Skip to main content
Log in

Using hierarchical spatial models for cancer control planning in Minnesota (United States)

  • Published:
Cancer Causes & Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective: Region-specific maps of cancer incidence, mortality, late detection rates, and screening rates can be very helpful in the planning, targeting, and coordination of cancer control activities. Unfortunately, past efforts in this area have been few, and have not used appropriate statistical models that account for the correlation of rates across both neighboring regions and different cancer types. In this article we develop such models, and apply them to the problem of cancer control in the counties of Minnesota during the period 1993–1997. Methods: We use hierarchical Bayesian spatial statistical methods, implemented using modern Markov chain Monte Carlo computing techniques and software. Results: Our approach results in spatially smoothed maps emphasizing either cancer prevention or cancer outcome for breast, colorectal, and lung cancer, as well as an overall map which combines results from these three individual cancers. Conclusions: Our methods enable us to produce a more statistically accurate picture of the geographic distribution of important cancer prevention and outcome variables in Minnesota, and appear useful for making decisions regarding targeting cancer control resources within the state.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wennberg JE, ed. (1999) Dartmouth Atlas of Healthcare in the United States 1999. Chicago, IL: American Hospital Association. Web address: http://www.dartmouthatlas.org; accessed January 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Abed J, Reilley B, Butler MO, Kean T, Wong F, Hohman K (2000) Comprehensive Cancer Control Initiative of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: an example of participatory innovation diffusion. J Public Health Manage Pract 6: 79–92.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Suarez L, Margin J, Weiss N (1991) Data-based intervention for cancer control in Texas. Texas Med 87: 70–77.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Pommerenke FA, Miller RW, Srivastava S, Ackermann SP (1994) Targeting cancer control: the state cancer control map and data program. Am J Public Health 84: 1479–1482.

    Google Scholar 

  5. National Program of Cancer Registries (2001) State/Territory Profile for Kentucky. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/npcr/ profiles/ky-npcr01.pdf. Accessed 01/29/2002.

  6. Penberthy L, Stivers C (2000) Analysis of cancer risk in district health departments in Virginia, 1992–1995. Technical report, Cancer Prevention and Control Project, Virginia Department of Health.

  7. National Cancer Institute (2002) PDQ Summary on Prostate Cancer Screening. Available at http://www.cancer.gov/cancer_information/. Accessed 01/23/2002.

  8. Cancer Surveillance and Control Program (1997) Case completeness and data quality audit: Minnesota Cancer Surveillance System 1994–1995. Technical report, Minnesota Cancer Surveillance System, Minnesota Department of Health.

  9. Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program (1986) Summary Staging Guide. Baltimore, MD: National Cancer Institute, NIH Publication No. 86–2313.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lengerich EJ, ed. (1999) Indicators for Chronic Disease Surveillance: Consensus of CSTE, ASTCDPD, and CDC. Atlanta, GA: Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Carlin BP, Louis TA (2000) Bayes and Empirical Bayes Methods for Data Analysis, 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/ CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Besag J, York JC, Mollie´ A (1991) Bayesian image restoration, with two applications in spatial statistics (with discussion). Ann Inst Stat Math 43: 1–59.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wikle CK, Milliff RF, Nychka D, Berliner LM (2001) Spatiotemporal hierarchical Bayesian modeling: tropical ocean surface winds. J Am Statist Assoc 96: 382–397.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Metropolis N, Rosenbluth AW, Rosenbluth MN, Teller AH, Teller E (1953) Equations of state calculations by fast computing machines. J Chem Phys 21: 1087–1091.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hastings WK (1970) Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika 57: 97–109.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Geman S, Geman D (1984) Stochastic relaxation, Gibbs distributions and the Bayesian restoration of images. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Machine Intell 6: 721–741.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gelfand AE, Smith AFM (1990) Sampling-based approaches to calculating marginal densities. J Am Stat Assoc 85: 398–409.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gelman A, Rubin DB (1992) Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences (with discussion). Stat Sci 7: 457–511.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wang F, Wall MM (2001) Modeling multivariate data with a common spatial factor. Research Report 2001–008, Division of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota.

  20. Xia H, Carlin BP (1998) Spatio-temporal models with errors in covariates: mapping Ohio lung cancer mortality. Stat Med 17: 2025–2043.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Waller L, Turnbull B, Clark L, Nasca P (1992) Chronic disease surveillance and testing of clustering of disease and exposure: application to leukemia incidence and TCE-contaminated dump sites in upstate New York. Environmetrics 3: 281–300.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Louis TA (1984) Estimating a population of parameter values using Bayes and empirical Bayes methods. J Am Stat Assoc 79: 393–398.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ghosh M (1992) Constrained Bayes estimates with applications. J Am Stat Assoc 87: 533–540. Minnesota cancer control maps 915

    Google Scholar 

  24. Shen W, Louis TA (1998) Triple-goal estimates in two-stage hierarchical models. J R Stat Soc B 60: 455–471.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Conlon EM, Louis TA (1999) Addressing multiple goals in evaluating region-specific risk using Bayesian methods. In Lawson A, Biggeri A, Boöhning D, et al., eds. Disease Mapping and Risk Assessment for Public Health. New York: Wiley, pp. 31–47.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Shen W, Louis TA (2000) Triple-goal estimates for disease mapping. Stat Med 19: 2295–2308.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Mardia KV (1988) Multi-dimensional multivariate Gaussian Markov random fields with application to image processing. J Multivar Anal 24: 265–284.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Gelfand AE, Vounatsou P (2002) Proper multivariate conditional autoregressive models for spatial data analysis. Biostatistics (In press).

  29. Carlin BP, Banerjee S (2002) Parametric and semiparametric frailty models for spatio-temporally correlated multivariate survival data (with discussion). In: Bernardo JM, Berger JO, Dawid AP, Smith AFM, eds. Bayesian Statistics 7. Oxford: Oxford University Press (In press).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Goodman DG, Wennberg JE (1999) Maps and health: the challenges of interpretation (editorial). J Public Health Manage Pract 5: xiii-xvii.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Short, M., Carlin, B.P. & Bushhouse, S. Using hierarchical spatial models for cancer control planning in Minnesota (United States). Cancer Causes Control 13, 903–916 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021980820140

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021980820140

Navigation