More recent insights into the breast cancer burden across BRICS-Plus: Health consequences in key nations with emerging economies using the global burden of disease study 2019

Abstract

BackgroundBrazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and 30 other Asian nations make up the BRICS-Plus, a group of developing countries that account for about half of the world’s population and contribute significantly to the global illness burden. This study aimed to analyzed the epidemiological burden of female breast cancer (BC) across the BRICS-Plus from 1990 to 2019 and studied the associations with age, period, birth cohort and countries’ sociodemographic index (SDI).MethodsThe BC mortality and incidence estimates came from the 2019 Global Burden of Disease Study. We estimated cohort and period effects in BC outcomes between 1990 and 2019 using age-period-cohort (APC) modeling. The maximum likelihood (ML) of the APC-model Poisson with log (Y) based on the natural-spline function was used to estimate the rate ratio (RR). We used annualized rate of change (AROC) to quantify change over the previous 30 years in BC across BRICS-Plus and compare it to the global.ResultsIn 2019, there were about 1.98 million female BC cases (age-standardized rate of 45.86 [95% UI: 41.91, 49.76]) and 0.69 million deaths (age-standardized rate of 15.88 [95% UI: 14.66, 17.07]) around the globe. Among them, 45.4% of incident cases and 51.3% of deaths were attributed to the BRICS-Plus. China (41.1% cases and 26.5% deaths) and India (16.1% cases and 23.1% deaths) had the largest proportion of incident cases and deaths among the BRICS-Plus nations in 2019. Pakistan came in third with 5.6% cases and 8.8% deaths. Over the past three decades, from 1990 to 2019, the BRICS-Plus region’s greatest AROC was seen in Lesotho (2.61%; 95%UI: 1.99-2.99). The birth cohort impacts on BC vary significantly among the BRICS-Plus nations. Overall, the risk of case-fatality rate tended to decline in all BRICS-Plus nations, notably in South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and China-ASEAN Free Trade Area (China-ASEAN FTA) countries, and the drop in risk in the most recent cohort was lowest in China and the Maldives. Additionally, there was a substantial negative link between SDI and case fatality rate (r1990= -0.91, p<0.001; r2019= -0.89, p<0.001) in the BRICS-Plus in both 1990 and 2019, with the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) nations having the highest case fatality rate.ConclusionsThe BC burden varies remarkably between different BRICS-Plus regions. Although the BRICS’ efforts to regulate BC succeeded, the overall improvements lagged behind those in high-income Asia-Pacific nations. Every BRICS-Plus country should strengthen specific public health approaches and policies directed at different priority groups, according to BRIC-Plus and other high-burden nations.

Estimating disparities of prostate cancer burden and its attributable risk factors for males across the BRICS‐plus, 1990–2019: A comparable study of key nations with emerging economies

“…However, we can see that the highest risk of prostate cancer incidence in the recent birth cohorts were in Lesotho in SACU region. Lesotho was one of the most underdeveloped countries declared by the United Nations and suffered from higher poverty rates with 72% of population lives in rural areas far away from healthcare services, so the highest mortality risk was mainly due to the extremely poor healthcare system and inadequate healthcare resources 12,24 …”

“…Information on prostate cancer has been collected from the Global Health Data Exchange (GHDx) online data collection tool (http://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool). The GBD study has made the information comparable and systematic by using consistent methods to estimate results from countries with incomplete data and to report on disease burden and risk factors with standardized metrics 12,15 …”

“…The BRICS‐plus consists of 35 developing countries in five regions, including Mercosur (core members as well as acceding members), South African Customs Union (SACU), SAARC (SAFTA members), China‐ASEAN FTA and Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), and the specific subdivision list of 35 countries is as follows: Mercosur (Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, Bolivia, and Venezuela); SACU (Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, South Africa, and Eswatini); SAARC (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka); China‐ASEAN FTA (China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Brunei, Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar, and Cambodia); EEU (Russia, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Armenia, and Kyrgyzstan) 12,16 . The sociodemographic index (SDI) was a composite indicator of national per capital income, average years of education among persons above 15 years of age and total fertility rate, which was built to categorize countries into five quintiles (high SDI, high middle SDI, middle SDI, low middle SDI, and low SDI) and used to analyze the influences of population's social development status on the epidemiological patterns of prostate cancer 7,13 …”

“…BRICS-plus is made up by 35 developing countries that account for about half of the world's population and contribute significantly to the global disease burden. 12 However, current studies lacked a consistent assessment of prostate cancer burden in many emerging countries and had not exhaustively revealed the epidemiological variations of prostate cancer and its risk factors and their link with age and socioeconomic status. Thus, relevant studies are essential to carry out to slow down the rising disease burden and regional inequalities of prostate cancer.…”

“…BRICS is a political and financial association of five major emerging national economics (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), and BRICS‐plus is a new economical platform to bring together the regional integration blocks where BRICS economies play a leading role. BRICS‐plus is made up by 35 developing countries that account for about half of the world's population and contribute significantly to the global disease burden 12 . However, current studies lacked a consistent assessment of prostate cancer burden in many emerging countries and had not exhaustively revealed the epidemiological variations of prostate cancer and its risk factors and their link with age and socioeconomic status.…”