- Record: found
- Abstract: found
- Article: found
Understanding American Indian Perceptions Toward Radiation Therapy
research-article
Author(s):
Samir H. Patel , MD
1 ,
Sasha Ebrahimi , PhD
2 ,
Donald W. Northfelt , MD
3 ,
Timothy E. Mathews , FNP-BC
4 ,
Farhia M. Omar , MPH
5 ,
Erika D. Martinez , MBA
5 ,
Todd A. DeWees , PhD
6 ,
Janet M. Okamoto , PhD
6
Publication date (Electronic):
31 July 2020
Publisher:
SAGE Publications
Read this article at
There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
Many American Indian (AI) and Alaska native (AN) patients do not complete guideline-concordant cancer care for the 4 most common cancers. Our aim was to better understand AI/AN attitudes toward radiation therapy (RT). Patients eligible for this survey study were AI/AN patients with cancer at the Phoenix Indian Medical Center who either received previous RT or were recommended to receive RT. An 18-item questionnaire was administered to each of the 50 participants from October 1, 2018, through February 15, 2019. Willingness to travel for RT was compared to respondent characteristics, concerns regarding RT, and obstacles to obtain RT. Duration of RT was important to 78% of patients: 24% would consider traveling 25 miles or more for a standard course, and 48% would travel that distance for a shorter course ( P < .001). The top-ranked barriers to RT were transportation, cost of treatment, and insurance compatibility. The top-ranked concerns about RT were adverse effects, cost of treatment, and fear of RT. Concerns about adverse effects were associated with the radiation team’s inability to explain the treatment ( P = .05). Transportation concerns were significantly associated with accessibility ( P = .02), communication with the RT team ( P = .02), and fear of RT ( P = .04). AI/AN patients are concerned about the adverse effects of RT and the logistics of treatment, particularly costs, transportation, and insurance compatibility. Use of culturally specific education and hypofractionation regimens may increase acceptance of RT for AI/AN patients with cancer, and this hypothesis will be tested in a future educational intervention-based study.
Related collections
Most cited references28
- Record: found
- Abstract: found
- Article: found
Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, 1975–2014, Featuring Survival
Abstract Background: The American Cancer Society (ACS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States. This Annual Report highlights survival rates. Methods: Data were from the CDC- and NCI-funded population-based cancer registry programs and compiled by NAACCR. Trends in age-standardized incidence and death rates for all cancers combined and for the leading cancer types by sex were estimated by joinpoint analysis and expressed as annual percent change. We used relative survival ratios and adjusted relative risk of death after a diagnosis of cancer (hazard ratios [HRs]) using Cox regression model to examine changes or differences in survival over time and by sociodemographic factors. Results: Overall cancer death rates from 2010 to 2014 decreased by 1.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = –1.8 to –1.8) per year in men, by 1.4% (95% CI = –1.4 to –1.3) per year in women, and by 1.6% (95% CI = –2.0 to –1.3) per year in children. Death rates decreased for 11 of the 16 most common cancer types in men and for 13 of the 18 most common cancer types in women, including lung, colorectal, female breast, and prostate, whereas death rates increased for liver (men and women), pancreas (men), brain (men), and uterine cancers. In contrast, overall incidence rates from 2009 to 2013 decreased by 2.3% (95% CI = –3.1 to –1.4) per year in men but stabilized in women. For several but not all cancer types, survival statistically significantly improved over time for both early and late-stage diseases. Between 1975 and 1977, and 2006 and 2012, for example, five-year relative survival for distant-stage disease statistically significantly increased from 18.7% (95% CI = 16.9% to 20.6%) to 33.6% (95% CI = 32.2% to 35.0%) for female breast cancer but not for liver cancer (from 1.1%, 95% CI = 0.3% to 2.9%, to 2.3%, 95% CI = 1.6% to 3.2%). Survival varied by race/ethnicity and state. For example, the adjusted relative risk of death for all cancers combined was 33% (HR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.32 to 1.34) higher in non-Hispanic blacks and 51% (HR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.46 to 1.56) higher in non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native compared with non-Hispanic whites. Conclusions: Cancer death rates continue to decrease in the United States. However, progress in reducing death rates and improving survival is limited for several cancer types, underscoring the need for intensified efforts to discover new strategies for prevention, early detection, and treatment and to apply proven preventive measures broadly and equitably.
- Record: found
- Abstract: found
- Article: found
Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, part I: National cancer statistics
Kathleen A Cronin, Andrew Lake, Susan Scott … (2018)
BACKGROUND The American Cancer Society (ACS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States. METHODS Incidence data were obtained from the CDC‐funded and NCI‐funded population‐based cancer registry programs and compiled by NAACCR. Data on cancer deaths were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics National Vital Statistics System. Trends in age‐standardized incidence and death rates for all cancers combined and for the leading cancer types by sex, race, and ethnicity were estimated by joinpoint analysis and expressed as the annual percent change. Stage distribution and 5‐year survival by stage at diagnosis were calculated for breast cancer, colon and rectum (colorectal) cancer, lung and bronchus cancer, and melanoma of the skin. RESULTS Overall cancer incidence rates from 2008 to 2014 decreased by 2.2% per year among men but were stable among women. Overall cancer death rates from 1999 to 2015 decreased by 1.8% per year among men and by 1.4% per year among women. Among men, incidence rates during the most recent 5‐year period (2010‐2014) decreased for 7 of the 17 most common cancer types, and death rates (2011‐2015) decreased for 11 of the 18 most common types. Among women, incidence rates declined for 7 of the 18 most common cancers, and death rates declined for 14 of the 20 most common cancers. Death rates decreased for cancer sites, including lung and bronchus (men and women), colorectal (men and women), female breast, and prostate. Death rates increased for cancers of the liver (men and women); pancreas (men and women); brain and other nervous system (men and women); oral cavity and pharynx (men only); soft tissue, including heart (men only); nonmelanoma skin (men only); and uterus. Incidence and death rates were higher among men than among women for all racial and ethnic groups. For all cancer sites combined, black men and white women had the highest incidence rates compared with other racial groups, and black men and black women had the highest death rates compared with other racial groups. Non‐Hispanic men and women had higher incidence and mortality rates than those of Hispanic ethnicity. Five‐year survival for cases diagnosed from 2007 through 2013 ranged from 100% (stage I) to 26.5% (stage IV) for female breast cancer, from 88.1% (stage I) to 12.6% (stage IV) for colorectal cancer, from 55.1% (stage I) to 4.2% (stage IV) for lung and bronchus cancer, and from 99.5% (stage I) to 16% (stage IV) for melanoma of the skin. Among children, overall cancer incidence rates increased by 0.8% per year from 2010 to 2014, and overall cancer death rates decreased by 1.5% per year from 2011 to 2015. CONCLUSIONS For all cancer sites combined, cancer incidence rates decreased among men but were stable among women. Overall, there continue to be significant declines in cancer death rates among both men and women. Differences in rates and trends by race and ethnic group remain. Progress in reducing cancer mortality has not occurred for all sites. Examining stage distribution and 5‐year survival by stage highlights the potential benefits associated with early detection and treatment. Cancer 2018;124:2785‐2800. © 2018 American Cancer Society
- Record: found
- Abstract: found
- Article: found
Tobacco Product Use Among Adults — United States, 2017
Teresa Wang, Kat Asman, Andrea S. Gentzke … (2018)
Cigarette smoking harms nearly every organ of the body and causes adverse health consequences, including heart disease, stroke, and multiple types of cancer ( 1 ). Although cigarette smoking among U.S. adults has declined considerably, tobacco products have evolved in recent years to include various combustible, noncombustible, and electronic products ( 1 , 2 ). To assess recent national estimates of tobacco product use among U.S. adults aged ≥18 years, CDC, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the National Institutes of Health’s National Cancer Institute analyzed data from the 2017 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). In 2017, an estimated 47.4 million U.S. adults (19.3%) currently used any tobacco product, including cigarettes (14.0%; 34.3 million); cigars, cigarillos, or filtered little cigars (3.8%; 9.3 million); electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) (2.8%; 6.9 million); smokeless tobacco (2.1%; 5.1 million); and pipes, water pipes, or hookahs (1.0%; 2.6 million). Among current tobacco product users, 86.7% (41.1 million) smoked combustible tobacco products, and 19.0% (9.0 million) used ≥2 tobacco products. By univariate analyses, the prevalence of current use of any tobacco product was higher among males than among females; adults aged <65 years than among those aged ≥65 years; non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Natives, whites, blacks, or multiracial adults than among Hispanics or non-Hispanic Asians; adults who lived in the South or Midwest than among those in the West or Northeast; adults who had a general educational development certificate (GED) than among those with other levels of education; adults who earned an annual household income of <$35,000 than among those with those with higher income; lesbian, gay, or bisexual adults than among heterosexual/straight adults; and adults who were divorced/separated/widowed or single/never married/not living with a partner than among those who were married/living with a partner. Prevalence was also higher among those who were uninsured, insured by Medicaid, or had some other public insurance than among those with private insurance or Medicare only; those who had a disability/limitation than among those who did not; and those who had serious psychological distress than among those who did not. Full implementation of evidence-based tobacco control interventions that address the diversity of tobacco products used by U.S. adults, in coordination with regulation of tobacco product manufacturing, marketing, and sales, can reduce tobacco-related disease and death in the United States ( 1 – 3 ). NHIS is an annual, nationally representative, in-person survey of the noninstitutionalized U.S. civilian population ( 4 ). The 2017 Sample Adult component included 26,742 adults aged ≥18 years; the response rate was 53.0%. Data were weighted to adjust for differences in selection probability and nonresponse and to provide nationally representative estimates. Five tobacco products were assessed: cigarettes; cigars (cigars, cigarillos, or filtered little cigars); pipes (regular pipes, water pipes, or hookahs)*; e-cigarettes; and smokeless tobacco (chewing tobacco, snuff, dip, snus, or dissolvable tobacco). Current cigarette smokers were those who reported having smoked ≥100 cigarettes during their lifetime and smoked every day or some days at the time of survey. Current users of all other tobacco products were those who reported their use every day or some days at the time of survey. Prevalence estimates for current use of any tobacco product, any combustible tobacco product (cigarettes, cigars, or pipes), and use of ≥2 tobacco products † were calculated. Estimates were calculated overall and separately by sex, age, race/ethnicity, U.S. region, § education, marital status, annual household income, sexual orientation, ¶ health insurance coverage,** disability, †† and presence of serious psychological distress. §§ T-tests were performed to assess overall differences in tobacco use between 2016 and 2017, with statistical significance defined as p<0.05. ¶¶ Among U.S. adults in 2017, 19.3% (estimated 47.4 million) currently used any tobacco product and 16.7% (41.1 million; 86.7% of current tobacco users) used any combustible tobacco product (Table). Cigarettes were the most commonly used tobacco product (14.0%; 34.3 million), with the prevalence of cigarette smoking in 2017 being the lowest measured among U.S. adults since NHIS data collection for this measure began in 1965 (Figure 1). Prevalence estimates of other tobacco products in 2017 were as follows: cigars (3.8%; 9.3 million); e-cigarettes (2.8%; 6.9 million); smokeless tobacco (2.1%; 5.1 million); and pipes (1.0%; 2.6 million). During 2016–2017, declines occurred in current use of any tobacco product; any combustible tobacco product; ≥2 tobacco products; cigarettes; and smokeless tobacco (all p<0.05). Among current tobacco product users, the proportion who were daily users was 75.0% for cigarettes, 58.2% for smokeless tobacco, 40.5% for e-cigarettes, 12.4% for cigars, and 10.6% for pipes. TABLE Percentage of adults aged ≥18 years who reported tobacco product use "every day" or "some days," by tobacco product and selected characteristics — National Health Interview Survey, United States, 2017 Characteristic Tobacco product use
% (95% CI) Any tobacco product* Any combustible tobacco product† Cigarettes§ Cigars/Cigarillos/Filtered little cigars¶ Regular pipe/Water pipe/Hookah** E-cigarettes†† Smokeless tobacco§§ ≥2 tobacco products¶¶ Overall 19.3 (18.6–20.0) 16.7 (16.1–17.3) 14.0 (13.4–14.6) 3.8 (3.5–4.1) 1.0 (0.9–1.2) 2.8 (2.5–3.1) 2.1 (1.9–2.3) 3.7 (3.4–4.0) Sex Male 24.8 (23.8–25.8) 20.8 (19.9–21.7) 15.8 (15.0–16.7) 6.8 (6.2–7.4) 1.8 (1.5–2.1) 3.3 (2.8–3.7) 4.0 (3.6–4.5) 5.7 (5.1–6.2) Female 14.2 (13.4–15.0) 12.9 (12.1–13.7) 12.2 (11.4–13.0) 1.0 (0.8–1.2) 0.4 (0.2–0.5) 2.4 (2.0–2.7) 0.2 (0.1–0.3) 1.8 (1.5–2.0) Age group (yrs) 18–24 18.3 (16.2–20.3) 14.0 (12.2–15.8) 10.4 (8.8–12.0) 4.3 (3.4–5.3) 2.5 (1.7–3.2) 5.2 (3.9–6.5) 2.9 (2.1–3.7) 5.2 (4.1–6.2) 25–44 22.5 (21.4–23.7) 19.5 (18.4–20.6) 16.1 (15.1–17.1) 4.7 (4.1–5.3) 1.2 (0.9–1.5) 3.6 (3.1–4.2) 2.5 (2.2–2.9) 4.7 (4.2–5.3) 45–64 21.3 (20.1–22.5) 18.9 (17.8–20.0) 16.5 (15.4–17.5) 3.9 (3.4–4.4) 0.6 (0.4–0.8) 2.4 (2.0–2.7) 2.0 (1.7–2.3) 3.5 (3.1–4.0) ≥65 11.0 (10.1–11.8) 9.8 (9.0–10.7) 8.2 (7.4–9.0) 1.8 (1.4–2.1) 0.7 (0.5–0.9) 0.7 (0.5–0.9) 0.9 (0.6–1.2) 1.1 (0.8–1.4) Race/Ethnicity*** White, non-Hispanic 21.4 (20.6–22.2) 18.3 (17.5–19.0) 15.2 (14.4–15.9) 4.0 (3.6–4.4) 1.1 (0.9–1.3) 3.3 (2.9–3.6) 2.8 (2.5–3.1) 4.2 (3.8–4.5) Black, non-Hispanic 20.1 (18.3–21.9) 18.8 (17.0–20.5) 14.9 (13.1–16.6) 6.0 (4.8–7.2) 1.4 (0.7–2.0) 2.2 (1.5–2.9) 0.6 (0.3–1.0) 4.1 (3.0–5.1) Asian, non-Hispanic 8.9 (7.1–10.8) 8.0 (6.2–9.8) 7.1 (5.5–8.8) —††† — 0.9 (0.4–1.4) — 1.2 (0.5–1.8) American Indian/ Alaska Native, non-Hispanic 29.8 (18.9–40.7) 26.3 (16.5–36.0) 24.0 (14.4–33.5) 5.8 (3.2–8.3) — — — 4.9 (2.3–7.5) Hispanic 12.7 (11.4–14.0) 11.2 (9.9–12.4) 9.9 (8.6–11.1) 2.2 (1.5–2.8) 0.6 (0.3–0.8) 1.8 (1.1–2.5) 0.7 (0.4–1.0) 1.9 (1.3–2.6) Multirace, non-Hispanic 27.4 (22.4–32.3) 23.8 (19.0–28.6) 20.6 (16.0–25.2) 4.3 (2.2–6.4) — 5.6 (2.7–8.5) — 6.4 (3.3–9.4) U.S. Census region§§§ Northeast 15.6 (13.8–17.4) 13.9 (12.3–15.6) 11.2 (9.8–12.6) 3.2 (2.5–3.8) 0.6 (0.3–0.9) 2.0 (1.5–2.6) 1.3 (0.9–1.8) 2.5 (1.8–3.1) Midwest 23.5 (22.1–24.8) 20.5 (19.2–21.7) 16.9 (15.5–18.2) 4.9 (4.2–5.6) 1.4 (1.0–1.7) 2.9 (2.4–3.4) 2.9 (2.5–3.4) 4.7 (4.0–5.3) South 20.8 (19.6–22.0) 18.0 (16.9–19.2) 15.5 (14.4–16.7) 4.1 (3.6–4.7) 0.9 (0.7–1.2) 3.1 (2.6–3.6) 2.2 (1.8–2.5) 4.1 (3.5–4.6) West 15.9 (14.6–17.1) 13.4 (12.4–14.3) 11.0 (10.1–11.8) 2.8 (2.3–3.3) 1.2 (0.9–1.6) 2.8 (2.2–3.3) 1.7 (1.2–2.1) 3.0 (2.5–3.5) Education (adults aged ≥25 yrs) 0–12 yrs (no diploma) 26.1 (24.0–28.3) 24.1 (22.0–26.2) 23.1 (21.0– 25.2) 3.6 (2.5–4.7) — 2.1 (1.5–2.8) 1.8 (1.2–2.4) 4.3 (3.1–5.4) GED 42.6 (38.2–46.9) 38.5 (34.3–42.8) 36.8 (32.7–41.0) 6.4 (4.1–8.7) — 7.2 (4.8–9.6) 3.4 (1.8–4.9) 9.9 (7.1–12.7) High school diploma 24.3 (22.8–25.8) 21.2 (19.7–22.6) 18.7 (17.4–20.1) 4.1 (3.3–4.8) 0.7 (0.4–1.0) 3.1 (2.5–3.7) 2.8 (2.3–3.4) 4.4 (3.7–5.2) Some college, no degree 23.1 (21.6–24.6) 19.6 (18.1–21.0) 17.4 (16.0–18.7) 3.4 (2.6–4.1) 1.0 (0.6–1.3) 3.4 (2.7–4.0) 2.3 (1.8–2.8) 3.8 (3.1–4.6) Associate degree (academic or technical/vocational) 20.4 (18.6–22.2) 18.2 (16.5–19.9) 15.5 (13.9–17.1) 3.6 (2.9–4.4) 0.8 (0.4–1.2) 2.7 (2.0–3.4) 1.9 (1.4–2.5) 3.6 (2.8–4.4) Undergraduate degree (bachelor’s) 12.5 (11.3–13.6) 10.7 (9.6–11.7) 7.1 (6.2– 7.9) 3.8 (3.2–4.5) 1.0 (0.6–1.3) 1.7 (1.2–2.2) 1.5 (1.1–1.8) 2.3 (1.8–2.8) Graduate degree (Master's, doctoral or professional 8.3 (7.0–9.5) 7.5 (6.3–8.7) 4.1 (3.3–5.0) 3.2 (2.4–4.0) 0.9 (0.6–1.3) 0.9 (0.5–1.2) 0.8 (0.5–1.1) 1.4 (0.9–1.9) Marital status Married/Living with partner 17.6 (16.7–18.4) 15.0 (14.3–15.8) 12.4 (11.6–13.1) 3.6 (3.2–4.0) 0.7 (0.6–0.9) 2.3 (2.0–2.6) 2.1 (1.8–2.4) 3.1 (2.7–3.5) Divorced/Separated/Widowed 23.1 (21.8–24.4) 21.1 (19.8–22.3) 19.1 (17.8–20.3) 3.4 (2.8–4.0) 0.7 (0.5–0.9) 2.9 (2.4–3.3) 1.7 (1.3–2.0) 4.0 (3.4–4.5) Single/Never married/Not living with partner 21.0 (19.7–22.4) 17.9 (16.7–19.2) 14.4 (13.2–15.6) 4.6 (3.9–5.2) 2.1 (1.6–2.6) 4.1 (3.3–4.9) 2.2 (1.8–2.7) 5.0 (4.3–5.7) Annual household income ($)¶¶¶ <35,000 26.0 (24.6–27.3) 23.7 (22.4–25.1) 21.4 (20.1–22.7) 4.4 (3.7–5.1) 1.4 (1.1–1.7) 3.6 (3.1–4.1) 1.6 (1.3–1.9) 5.2 (4.5–5.9) 35,000–74,999 20.5 (19.4–21.6) 17.7 (16.7–18.8) 15.3 (14.3–16.3) 3.6 (3.1–4.2) 1.0 (0.7–1.3) 3.1 (2.6–3.6) 2.6 (2.1–3.0) 4.3 (3.7–4.9) 75,000–99,999 18.4 (16.6–20.1) 14.9 (13.3–16.6) 11.8 (10.3–13.4) 3.7 (2.7–4.7) 0.8 (0.4–1.1) 2.5 (1.7–3.2) 2.8 (2.1–3.4) 2.9 (2.1–3.7) ≥100,000 13.5 (12.3–14.7) 11.2 (10.1–12.2) 7.6 (6.7–8.4) 4.0 (3.4–4.6) 0.8 (0.5–1.1) 1.8 (1.3–2.2) 2.0 (1.6–2.4) 2.3 (1.9–2.8) Sexual orientation Heterosexual/Straight 19.0 (18.3–19.8) 16.5 (15.9–17.1) 13.7 (13.1–14.4) 3.8 (3.5–4.1) 1.0 (0.8–1.2) 2.6 (2.4–2.9) 2.1 (1.9–2.3) 3.6 (3.2–3.9) Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual 27.3 (23.0–31.6) 23.4 (19.4–27.4) 20.3 (16.7–24.0) 3.8 (2.2–5.5) 2.1 (0.9–3.2) 7.5 (5.3–9.8) — 6.6 (4.8–8.5) Health insurance coverage**** Private insurance 16.2 (15.5–16.9) 13.6 (12.9–14.3) 10.5 (9.9–11.1) 3.6 (3.2–3.9) 0.9 (0.7–1.1) 2.3 (2.0–2.6) 2.2 (2.0–2.5) 2.9 (2.5–3.2) Medicaid 28.2 (26.0–30.4) 25.9 (23.7–28.0) 24.5 (22.4–26.6) 3.6 (2.7–4.5) 1.0 (0.6–1.4) 4.8 (3.7–5.9) 1.0 (0.7–1.4) 5.7 (4.6–6.8) Medicare only (aged ≥65 yrs) 11.0 (9.5–12.5) 9.9 (8.5–11.3) 8.7 (7.3–10.1) 1.8 (1.1–2.4) — 0.7 (0.4–1.1) 0.8 (0.4–1.1) 1.3 (0.8–1.9) Other public insurance 26.8 (24.2–29.5) 23.2 (20.6–25.7) 20.4 (18.0–22.9) 5.7 (4.3–7.0) 1.4 (0.7–2.1) 3.1 (2.1–4.1) 3.4 (2.3–4.5) 5.1 (3.8–6.3) Uninsured 31.0 (28.7–33.4) 27.8 (25.6–30.1) 24.7 (22.5–26.9) 6.0 (4.6–7.5) 1.9 (1.2–2.7) 4.6 (3.6–5.6) 2.6 (1.9–3.2) 7.3 (5.8–8.7) Disability/Limitation†††† Yes 25.0 (23.3–26.7) 22.4 (20.8–24.1) 20.7 (19.1–22.3) 3.4 (2.6–4.1) 1.1 (0.7–1.5) 3.3 (2.6–4.1) 2.1 (1.5–2.6) 4.5 (3.7–5.3) No 18.8 (17.9–19.8) 16.1 (15.2–16.9) 13.3 (12.5–14.0) 3.7 (3.3–4.1) 1.1 (0.9–1.3) 2.7 (2.4–3.1) 2.1 (1.8–2.5) 3.4 (3.0–3.8) Serious psychological distress§§§§ Yes 40.8 (36.9–44.7) 36.4 (32.6–40.3) 35.2 (31.4–39.0) 4.4 (2.9–6.0) — 7.9 (5.8–10.1) — 7.3 (5.4–9.3) No 18.5 (17.8–19.2) 16.0 (15.4–16.6) 13.2 (12.5–13.8) 3.8 (3.5–4.1) 1.1 (0.9–1.2) 2.6 (2.3–2.9) 2.1 (1.9–2.3) 3.5 (3.2–3.8) Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval; E-cigarettes = electronic cigarettes; GED = general educational development certificate; HS = high school. * Any tobacco product use was defined as use either every day or some days of at least one tobacco product. For cigarettes only, users were defined as persons who had smoked ≥100 cigarettes during their lifetime and now smoked cigarettes either every day or some days. † Any combustible tobacco product use was defined as use either every day or some days of at least one combustible tobacco product: cigarettes; cigars, cigarillos, or filtered little cigars; pipes, water pipes, or hookahs. For cigarettes only, users were defined as persons who had smoked ≥100 cigarettes during their lifetime and now smoked cigarettes every day or some days. § Current cigarette smokers were defined as persons who reported smoking ≥100 cigarettes during their lifetime and now smoked cigarettes every day or some days. ¶ Reported smoking cigars, cigarillos, or little filtered cigars at least once during their lifetime and now smoked at least one of these products every day or some days. ** Reported smoking tobacco in a regular pipe, water pipe, or hookah at least once during their lifetime and now smoked at least one of these products every day or some days. †† Reported using electronic cigarettes at least once during their lifetime and now used e-cigarettes every day or some days. §§ Reported using chewing tobacco, snuff, dip, snus, or dissolvable tobacco at least once during their lifetime and now used at least one of these products every day or some days. ¶¶ Use was defined as use either every day or some days of at least two or more of the following tobacco products: cigarettes (≥100 cigarettes during lifetime); cigars, cigarillos, or filtered little cigars; pipes, water pipes, or hookahs; electronic cigarettes; or smokeless tobacco products. Among multiple tobacco product users, 84.1% used two products, 13.4% used three products, and 2.5% used four or more tobacco products *** Hispanic persons could be of any race. ††† Dashes indicate that prevalence estimates with a relative standard error ≥30% are not presented. §§§ Northeast: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont; Midwest: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin; South: Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia; West: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. ¶¶¶ Based on observed income as obtained from combined family income bracketing questions. **** Private coverage: includes adults who had any comprehensive private insurance plan (including health maintenance organizations and preferred provider organizations). Medicaid: for adults aged <65 years, includes adults who do not have private coverage, but who have Medicaid or other state-sponsored health plans including Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP); also includes adults aged ≥65 years who do not have any private coverage but have Medicare and Medicaid or other state-sponsored health plans including CHIP. Medicare only: includes adults aged ≥65 years who only have Medicare coverage. Other coverage: includes adults who do not have private insurance, Medicaid, or other public coverage, but who have any type of military coverage, coverage from other government programs, or Medicare. Uninsured: includes adults who have not indicated that they are covered at the time of the interview under private health insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, a state-sponsored health plan, other government programs, or military coverage. Insurance coverage is ‘as of time of survey’. †††† Disability status was defined on the basis of self-reported presence of selected limitations including vision, hearing, cognition, and movement. Limitations in performing activities of daily living were defined using the question “Does [person] have difficulty dressing or bathing?” Limitations in performing instrumental activities of daily living were defined on the basis of responses to the question “Because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition, does [person] have difficulty doing errands alone such as visiting a doctor’s office or shopping?” Any disability was defined as a “yes” response pertaining to at least one of the limitations listed (vision, hearing, cognition, movement, activities of daily living, or instrumental activities of daily living). A random sample of half of the respondents from the 2017 Person File was asked about limitations and weights from the Family Disability Questions File were applied. §§§§ Based on the Kessler psychological distress scale, a series of six questions that ask about feelings of hopelessness, sadness, nervousness, restlessness, worthlessness, and feeling like everything is an effort in the past 30 days. Participants were asked to respond on a Likert Scale ranging from “None of the time” (score = 0) to “All of the time” (score = 4). Responses were summed over the six questions; persons with a score of ≥13 were coded as having serious psychological distress, and respondents with a score <13 were coded as not having serious psychological distress. FIGURE 1 Percentage of adults aged ≥ 18 years who were current cigarette smokers,* overall and by sex — National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), United States, 1965–2017 * For NHIS years 1965–1991, current smokers included adults who reported that they had smoked ≥100 cigarettes in their lifetime and currently smoked. Since 1992, current smokers included adults who reported smoking ≥100 cigarettes during their lifetime and specified that they currently smoked every day or on some days. Data are not available for 1967–1969, 1971–1973, 1975, 1981, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1989, and 1996 because questions regarding smoking were not included in the NHIS conducted in those years. Related data and documentation can be found at https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis/data-questionnaires-documentation.htm. The figure is a line graph showing the percentage of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years who were current cigarette smokers, overall and by sex during 1965–2017, based on data from the National Health Interview Survey. Overall, 3.7% of U.S. adults (9.0 million; 19.0% of current tobacco product users) used ≥2 tobacco products. Among multiple tobacco product users, 84.1% used two products, 13.4% used three products, and 2.5% used four or more products. The most prevalent tobacco product combinations were cigarettes and e-cigarettes (30.1%), followed by cigarettes and cigars (29.2%) (Figure 2). FIGURE 2 Top tobacco product use* combinations among adults aged ≥18 years who currently used ≥2 tobacco products † , § — National Health Interview Survey, United States, 2017 * For cigarettes, current smokers were defined as persons who had smoked ≥100 cigarettes during their lifetime and now smoked either every day or some days. Current users of all other assessed tobacco products were defined as persons who reported use of each respective product every day or some days at the time of survey. † Percentages were calculated among adults who currently used ≥2 of the following five tobacco product types: cigarettes; cigars, cigarillos, or filtered little cigars (cigars); regular pipes, water pipe or hookahs (pipes); chewing tobacco, snuff, dip, snus, or dissolvable tobacco (smokeless tobacco); and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). § A total of 26 distinct combinations were assessed (10 two-product type combinations; 10 three-product type combinations; 5 four-product type combinations, and 1 five-product type combination). The figure is a bar chart showing the top tobacco product combinations used among U.S. adults aged ≥18 years who currently used ≥2 tobacco products in 2017, based on data from the National Health Interview Survey. By univariate analyses, the prevalence of any current tobacco product use was higher among males (24.8%) than among females (14.2%); those aged 25–44 years (22.5%), 45–64 years (21.3%), or 18–24 years (18.3%) than among those aged ≥65 years (11.0%); non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Natives (29.8%), multiracial adults (27.4%), whites (21.4%), or blacks (20.1%) than among Hispanics (12.7%) or non-Hispanic Asians (8.9%); those who lived in the Midwest (23.5%) or the South (20.8%) than among those who lived in the West (15.9%) or Northeast (15.6%); those who had a GED (42.6%) than among those with other levels of education; those who were divorced/separated/widowed (23.1%) or single/never married/not living with a partner (21.0%) than among those married/living with a partner (17.6%); those who had annual household income of <$35,000 (26.0%) than among those with higher income; and lesbian, gay, or bisexual adults (27.3%) than among heterosexual/straight adults (19.0%). Prevalence was also higher among those who were uninsured (31.0%), insured by Medicaid (28.2%) or had some other public insurance (26.8%) than among those with private insurance (16.2%) or Medicare only (11.0%); those who had a disability/limitation (25.0%) than among those who did not (18.8%); and those who had serious psychological distress (40.8%) than among those who did not (18.5%). Discussion Considerable progress has been made in reducing cigarette smoking among U.S. adults over the past half century: an estimated 14.0% of U.S. adults (34.3 million) were current cigarette smokers in 2017, representing a 67% decline since 1965. However, in 2017, nearly nine in 10 (41.1 million) adult tobacco product users reported using a combustible tobacco product, with cigarettes being the product most commonly used. The burden of death and disease from tobacco use in the United States is caused overwhelmingly by cigarettes and other combustible products, and an estimated 480,000 U.S. adults die from cigarette smoking and secondhand smoke exposure each year ( 1 ). Therefore, continued efforts to reduce all forms of combustible tobacco smoking, including cigarettes, among U.S. adults are especially important ( 1 ). U.S. adults also report using various noncigarette tobacco products. In 2017, approximately one in five adults (47.4 million) currently used any tobacco product, and 19.0% of these adults reported multiple tobacco product use. Multiple tobacco product users are at increased risk for nicotine addiction and dependence ( 1 , 5 ). E-cigarettes were commonly used among multiple tobacco product users. Primary reasons for e-cigarette use among adults include curiosity, flavoring, cost, consideration of others, convenience, and simulation of cigarettes, as well as to attempt to quit smoking ( 6 ). However, although e-cigarettes could benefit adult smokers if used as a complete substitute for combustible tobacco smoking, evidence of the effectiveness of e-cigarettes as a cessation aid is inconclusive ( 7 ). Demographic variations in tobacco product use were observed. For example, young adults reported the highest use of emerging products such as e-cigarettes and pipes; the higher prevalence of overall pipe use among young adults is likely primarily driven by water pipe or hookah use ( 1 ). Differences in tobacco product use across population groups might be related to multiple factors, including targeted advertising, differing perceptions regarding the relative harm or social acceptability of tobacco use, and differences in tobacco product prices and levels of access to cessation resources ( 1 , 2 ). The findings in this report are subject to at least four limitations. First, the potential for recall bias exists because responses were self-reported and not biochemically validated. However, self-reported smoking status correlates highly with serum cotinine levels ( 8 ). Second, the questionnaire did not assess gender identity; including transgender persons could affect overall tobacco use estimates among the sexual and gender minorities considered in this report. Third, NHIS estimates are not generalizable to persons in the military or institutionalized populations. Finally, the NHIS Sample Adult component’s response rate of 53.0% might have resulted in nonresponse bias. Full implementation of comprehensive tobacco control programs at the national, state, and local levels, including tobacco price increases, high-impact anti-tobacco mass media campaigns, comprehensive smoke-free laws,*** and barrier-free access to tobacco cessation counseling and approved medications, along with FDA regulation of tobacco products, can accelerate progress toward reducing tobacco-related death and disease in the United States ( 3 ). Given the increasing diversity of available tobacco products, coordinated efforts are key to implementing proven strategies while also exploring promising new strategies. For example, CDC supports the National Tobacco Control Program ( 3 ), and the Tips From Former Smokers campaign, which led to approximately half a million sustained quits among U.S. adult smokers during 2012–2015 ( 9 ). FDA launched the Every Try Counts campaign in 2018, which targets adults aged 25–54 years who have attempted to quit smoking in the last year but were unsuccessful. The campaign also complements FDA’s recently announced plan to explore reducing nicotine content in cigarettes to minimally or nonaddictive levels ( 10 ). The National Cancer Institute supports research to improve tobacco dependence treatment and provides resources to help smokers quit, including Smokefree.gov; the toll-free national quitline network (1-800-QUIT-NOW); and LiveHelp online. These coordinated strategies, in combination with state and local level tobacco prevention and control strategies that address the diversity of tobacco products, can reduce tobacco related disease and death in the United States ( 1 ). Summary What is already known about this topic? Although cigarette smoking among U.S. adults has declined considerably, tobacco products have evolved in recent years to include various combustible, non-combustible, and electronic products. What is added by this report? In 2017, an estimated 47.4 million U.S. adults (19.3%) currently used any tobacco product. Among current tobacco product users, 86.7% (41.1 million) smoked combustible tobacco products, and 19.0% (9.0 million) used two or more tobacco products. What are the implications for public health practice? Implementation of evidence-based tobacco control interventions that address the diversity of tobacco products used by U.S. adults, in coordination with regulation of tobacco product manufacturing, marketing, and sales, can reduce tobacco-related disease and death in the United States.
Author and article information
Journal
Journal ID (nlm-ta): Cancer Control
Journal ID (publisher-id): CCX
Journal ID (hwp): spccx
Title:
Cancer Control : Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
Publisher:
SAGE Publications
(Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA
)
ISSN
(Print):
1073-2748
ISSN
(Electronic):
1526-2359
Publication date
(Electronic):
31
July
2020
Publication date Collection: Jul-Aug 2020
Volume: 27
Issue: 3
Electronic Location Identifier: 1073274820945991
Affiliations
Author notes
[*]Samir H. Patel, MD, Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic Hospital, 5777 E
Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA. Email:
patel.samir@
123456mayo.edu
Author information
Samir H. Patel
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8251-574X
Article
Publisher ID: 10.1177_1073274820945991DOI: 10.1177/1073274820945991
PMC ID: 7658722
PubMed ID: 32735143
SO-VID: d2672b56-d758-4b63-a920-63efb5673f9d
Copyright © © The Author(s) 2020
License:
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
History
Date
received
: 06
May
2020
Date
revision received
: 29
June
2020
Date
accepted
: 8
July
2020
Categories
Subject:
Original Research Article
Custom metadata
cover-date July-August 2020
typesetter ts3
Data availability: