Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart
  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Mesothelioma incidence projections in South East England

Sharma P. Riaz, Victoria H. Coupland, Margreet Lüchtenborg, Michael D. Peake, Henrik Møller
European Respiratory Journal 2012 40: 965-968; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00168111
Sharma P. Riaz
*King's College London, Thames Cancer Registry, London
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: sharma.riaz@kcl.ac.uk
Victoria H. Coupland
*King's College London, Thames Cancer Registry, London
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Margreet Lüchtenborg
*King's College London, Thames Cancer Registry, London
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael D. Peake
#Dept of Respiratory Medicine, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Henrik Møller
*King's College London, Thames Cancer Registry, London
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

We estimated the past and future age-standardised incidence rates of mesothelioma by birth cohort and by period of diagnosis in South East England.

We extracted data on patients diagnosed with mesothelioma (International Classification of Diseases-10 C45) between 1960 and 2009 from the Thames Cancer Registry. We calculated the age-standardised incidence rates using the European standard population. We used age-cohort and age-period modelling to estimate the age-specific incidence rates for the 1900 to 1950 birth cohorts and the 1935 to 2034 calendar periods.

A much more pronounced increase in mesothelioma incidence between 1972 and 2007 was observed in males than in females. In both sexes, the incidence rates increased in successive generations up to the 1945 birth cohort. Projection of rates in the future showed an increase in incidence in males until 2022 and a decrease thereafter. Among females, the incidence rate was predicted to increase gradually until reaching its maximum around 2027, and to remain stable thereafter.

The occurrence of mesothelioma is closely linked to occupational exposure to asbestos in the 1960s and 1970s and, due to the long latency period, the incidence of mesothelioma is projected to increase until the 2020s.

  • Asbestos
  • incidence
  • mesothelioma
  • pleural mesothelioma
  • projections

Pleural mesothelioma is a malignant tumour of the membrane surrounding the lung. It is currently considered an incurable tumour with a median survival approaching 1 yr. [1]

The leading cause of mesothelioma is occupational exposure to asbestos fibres. Asbestos was widely used in many industries in the UK from the 1950s up until the mid-1980s. In the earlier part of this period, asbestos exposure occurred most commonly in mining, ship building, and manufacturing of asbestos textiles and cement, but in the later period those working in plumbing, insulation, demolition and construction industries became the largest at-risk group. The importance of the low levels of “ambient” asbestos in many public and private buildings from the 1950s and 1960s is unknown.

The incidence of mesothelioma started to increase in the 1970s. The number of new cases of mesothelioma diagnosed in the UK in 2008 was ∼2,400 and is expected to rise in subsequent years [2]. Previous predictions of future numbers of mesothelioma deaths in the UK suggest that male mesothelioma deaths would peak at around the year 2020 [3].

In South East England, ∼440 cases of mesothelioma were diagnosed in the most recent year. The relatively high number of mesothelioma cases in South East England compared with the UK overall is probably due to the high exposure to asbestos in the ship-building industry [1]. We aimed to project the past and future incidence rates by birth cohort and by period of diagnosis among males and females in South East England.

METHODS

Study population

From the Thames Cancer Registry (TCR) database, we identified 8,250 patients diagnosed with mesothelioma (International Classification of Diseases-10 C45) between 1960 and 2009 [4]. The TCR is one of 12 population-based cancer registries in the UK and covers the residential populations of London, Surrey, Sussex and Kent. In this area, registration is initiated by pathology and clinical information received from hospitals. Trained cancer registration officers seek additional information from the medical records on demographic details, disease stage and treatment. Data are quality assured when added to a central database and updated continuously.

Statistical analysis

For the analyses, age at diagnosis was categorised into 5-yr age groups with the mid-point representing the group, for example, 0–5-yr-olds were represented by “2”, and hence age groups were 2, 7, etc., through to 87 (85+ yrs). We categorised the year of diagnosis into 5-yr periods, which were represented by the mid-points of 1962 (for 1960–1964), 1977 etc., through to 2007. We assumed that the age-specific incidence rates were constant for patients younger than 27 yrs of age, extrapolating their 1962 rates backwards and their 2007 rates forwards in time. We used a Poisson regression age cohort model [5] to estimate age-specific rates in the cohort dimension and an age-period model to extrapolate in the period dimension. We then calculated the age-standardised rates (per 100,000 European standard population) for birth cohorts and cross-sectionally for the different calendar periods. Because the earlier and later cohort estimates were based on a small number of cases, and were therefore less robust, we report estimates for the 1900 to 1950 birth cohorts and the 1960 to 2009 calendar periods.

Ethics

Cancer registries in England have approval from the National Information Governance Board to carry out surveillance using the data they collect on all cancer patients under section 251 of the National Health Service Act of 2006. Therefore, separate ethical approval was not required for this study.

RESULTS

The age-standardised incidence rates of mesothelioma were higher among males than females (table 1 and fig. 1). The male/female incidence ratio changed from 2:1 in 1962 to 6:1 in the 1980s and 1990s, falling back to 5:1 in the 2000s (table 1 and fig. 1). Incidence rates increased from 1962 to 2007 (table 1). This increase occurred more rapidly among males (0.05 in 1962 to 5.52 in 2007) and more gradually in females (0.02 in 1962 to 1.13 in 2007).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1– Number of cases, age-standardised incidence rates (ASR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of mesothelioma, by sex and calendar period, South East England, 1962–2007
Figure 1–
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1–

Age-standardised incidence rates per 100,000 European standard population (ASR (E)) per 100,000 of mesothelioma, by sex and period of diagnosis, South East England, 1962–2007.

First, an age-cohort Poisson regression model was fitted to the empirical data, where the response variable was the number of recorded diagnoses, the age group at diagnosis and birth cohort were treated as explanatory variables, and the logarithm of the population at risk was included as the offset term in the model. The age-standardised incidence rates increased in successive generations up to the 1945 cohort when the estimated incidence rates were 9.04 per 100,000 among males and 1.96 per 100,000 among females (fig. 2). The incidence rate decreased in the generation born after 1945.

Figure 2–
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2–

Age-standardised incidence rates per 100,000 European standard population (ASR (E)) of mesothelioma by sex and cohort of birth, South East England, 1900–1950.

Secondly, the estimated rates from the age-cohort model were combined with the empirical data to form the input to an age-period Poisson regression model. This model was specified in the same way as the age-cohort model but with birth cohort replaced by period of diagnosis. We projected that the incidence rates in males will increase until the 2020s and decrease thereafter (fig. 3). Among females, the incidence rates were projected to increase gradually until reaching a peak in the late 2020s and remaining relatively stable thereafter. Projections further into the future became less robust.

Figure 3–
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3–

Observed and projected age-standardised incidence rates per 100,000 European standard population (ASR (E)) of mesothelioma by sex and period of diagnosis, South East England, 1935–2032.

DISCUSSION

The relatively high incidence of mesothelioma in the area covered by the TCR is probably due to the occupational exposure to asbestos particularly in the ship-building industries present in South East England and thereby affecting mostly males [6]. Mesothelioma incidence rates were found to be higher among males than females. This is in accordance with other studies in the UK [1, 2] and around the world [7–11]. The male preponderance is contrasted by a follow-up study of a rural Turkish cohort, which found a higher incidence of mesothelioma in females than males [12]. People in this cohort were exposed from birth to asbestos-containing soil mixtures (“white soil”). White soil was used in whitewash or plaster materials for walls; as insulation and water proofing; for floors and roofs; for baby powder and also in pottery.

A British study published in 1995 reported a peak in imported asbestos between the 1960s and 1970s [3]. The use of blue and brown asbestos was banned in the UK in 1985. Given the estimated median induction time of 32 yrs for occupation-related mesothelioma [13], this would explain both our observation of the rapid increase in incidence rates in the calendar periods 1972 to 2007, as well as the high incidence rates of mesothelioma among generations born up to the 1945 birth cohort and the decreasing incidence in the birth cohorts thereafter.

Incidence rates in males were projected to increase in each period until about 2022 and to decrease thereafter, whereas, in females, the incidence rates are estimated to peak around 2027. In general, using age-period-cohort modelling, studies around the world project fairly similar timing of peak incidence. A study in Denmark also predicted the future annual number of mesothelioma cases to peak around 2015 or later [14]. A study conducted in France predicted a much later peak in mortality between 2025 and 2050, which is related to the later peak in French import of asbestos in 1975 [15]. A recent USA study reported significantly increased mesothelioma incidence from the late 1970s through to the mid-1990s, and projections in this study indicate that the number of male mesothelioma cases peaked during 2000–2004 [16]. An early peak in the USA compared with the UK is due to the timing of maximum exposure, where a maximum exposure in the USA occurred from the 1930s to the 1960s [17]. Workers born after 1929 would have had fewer years of exposure to asbestos, hence the earlier decline in mesothelioma cases.

A previous UK study projected the peak in the number of deaths due to mesothelioma to occur in 2020, which is slightly earlier compared with the projections in our study [3]. More recent publications from the same group predicted the peak of mesothelioma deaths to occur a further 5 yrs earlier [18, 19]. In these latter two studies, the estimated population exposure to asbestos was included in the model for prediction of mesothelioma mortality. A study in Australia applying both modelling approaches projected the mesothelioma incidence to peak between 2014 and 2021, where the age-period-cohort model projected a later incidence peak than the model that incorporated projections based also on asbestos exposure [20]. Analyses that base the projection on the modelling of exposure to asbestos in the population on assumptions about distribution, dose and dose rates of the exposure may not be very accurate, especially in the period after the import of asbestos had stopped. The age-period-cohort modelling used in this study allows for separate effects of age, calendar period and birth cohort. It does not take into account any available data on asbestos exposure in the population, but allows indirectly for this through the impact of this exposure on the empirical mesothelioma rates. We consider that both strategies of analysis have merits and we note that the predictions of future disease pattern are in general agreement.

Conclusion

We project that the incidence rates of mesothelioma in South East England will continue to increase and will peak in the 2020s, and at a slightly later time for females than for males.

Acknowledgments

This paper is a contribution from the National Cancer Intelligence Network (www.ukacr.org; www.ncin.org.uk).

Footnotes

  • Support Statement

    The Thames Cancer Registry in King's College London receives funding from the Department of Health for England. The views expressed in the article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Department of Health.

  • Statement of Interest

    None declared.

  • Received September 28, 2011.
  • Accepted December 22, 2011.
  • ©ERS 2012

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    1. Mak V,
    2. Davies E,
    3. Putcha V,
    4. et al
    . The epidemiology and treatment of mesothelioma in South East England 1985–2002. Thorax 2008; 63: 160–166.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    UK CR. Mesothelioma statistics – key facts. http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/types/Mesothelioma/ Date last updated: November 29, 2010. Date last accessed: June 18, 2012.
  3. ↵
    1. Peto J,
    2. Hodgson JT,
    3. Matthews FE,
    4. et al
    . Continuing increase in mesothelioma mortality in Britain. Lancet 1995; 345: 535–539.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. ↵
    World Health Organisation. International Statistical Classification of Disease (ICD-10) and Related Health Problems. 2nd Edn. Geneva, Switzerland, 2004; pp. 185–186.
  5. ↵
    1. Clayton D,
    2. Schifflers E
    . Models for temporal variation in cancer rates. II: age-period-cohort models. Stat Med 1987; 6: 469–481.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. ↵
    1. Yates DH,
    2. Corrin B,
    3. Stidolph PN,
    4. et al
    . Malignant mesothelioma in south east England: clinicopathological experience of 272 cases. Thorax 1997; 52: 507–512.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  7. ↵
    1. Weill H,
    2. Hughes JM,
    3. Churg AM
    . Changing trends in US mesothelioma incidence. Occup Environ Med 2004; 61: 438–441.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. Mesothelioma in Australia. Incidence 1982 to 2004. Deaths 1997 to 2005. Australian Safety and Compensation Council. http://safeworkaustralia.gov.au/AboutSafeWorkAustralia/WhatWeDo/Publications/Documents/192/MesotheliomaInAustralia_Incidence1982_2004_Deaths_1997_2005_PDF.pdf Date last accessed: June 18, 2012.
    1. Jarvholm B,
    2. Englund A,
    3. Albin M
    . Pleural mesothelioma in Sweden: an analysis of the incidence according to the use of asbestos. Occup Environ Med 1999; 56: 110–113.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Kanazawa N,
    2. Ioka A,
    3. Tsukuma H,
    4. et al
    . Incidence and survival of mesothelioma in Osaka, Japan. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2006; 36: 254–257.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Andersson M,
    2. Olsen JH
    . Trend and distribution of mesothelioma in Denmark. Br J Cancer 1985; 51: 699–705.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  10. ↵
    1. Metintas S,
    2. Metintas M,
    3. Ucgun I,
    4. et al
    . Malignant mesothelioma due to environmental exposure to asbestos: follow-up of a Turkish cohort living in a rural area. Chest 2002; 122: 2224–2229.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. ↵
    1. Lanphear BP,
    2. Buncher CR
    . Latent period for malignant mesothelioma of occupational origin. J Occup Med 1992; 34: 718–721.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  12. ↵
    1. Kjaergaard J,
    2. Andersson M
    . Incidence rates of malignant mesothelioma in Denmark and predicted future number of cases among men. Scand J Work Environ Health 2000; 26: 112–117.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  13. ↵
    1. Banaei A,
    2. Auvert B,
    3. Goldberg M,
    4. et al
    . Future trends in mortality of French men from mesothelioma. Occup Environ Med 2000; 57: 488–494.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Price B,
    2. Ware A
    . Mesothelioma trends in the United States: an update based on Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program data for 1973 through 2003. Am J Epidemiol 2004; 159: 107–112.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    1. Price B
    . Analysis of current trends in United States mesothelioma incidence. Am J Epidemiol 1997; 145: 211–218.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    1. Hodgson JT,
    2. McElvenny DM,
    3. Darnton AJ,
    4. et al
    . The expected burden of mesothelioma mortality in Great Britain from 2002 to 2050. Br J Cancer 2005; 92: 587–593.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  17. ↵
    1. Tan E,
    2. Warren N,
    3. Darnton AJ,
    4. et al
    . Projection of mesothelioma mortality in Britain using Bayesian methods. Br J Cancer 2010; 103: 430–436.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  18. ↵
    1. Clements M,
    2. Berry G,
    3. Shi J,
    4. et al
    . Projected mesothelioma incidence in men in New South Wales. Occup Environ Med 2007; 64: 747–752.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
View this article with LENS
Vol 40 Issue 4 Table of Contents
European Respiratory Journal: 40 (4)
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Mesothelioma incidence projections in South East England
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Mesothelioma incidence projections in South East England
Sharma P. Riaz, Victoria H. Coupland, Margreet Lüchtenborg, Michael D. Peake, Henrik Møller
European Respiratory Journal Oct 2012, 40 (4) 965-968; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00168111

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Mesothelioma incidence projections in South East England
Sharma P. Riaz, Victoria H. Coupland, Margreet Lüchtenborg, Michael D. Peake, Henrik Møller
European Respiratory Journal Oct 2012, 40 (4) 965-968; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00168111
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Lung cancer
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

Original Article

  • Lung volumes and survival in chronic lung allograft dysfunction
  • Prior CV disease and mortality COPD pneumonia patients
  • Factors associated with FEV1 decline in CF
Show more Original Article

Mesothelioma

  • Exhaled breath screening for malignant pleural mesothelioma
  • Tumour thickness and survival in malignant pleural mesothelioma
  • Incidence and familial risk of pleural mesothelioma in Sweden
Show more Mesothelioma

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society