Wellness Exchange: Health Discussions
"Rising Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer Deaths Alarm Experts"
(upbeat music) - Welcome to Listen2, this is Ted. The news was published on Sunday, October 27th, and today we'll be diving deep into this startling report. Joining me are Eric and Kate, let's get started. Today's topic is about the alarming rise in mortality rates from early onset colorectal cancer, EOCRC, among younger populations in the U.S. What stood out to you about this data? - The significant rise in mortality rates is eye-opening. I mean, just look at how the younger age cohort, those between 20 and 44 years old, saw an average annual percentage change, APC of 0 to 0.85%, whereas for those aged 45, 54, it was a staggering 11.52%. These numbers are just mind-blowing when you consider the advances we've made in cancer treatment overall. - Absolutely, Eric. And it's even more concerning when you consider that EOCRC mortality rates were actually decreasing between 2000 and 2005. We've seen an overall APC of 0.87% from 2005, 2022, indicating that the trend has reversed dramatically. The fact that this deadly rise is happening in such a relatively short time span should be a huge wake-up call for everyone. - Why might these mortality rates be increasing despite all the advancements we've seen in cancer treatments over the years? - One reason could be the delay in diagnosis among younger patients. Younger folks might not think that something serious could be wrong, so they delay seeking medical advice. By the time they do get a diagnosis, the cancer might already be more advanced, making it tougher to treat effectively. - Or it could be that younger patients might ignore early symptoms, like overt bleeding or gastrointestinal issues, thinking they are trivial or just a part of everyday problems. The chances of missing early signs are higher because they aren't concerned. - Can you clarify for our audience what APC means? - Sure thing, Ted. APC stands for annual percentage change. It basically measures the yearly rate of increase or decrease in mortality rates. It's a way to track trends over time and see whether things are getting better or worse. - Exactly. - And it helps us see how EOCRC has become more deadly. By looking at the annual percentage changes, we can understand how the situation has evolved over the years. - How does the data from the NCHS and CR databases contribute to this analysis? - The NCHS database is pretty comprehensive, covering nearly 100% of the US population. This gives us a very thorough overview. On the other hand, the CR database focuses more on cancer-specific data and covers about 42% of the population. Together, these databases give us a detailed and nuanced picture of how EOCRC is impacting different age groups and stages of cancer. - This synergy between the two databases offers a fuller picture. With both general and specific data, we can really dig into how EOCRC is affecting different demographics and why it's such a pressing issue. - Specifically, what age-related trends in this study do you find most alarming? - For those in the 45 to 54 age group who have early-stage tumors, the mortality rate increased on average by a shocking 11.52%. This indicates a serious problem because early-stage cancers should ideally have better outcomes due to earlier detection and treatment. - And among the younger cohort, those aged 2044, the average APC was 11.06% for late-stage tumors. This indicates severe issues with earlier detection and younger populations. By the time it's caught, it's all related. - Can we draw parallels to any historical health crises that might help us understand this trend? - This rise in EOCRC reminds me a lot of the initial AIDS crisis in the early 1980s. Back then, the delay in diagnosis and lack of awareness led to high mortality rates, just like what we're seeing here with EOCRC. - Totally. But unlike AIDS, EOCRC isn't a communicable disease, which makes the rise in mortality even more puzzling. You'd think awareness would be easier to spread over recent years with all the information we have. - What lessons can we learn from how we handled the AIDS crisis? - One major lesson is the importance of early diagnosis and public awareness. Just like with AIDS, education and earlier testing helped reduce those high mortality rates. If we raise awareness and promote earlier screening for EOCRC, we could potentially save a lot of lives. Making tests more accessible and less stigmatized is crucial as well. Even today, people often avoid screenings due to fear or neglect of symptoms. We need to change that mindset. - But are there differences in how society has engaged with these two health issues? - Absolutely. With AIDS, stigma played a huge role. While the stigma around colorectal cancer tends to be more about embarrassment, people might delay testing because they're too embarrassed to talk about their symptoms. - True. - But a lot of people consider ailments like bleeding or GI issues too minor to warrant a doctor's visit, which is a dangerous misconception. Many underestimate their severity. - How does socioeconomic factors compare between these two health crises? - Both health issues show that lower income and marginalized groups suffer more because they lack access to timely healthcare. It's a recurring problem that affects outcomes dramatically. - However, the difference in accessibility and insurance coverage now compared to the 1980s is vast. That said, there's still a lot more work to be done to ensure everyone has access to life-saving screenings and treatments. - What specific actions did we take during the AIDS crisis that could be mirrored today for EOCRC? - National Awareness Campaigns, Distigmatization efforts and free or low-cost testing were crucial for tackling AIDS. Implementing similar strategies for EOCRC could make a big difference. - Policy changes like lowering the screening age to 45 in 2021 for CRC by medical societies is a step in the right direction, but we need a broader implementation. Everyone should be aware of the importance of early detection. - Looking ahead, what are the two most distinct ways this issue could unfold? - One scenario is that awareness increases, screenings become more routine, and mortality rates start to decline as more early stage cancers are detected. This would be the ideal outcome, of course. - Conversely, if current trends continue unchecked, we could see mortality rates rise even further, especially among those who are already underprivileged and have less access-- - What could be the triggers for increased awareness and routine screenings? - Large-scale public health campaigns increased funding for screening programs and educational initiatives about the symptoms and risk factors could be significant drivers. We have to make screening a no-brainer for everyone. - Social media could play a huge role too. Viral campaigns, influencer endorsements, and easy access to screening information could reach a much wider audience, making it easier to educate and inform. - If awareness doesn't increase, what could be the biggest barriers we face? - Cost and accessibility remain significant barriers. There are still so many people who simply can't afford regular health checkups or are uninsured, this is a massive hurdle. - And misinformation. Alarmingly, some people still believe that cancer is inevitably a death sentence, which deters them from seeking early testing. It's crucial to-- - How might healthcare policies evolve in response to this crisis? - Policies could mandate insurance coverage for earlier CRC screenings and provide subsidies for low-income families. Making screenings affordable and widely available is key to turning this trend around. - We need more than just policies. A cultural shift emphasizing preventive care and regular checkups is essential. People need to prioritize their health and understand the importance of early detection. - What role does technology play in shaping these futures? - Advancements in medical technology, like noninvasive CRC screenings, could make routine testing easier and more widespread. Imagine a simple test you could do at home that gives you early detection results. - Telemedicine could be crucial too, especially for individuals in remote or underserved areas. - Being able to connect with specialists more easily could make a world of difference for early diagnosis and treatment. - Considering both these futures, what's the best case scenario for EOCRC mortality rates? - The best case scenario is a significant decline in mortality rates due to early detection and effective treatment becoming the norm. If we can turn this trend around, it will save countless lives. - Yes, and more equitable healthcare access, ensuring everyone can get screened and treated early. It's not just about lowering the statistics, it's about saving real lives. - And the worst case scenario? - Worst case is that mortality rates continue to rise, particularly among young adults, and healthcare systems become overwhelmed. It's a grim thought, but it's a possible outcome if we don't act fast. - It's a grim picture where disparities widen, and preventable deaths continue to increase due to systemic failures. This is something we can't afford to let happen. - That's all the time we have today. Thank you, Eric and Kate, for being here and sharing your insights. Let's hope we can all work together to change this alarming trend. Catch you next time on "Listen To."