Differences in Cancer Incidence among Indians in Alaska and New Mexico and U.S. Whites, 1993-2002

Abstract

Cancer incidence for American Indians and Alaska Natives is typically reported as a single rate for all U.S. indigenous populations combined. Previously reported combined rates suggest that American Indians and Alaska Natives have lower cancer incidence rates compared with the U.S. population. Alaska Native people comprise three major ethnic groups: Eskimo, Indian, and Aleut people. We examined cancer incidence from only Alaska Indians and compared incidence rates with an American Indian population living in New Mexico. These data indicate striking differences in cancer patterns between two American Indian populations. Cancer data for the years 1993 to 2002 for American Indians of New Mexico and U.S. Whites are from the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program Public-use data set. Data for Alaska Indians are from the Alaska Native Tumor Registry, which is also a Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results Program participant. Overall, cancer incidence rates for all sites combined in New Mexico Indian men and women were lower than U.S. White rates, whereas Alaska Indian men and women exceeded U.S. rates. In comparing Alaska and New Mexico Indians, we observed a 2.5-fold higher incidence of cancer among Alaska Indians. The largest differences between the two Indian populations were noted primarily in cancers associated with tobacco use, including cancers of the oral cavity/pharynx, esophagus (only in men), colon and rectum, pancreas, larynx (men), lung, prostate, and urinary bladder (men). Lung cancer rates in Alaska Indian men and women were 7 and 10 times those of New Mexico Indian men and women. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev

Breast cancer incidence among American Indian and Alaska Native women: US, 1999-2004

“…The overall lower rates of breast cancer among AI/AN women compared with women of other racial and ethnic populations and the higher rates of breast cancer among AI/AN women residing in Alaska and states in the Northern and Southern Plains have been observed previously in national and state level statistics. [1][2][3]5,6,28,29 For 2004, the United States Cancer Statistics reported breast cancer incidence rates among AI/AN women of 58.3 in New Mexico, 103.6 in Oklahoma, and 149.5 in Alaska. 1 A study that was restricted to Indian females in Alaska and New Mexico noted rates of 52 among New Mexico Indian women and 233 among Alaskan Indian women (Eskimo and Aleut women were excluded).…”

“…1 A study that was restricted to Indian females in Alaska and New Mexico noted rates of 52 among New Mexico Indian women and 233 among Alaskan Indian women (Eskimo and Aleut women were excluded). 29 Such large regional differences indicate an important need for etiologic and health services research about breast cancer in AI/AN populations. The Four-Corners Breast and Endometrial Cancer Study (Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah-all in the Southwest IHS region), for example, was designed to examine genetic admixture in relation to gene markers and environmental factors among American Indian, Hispanic, and NHW women.…”

A review of the Hispanic paradox: time to spill the beans?

“…While two possible hypotheses have been suggested to explain the Hispanic paradox, namely a difference in genetic predisposition or difference in environmental factors [44,48], the evidence for the former appears to be weak. In particular, the genetic ancestry of Hispanic Mexicans (a combination of Native American, South American Amerindian and Spanish gene pools) does not confer any clear-cut protective effect elsewhere in North America (Alaskan Indian), South America (Amerindian) or Europe (Spanish) [35,36,51].…”

“…However, Native Americans and Hispanic subjects also share some dietary preferences (cultural ancestry), such as a high consumption of legumes, so further studies will be necessary to separate these inter-ethnic effects. A study comparing Alaskan Indians with American Indians concluded that, despite similar genetic and cultural back grounds, lower smoking rates in the latter (39% versus 21%, respectively) could not explain the five-to seven-fold lower rates of lung cancer [51]. Instead, a diet low in Lung cancer incidence Lung cancer mortality FIGURE 1 Inter-ethnic differences in mortality and/or incidence for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and lung cancer per 100 000, the basis of the ''Hispanic paradox'' [37,38].…”

“…Instead, a diet low in Lung cancer incidence Lung cancer mortality FIGURE 1 Inter-ethnic differences in mortality and/or incidence for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and lung cancer per 100 000, the basis of the ''Hispanic paradox'' [37,38]. fruit, vegetables and fibre in Alaskan Indians was implicated as possibly contributing to the marked increased lung cancer rates [51].…”