Skip to main content
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health logoLink to International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
. 2017 May 9;14(5):495. doi: 10.3390/ijerph14050495

Hospitalizations in Pediatric and Adult Patients for All Cancer Type in Italy: The EPIKIT Study under the E.U. COHEIRS Project on Environment and Health ,

Prisco Piscitelli 1,*, Immacolata Marino 2, Andrea Falco 1, Matteo Rivezzi 1, Roberto Romano 3, Restituta Mazzella 3, Cosimo Neglia 3, Giulia Della Rosa 3, Giuseppe Pellerano 3, Giuseppe Militerno 4, Adriana Bonifacino 5, Gaetano Rivezzi 6, Roberto Romizi 7, Giuseppe Miserotti 8, Maurizio Montella 9, Fabrizio Bianchi 10, Alessandra Marinelli 11, Antonella De Donno 12, Giovanni De Filippis 13, Giuseppe Serravezza 13, Gianluca Di Tanna 14, Dennis Black 15, Valerio Gennaro 16, Mario Ascolese 17, Alessandro Distante 3, Ernesto Burgio 18, Massimo Crespi 19,§, Annamaria Colao 20
Editor: William Chi-shing Cho
PMCID: PMC5451946  PMID: 28486413

Abstract

Background: Cancer Registries (CRs) remain the gold standard for providing official epidemiological estimations. However, due to CRs’ partial population coverage, hospitalization records might represent a valuable tool to provide additional information on cancer occurrence and expenditures at national/regional level for research purposes. The Epidemiology of Cancer in Italy (EPIKIT) study group has been built up, within the framework of the Civic Observers for Health and Environment: Initiative of Responsibility and Sustainability (COHEIRS) project under the auspices of the Europe for Citizens Program, to assess population health indicators. Objective: To assess the burden of all cancers in Italian children and adults. Methods: We analyzed National Hospitalization Records from 2001 to 2011. Based on social security numbers (anonymously treated), we have excluded from our analyses all re-hospitalizations of the same patients (n = 1,878,109) over the entire 11-year period in order to minimize the overlap between prevalent and incident cancer cases. To be more conservative, only data concerning the last five years (2007–2011) have been taken into account for final analyses. The absolute number of hospitalizations and standardized hospitalization rates (SHR) were computed for each Italian province by sex and age-groups (0–19 and 20–49). Results: The EPIKIT database included a total of 4,113,169 first hospital admissions due to main diagnoses of all tumors. The annual average number of hospital admissions due to cancer in Italy has been computed in 2362 and 43,141 hospitalizations in pediatric patients (0–19 years old) and adults (20–49 years old), respectively. Women accounted for the majority of cancer cases in adults aged 20–49. As expected, the big city of Rome presented the highest average annual number of pediatric cancers (n = 392, SHR = 9.9), followed by Naples (n = 378; SHR = 9.9) and Milan (n = 212; SHR = 7.3). However, when we look at SHR, minor cities (i.e., Imperia, Isernia and others) presented values >10 per 100,000, with only 10 or 20 cases per year. Similar figures are shown also for young adults aged 20–49. Conclusions: In addition to SHR, the absolute number of incident cancer cases represents a crucial piece of information for planning adequate healthcare services and assessing social alarm phenomena. Our findings call for specific risk assessment programs at local level (involving CRs) to search for causal relations with environmental exposures.

Keywords: hospitalizations, cancer incidence, children, pediatric cancer, adult cancer, environment and health

1. Introduction

Until 1955, the word “tumor” was generically defined as “an occupational disease of chemical industry workers” in the most prestigious encyclopedic dictionaries [1]. Nowadays, cancer is generally associated with old age, and its continuous increase—observed throughout the 20th century in all industrialized countries—is generally explained as a consequence of progressive accumulation of oxidative, stochastic (random) genetic damage, along with ongoing improvement in our diagnostic capacities. From the end of the 1980s to date, cancer has involved individuals of all ages, including younger people, whose number it is difficult to estimate [2]. Cancer incidence data are essential for epidemiological purposes, as well as for planning screening campaigns and cancer primary prevention or surveillance. The implementation of Cancer Registries (CRs) represents the gold standard methodology for data collection and cancer surveillance at the local level [3].

In Italy, a network of population-based local cancer registries has been established (Italian Association of Cancer Registries, AIRTUM) in order to set high qualitative standards in data collection that result in reliable reports, with data available on the AIRTUM website. However, the AIRTUM CRs does not cover the entire Italian population, with a remarkable difference in CRs population coverage among Northern (50.2%), Central (25.5%) and Southern areas of the Country (17.9%) [4]. In the last decade, cancer incidence estimation at national level have been provided in the frame of a specific cooperation between the National Institute of Public Health (ISS), the National Cancer Institute of Milan, and the AIRTUM. They mainly adopted the Mortality-Incidence Analysis MODel (MIAMOD) statistical model, which represents a back-calculation approach to estimate the morbidity of chronic irreversible diseases from existing mortality and survival data [5,6].

Referring only to CRs when searching for epidemiological data about the overall and cancer-specific burden of tumors in general population or in well-defined subgroups (i.e., pediatric population or younger adults) might represent a limitation, due to the problem of CRs’ partial population coverage [7]. Despite possible limitations related to underestimation produced by the proportion of cancer patients that is not hospitalized, additional secondary databases such as hospital discharge records (HDR) have been proposed by researchers as potential tools to improve the ability of assessing the burden of several diseases, including cancer [8,9,10,11,12]. The accuracy of these secondary data sources has been specifically explored [13,14]. A study carried out by Penberthy et al. used both CRs and HDR for the detection of incident cancer cases [15]. In our previous studies, we have used HDR as secondary data source to specifically address the issue of breast cancer [12,16].

In this paper, we present the first analyses performed on the national hospital discharge records maintained at central level by the Ministry of Health concerning hospitalization due to main diagnosis of overall cancer, as a result of the work carried out by the Epidemiology of Cancer in Italy (EPIKIT) study group. This latter initiative has been promoted within the framework of the European Civic Observers for Health and Environment: Initiative of Responsibility and Sustainability (COHEIRS) project under the auspices of the European Union’s “Europe for Citizens” Program [17]. COHEIRS—coordinated by ALDA, the European Association of Local Democracy Agencies at the European Council in Strasbourg was implemented in Italy by the Euro Mediterranean Scientific Bio-Medical Institute (ISBEM) and International Society Doctors for the Environment (ISDE) and it has been acknowledged as one of the three best European projects of the year 2013. The aim of the COHEIRS project was to foster the implementation of the “precautionary principle” (with specific focus on health and environment assessment) stated in the Maastricht Treaty and at Article 191 of the European Union Treaty [17]. Precautionary principle should be invoked when scientific final proofs of toxicity for the environment or health are lacking, but some evidence lead to possible concerns.

Although CRs remain the gold standard methodology to collect epidemiological information on cancer incidence at local level, we attempted to estimate the burden of cancer at regional and province level for the entire nation thanks to the specific expertise developed by our study group in the treatment and analysis of HDR. These analyses could also be useful in better understanding the consistency of social alarm that have spread in certain areas of the country (i.e., the Campania region) concerning possible environmental threats to human health related to illegal activities leading to soil/air/water pollution. Our work could help in explaining the widespread perception of higher incidence of tumors in pediatric population (0–19 years old) and adults belonging to those age groups (20–49 years old) generally excluded by official screening for cancer prevention. At the same time, our work could be used by decision makers in planning healthcare services to be offered at local level in the field of oncology.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Database

Information concerning hospitalizations occurring in Italian hospitals are registered in Hospital Discharge Records (HDRs), which are collected in the Italian Ministry of Health’s national hospitalization database. The information is anonymous and includes the region and hospital where the patients have been hospitalized, type of hospitalization (ordinary admission or day hospital), region and province where the patient come from, local health authority (ASL) who is paying for the hospitalization costs, patient’s age, gender, main diagnosis, secondary diagnoses (comorbidities which are not the cause of the hospitalization), procedures performed, diagnosis related group (DRG) and length of the hospitalization. HDRs are kept at the central level by the Ministry of Health since the year 1999, but the national hospitalization database has been fully implemented for all Italian regions only since 2001. It is important to point out that, in the national hospitalization database, people admitted at hospitals located in different region or provinces (different from those ones where patients live), are classified according to their hometown address. Therefore, there was no possibility of misclassification of patients from one province in another. However, it was impossible to assess the time people have been living in a specific region or province.

The Italian Ministry of Health has officially provided ISDE Campania (who is part of the COHEIRS Project and promoted the EPIKIT study group) with the full database covering all hospitalizations occurred in Italy between 2001 and 2011 due to cancer diagnoses. The quality of these data is known to be very high and certified at the central level by the Ministry of Health, with completeness and reliability of records (in terms of correspondence between hospitalizations and individual social security numbers as well as in terms of absence of errors or missing data) varying from 95.6% (year 2001) and 99.8% (from year 2008), respectively, as reported in our previous studies [9,17].

Our dataset included all hospitalized patients identified based on the following International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9-CM) major diagnosis codes: 174 (breast cancer), 162 (lung cancer), 163 (pleural cancer), 161 (larynx cancer), 146 (oropharyngeal cancer), 147 (rhino-pharyngeal cancer), 148 (hypo-pharyngeal cancer), 141 (tongue cancer), 142 (salivary glands cancer), 193 (thyroid cancer), 01, 02, 03, 04, 05 (brain cancer), 188 (bladder cancer), 185 (prostatic cancer), 180 (uterine cervix cancer), 182 (uterine cancer), 183 (ovary cancer), 153 (colon cancer), 157 (pancreatic cancer), 186.0 and 186.9 (testicular cancer), 189 (kidney and urinary tract cancer), 155 (liver cancer), 200.0–200.2, 201.0–201.9, 202.0, 203.0–203.1, 203.8, 204.0, 204.2, 204.8, 204.9, 205.0, 205.1–205.3, 205.8, 205.9, 206.0–206.3, 206.8–206.9, 207, 208 (malignant tumors of lymphatic and hemopoietic system), 1510–1519 (gastric cancer), 1501–1509 (esophageal cancer), 1580–1589 (peritoneal cancer), 1560–1569 (gall-bladder and biliary tract cancer). We considered both ordinary hospitalization and day hospital regimens.

Based on social security numbers (which were treated anonymously), the Ministry of Health has enabled us to exclude all hospital re-admissions of the same patient over the entire study period, in order to minimize possible bias related to the overlapping between prevalent and incident cancer cases. To exclude hospital re-admissions from our analysis, we have considered as hospitalization “index” only the first hospital admission over the entire study period (2001–2011). Patients presenting the same social security number (treated anonymously) and the same major diagnosis were considered as the same person, and they were computed only one time. This kind of approach to minimize the overlapping between prevalent and incident cases has been already used and validated by the Environmental Protection Agency of Piemonte Region for the assessment of population health indicators [18]. After having identified first hospital admissions for the cancer diagnosis that occurred between 2001 and 2011, we removed relapses and admissions for previous cancer patients from hospitalizations taking place during the entire 11-year period. To be more conservative and exclude prevalent cancer cases and disease relapses, we have included in our final analyses only the last five years (2007–2011).

2.2. Analyses Performed and Data Treatment

The total number of records contained in the official database provided by the Ministry of Health were 5,991,278. About 24,194 records were missing information concerning the province where the hospitalized patient was living. We have excluded from our analyses all re-hospitalizations concerning the same patient (n = 1,878,109) over the entire 11-year period. As a result, the Epikit Database contains a total of 4,113,169 “first hospital admissions” due to main diagnoses of any cancer detailed in the previous paragraph. The absolute frequencies (number of hospitalizations) were computed for each Italian region (R) and province (P), by sex (S), year (y), and 10-year age groups (x):

ny,xS(Reg or Prov) (1)

The standardized hospitalization rate (H) per 100,000 inhabitants was computed by referring to the Italian population as standard Popy,xS(IT) of year 2001 (y) per age group (x) and sex (S):

Hy,xRS=[xhy,xRS]*[Popy,xS(IT)][xPy,xS(IT)]×100 (2)
Hy,xPS=[xhy,xPS]*[Popy,xS(IT)][xPy,xS(IT)]×100 (3)

Data were analyzed and processed using Stata (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA) and Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA) software. Age and sex standardized rates per region and province were calculated based on population data provided by the Italian National Institute for Statistics (ISTAT). The results of the analyses in this first paper have been studied as cumulative data (all tumors) per each Italian region and province according to sex and age groups (0–19; 20–49). Data are specifically presented per province (in tables and on maps) as absolute number of hospitalizations and standardized hospitalization rates for each of the years from 2007 to 2011.

3. Results

Table 1 and Figure 1 report the annual average standardized hospitalization rate (SHR) per region due to all cancers in people aged 0–100 years old. Table 2 and Table 3 present the overall number of new hospitalizations and the corresponding standardized hospitalization rates per 100,000 inhabitants per province due to all cancers in pediatric population aged 0–19 and adults aged 20–49 years old, respectively.

Table 1.

Overall cancer standardized hospitalization rate per region in population aged 0–100 years old (Average Annual Value).

Region Average Annual SHR
Piemonte 68.84
Valle d’Aosta 87.30
Lombardia 76.64
Trentino Alto Adige 73.72
Veneto 75.19
Friuli Venezia Giulia 86.86
Liguria 84.34
Emilia/Romagna 84.00
Toscana 72.37
Umbria 76.10
Marche 76.22
Lazio 79.92
Abruzzo 67.50
Molise 74.22
Campania 77.46
Puglia 74.93
Basilicata 71.54
Calabria 65.73
Sicilia 73.71
Sardegna 80.51

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Overall regional cancer standardized hospitalization rates (SHR) per 100,000 in the population aged 0–100 years old (average annual value).

Table 2.

Standardized hospitalization rate (SHR) per 100,000 and overall number of new hospitalizations due to cancer per region and province from 2007 to 2011. Pediatric patients aged 0–19 years old.

Region Province 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Mean Values 2007–2011
n SHR n SHR n SHR n SHR n SHR n SHR
Northern Italy
Lombardia Como 38 6.50 36 6.15 32 5.47 35 5.98 45 7.69 37 6.36
Varese 34 3.98 54 6.32 47 5.50 55 6.43 59 6.90 50 5.83
Cremona 15 4.44 15 4.44 13 3.85 17 5.04 20 5.93 16 4.74
Mantova 23 5.86 16 4.08 13 3.31 26 6.62 23 5.86 20 5.15
Brescia 82 6.22 65 4.93 60 4.55 91 6.90 76 5.77 75 5.67
Pavia 27 5.69 28 5.90 22 4.64 37 7.80 26 5.48 28 5.90
Bergamo 36 3.06 54 4.58 43 3.65 57 4.84 64 5.43 51 4.31
Milano 222 7.64 215 7.40 229 7.88 239 8.23 156 5.37 212 7.30
Lodi 10 4.46 14 6.24 14 6.24 18 8.02 12 5.35 14 6.06
Monza-Brianza 44 5.18 44 5.18
Sondrio 6 3.33 7 3.89 15 8.33 11 6.11 9 5.00 10 5.33
Lecco 22 6.42 19 5.55 11 3.21 30 8.76 17 4.96 20 5.78
TOTAL 515 5.86 523 5.95 499 5.67 616 7.01 551 6.27 541 6.15
Veneto Rovigo 19 9.60 13 6.57 6 3.03 10 5.05 15 7.58 13 6.37
Venezia 56 7.15 48 6.13 45 5.75 39 4.98 58 7.41 49 6.28
Vicenza 69 7.48 54 5.85 61 6.61 59 6.39 66 7.15 62 6.70
Treviso 63 6.81 63 6.81 55 5.94 70 7.56 58 6.27 62 6.68
Verona 39 4.23 44 4.77 60 6.51 50 5.42 54 5.86 49 5.36
Padova 52 5.70 47 5.15 56 6.14 66 7.24 51 5.59 54 5.96
Belluno 8 4.21 12 6.31 3 1.58 15 7.89 8 4.21 9 4.84
TOTAL 306 6.31 281 5.79 286 5.89 309 6.37 310 6.39 298 6.15
Emilia-Romagna Parma 23 5.89 27 6.91 40 10.24 41 10.49 35 8.96 33 8.50
Rimini 12 3.84 20 6.39 16 5.12 26 8.31 22 7.03 19 6.14
Bologna 49 5.62 65 7.45 54 6.19 62 7.11 48 5.50 56 6.37
Forlì-Cesena 28 7.68 22 6.03 6 1.64 21 5.76 20 5.48 19 5.32
Ravenna 15 4.37 17 4.95 17 4.95 10 2.91 18 5.24 15 4.48
Reggio Emilia 29 5.34 40 7.37 37 6.81 44 8.10 27 4.97 35 6.52
Piacenza 17 6.64 12 4.69 26 10.16 24 9.38 12 4.69 18 7.11
Modena 28 4.10 44 6.45 33 4.84 40 5.86 30 4.40 35 5.13
Ferrara 24 8.81 19 6.97 17 6.24 13 4.77 7 2.57 16 5.87
TOTAL 225 5.57 266 6.59 246 6.09 281 6.96 219 5.42 247 6.13
Piemonte Torino 108 5.22 124 5.99 130 6.28 143 6.91 131 6.33 127 6.15
Alessandria 16 4.60 26 7.47 41 11.78 30 8.62 20 5.75 27 7.64
Vercelli 7 4.67 17 11.33 17 11.33 18 12.00 8 5.33 13 8.93
Novara 26 7.55 28 8.13 17 4.93 16 4.64 14 4.06 20 5.86
Biella 17 11.01 8 5.18 7 4.53 6 3.89 6 3.89 9 5.70
Asti 10 5.09 11 5.60 13 6.61 20 10.17 7 3.56 12 6.21
Cuneo 45 7.81 27 4.68 25 4.34 28 4.86 20 3.47 29 5.03
Verbano-Cusio-Ossola 2 1.44 8 5.76 10 7.20 18 12.97 2 1.44 8 5.76
TOTAL 231 5.81 249 6.26 260 6.53 279 7.01 208 5.23 245 6.17
Liguria Imperia 10 5.52 15 8.28 15 8.28 26 14.36 20 11.04 17 9.50
Genova 56 7.94 41 5.81 55 7.80 50 7.09 45 6.38 49 7.00
La Spezia 8 4.48 17 9.52 16 8.96 14 7.84 10 5.60 13 7.28
Savona 22 9.63 22 9.63 13 5.69 19 8.31 9 3.94 17 7.44
TOTAL 96 7.42 95 7.34 99 7.65 109 8.43 84 6.49 97 7.47
Trentino-Alto Adige Trento 32 5.62 22 3.87 33 5.80 37 6.50 42 7.38 33 5.83
Bolzano 31 5.27 15 2.55 24 4.08 20 3.40 21 3.57 22 3.77
TOTAL 63 5.44 37 3.20 57 4.93 57 4.92 63 5.44 55 4.79
Friuli Venezia Giulia Udine 24 5.11 22 4.69 42 8.95 23 4.90 31 6.61 28 6.05
Trieste 11 5.87 13 6.94 13 6.94 15 8.01 12 6.41 13 6.83
Gorizia 6 4.97 2 1.66 11 9.10 6 4.97 6 4.97 6 5.13
Pordenone 20 6.63 15 4.97 24 7.95 27 8.95 13 4.31 20 6.56
TOTAL 61 5.65 52 4.82 90 8.34 71 6.58 62 5.75 67 6.23
Valle d’Aosta Aosta 10 8.11 12 9.73 4 3.24 14 11.36 10 8.11 10 8.11
Total Northern Italy 1446 5.71 1463 5.78 1451 5.73 1665 6.58 1445 5.71 1494 5.90
Central Italy
Lazio Roma 433 10.96 387 9.80 408 10.33 375 9.49 357 9.04 392 9.92
Frosinone 42 8.95 58 12.36 55 11.72 53 11.29 42 8.95 50 10.65
Rieti 19 13.72 8 5.78 16 11.55 11 7.94 12 8.66 13 9.53
Latina 82 14.65 74 13.22 52 9.29 51 9.11 47 8.40 61 10.93
Viterbo 42 14.83 26 9.18 18 6.35 16 5.65 21 7.41 25 8.68
TOTAL 618 11.44 553 10.24 549 10.17 506 9.37 479 8.87 541 10.02
Toscana Lucca 29 8.44 19 5.53 21 6.11 17 4.95 27 7.85 23 6.58
Grosseto 19 10.37 9 4.91 7 3.82 12 6.55 14 7.64 12 6.66
Arezzo 16 5.10 22 7.01 14 4.46 19 6.06 21 6.70 18 5.87
Pisa 26 6.96 19 5.09 27 7.23 16 4.29 19 5.09 21 5.73
Siena 18 7.58 17 7.16 18 7.58 6 2.53 12 5.06 14 5.98
Pistoia 13 5.00 8 3.08 12 4.62 13 5.00 12 4.62 12 4.46
Livorno 16 5.61 11 3.86 19 6.66 12 4.21 10 3.50 14 4.77
Firenze 39 4.38 46 5.17 41 4.61 38 4.27 31 3.48 39 4.38
Massa-Carrara 16 9.64 4 2.41 13 7.83 7 4.22 5 3.01 9 5.42
Prato 9 3.73 15 6.22 9 3.73 6 2.49 3 1.24 8 3.48
TOTAL 201 6.10 170 5.16 181 5.50 146 4.43 154 4.67 170 5.17
Marche Pesaro-Urbino 27 7.68 21 5.97 24 6.83 25 7.11 30 8.53 25 7.22
Ascoli Piceno 32 16.39 21 10.76 31 15.88 17 8.71 16 8.20 23 11.99
Ancona 31 6.89 35 7.78 38 8.45 28 6.22 32 7.11 33 7.29
Macerata 17 5.61 22 7.26 25 8.25 17 5.61 19 6.27 20 6.60
Fermo 11 6.72 10 6.11 11 6.42
TOTAL 107 8.23 99 7.62 118 9.08 98 7.54 107 8.23 106 8.14
Abruzzo Chieti 30 8.32 43 11.93 27 7.49 29 8.05 24 6.66 31 8.49
L’Aquila 31 11.62 23 8.62 30 11.25 16 6.00 17 6.37 23 8.77
Pescara 18 5.83 25 8.10 24 7.77 25 8.10 19 6.15 22 7.19
Teramo 40 13.48 21 7.08 32 10.79 25 8.43 17 5.73 27 9.10
TOTAL 119 9.65 112 9.09 113 9.17 95 7.71 77 6.25 103 8.37
Umbria Terni 27 13.68 20 10.13 13 6.59 19 9.63 16 8.11 19 9.63
Perugia 46 7.47 43 6.98 57 9.25 27 4.38 35 5.68 42 6.75
TOTAL 73 8.98 63 7.74 70 8.60 46 5.65 51 6.27 61 7.45
Molise Isernia 14 18.25 7 9.12 10 13.03 11 14.34 8 10.43 10 13.03
Campobasso 17 7.94 20 9.34 32 14.94 34 15.87 18 8.40 24 11.30
TOTAL 31 10.66 27 9.28 42 14.44 45 15.47 26 8.94 34 11.76
Total Central Italy 1149 9.32 1024 8.31 1073 8.70 936 7.59 894 7.25 1015 8.23
Southern Italy
Campania Salerno 143 12.16 146 12.42 109 9.27 130 11.06 120 10.21 130 11.02
Napoli 447 11.75 449 11.81 333 8.76 324 8.52 338 8.89 378 9.95
Caserta 132 11.96 140 12.68 101 9.15 99 8.97 92 8.33 113 10.22
Avellino 45 10.27 52 11.87 45 10.27 59 13.46 35 7.99 47 10.77
Benevento 30 10.37 36 12.44 19 6.57 24 8.30 18 6.22 25 8.78
TOTAL 797 11.70 823 12.09 607 8.92 636 9.34 603 8.86 693 10.18
Sicilia Caltanissetta 32 10.12 37 11.70 36 11.39 30 9.49 33 10.44 34 10.63
Messina 88 13.82 68 10.68 48 7.54 63 9.90 46 7.23 63 9.83
Agrigento 46 9.28 28 5.65 34 6.86 38 7.67 35 7.06 36 7.30
Catania 119 9.65 130 10.55 102 8.28 118 9.57 85 6.90 111 8.99
Palermo 119 8.50 102 7.29 127 9.08 79 5.65 95 6.79 104 7.46
Siracusa 26 6.16 46 10.89 26 6.16 16 3.79 27 6.39 28 6.68
Trapani 33 7.22 34 7.43 52 11.37 38 8.31 25 5.47 36 7.96
Enna 21 11.27 14 7.51 12 6.44 18 9.66 10 5.37 15 8.05
Ragusa 36 10.49 23 6.70 23 6.70 22 6.41 14 4.08 24 6.88
TOTAL 520 9.47 482 8.78 460 8.38 422 7.69 370 6.74 451 8.21
Puglia Brindisi 37 8.98 24 5.83 31 7.52 32 7.77 40 9.71 33 7.96
Bari 150 11.26 111 8.33 118 8.86 110 8.26 101 7.58 118 8.86
Foggia 67 9.45 70 9.88 58 8.18 61 8.61 53 7.48 62 8.72
Barletta-Andria-Trani 55 11.84 34 7.32 45 9.58
Lecce 54 6.68 52 6.43 56 6.93 49 6.06 59 7.30 54 6.68
Taranto 51 8.22 41 6.61 45 7.26 34 5.48 33 5.32 41 6.58
TOTAL 359 9.25 298 7.68 308 7.94 341 8.79 320 8.24 325 8.38
Calabria Cosenza 56 7.92 47 6.65 56 7.92 53 7.50 56 7.92 54 7.58
Reggio Calabria 54 8.99 70 11.65 45 7.49 54 8.99 46 7.66 54 8.96
Catanzaro 44 11.93 35 9.49 21 5.69 50 13.56 27 7.32 35 9.60
Vibo Valentia 15 8.43 9 5.06 12 6.74 18 10.11 10 5.62 13 7.19
Crotone 21 10.46 13 6.48 10 4.98 18 8.97 9 4.48 14 7.07
TOTAL 190 9.24 174 8.47 144 7.00 193 9.39 148 7.20 170 8.26
Sardegna Oristano 11 7.95 7 5.06 17 12.29 13 9.39 13 9.39 12 8.82
Medio Campidano 8 9.20 13 14.94 5 5.75 9 10.35 8 9.20 9 9.89
Cagliari 40 8.17 25 5.11 40 8.17 33 6.74 44 8.99 36 7.44
Nuoro 14 9.21 9 5.92 10 6.58 11 7.24 13 8.55 11 7.50
Ogliastra 4 7.45 6 11.18 5 9.31 3 5.59 4 7.45 4 8.20
Olbia-Tempio 9 6.25 16 11.11 14 9.72 6 4.17 10 6.95 11 7.64
Sassari 27 9.13 37 12.51 23 7.78 17 5.75 12 4.06 23 7.85
Carbonia-Iglesias 5 4.84 10 9.68 6 5.81 9 8.71 4 3.87 7 6.58
TOTAL 118 8.06 123 8.41 120 8.20 101 6.90 108 7.38 114 7.79
Basilicata Potenza 27 7.35 23 6.26 25 6.81 29 7.90 37 10.08 28 7.68
Matera 20 9.78 12 5.87 10 4.89 10 4.89 11 5.38 13 6.16
TOTAL 47 8.22 35 6.12 35 6.12 39 6.82 48 8.40 41 7.14
Total Southern Italy 2031 10.02 1935 9.55 1674 8.26 1732 8.55 1597 7.88 1794 8.85

Note: Regional capitals are highlighted in bold.

Table 3.

Standardized hospitalization rate (SHR) per 100,000 and overall number of new hospitalizations due to cancer per region and province from 2007 to 2011. Adults aged 20–49 years old.

Region Province 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Mean Values 2007–2011
n SHR n SHR n SHR n SHR n SHR n SHR
Northern Italy
Lombardia Mantova 291 71.55 288 70.81 276 67.86 291 71.55 324 79.66 294 72.29
Pavia 359 67.93 380 71.90 341 64.52 331 62.63 378 71.52 358 67.70
Brescia 894 70.23 918 72.12 901 70.78 939 73.77 876 68.82 906 71.14
Lecco 211 63.42 224 67.32 225 67.62 200 60.11 219 65.82 216 64.86
Milano 2694 89.19 2711 89.76 2663 88.17 2434 80.59 1951 64.59 2491 82.46
Como 370 62.42 414 69.84 417 70.35 356 60.06 369 62.25 385 64.98
Sondrio 120 67.52 138 77.64 135 75.96 126 70.89 109 61.33 126 70.67
Cremona 240 68.28 231 65.72 215 61.16 246 69.98 215 61.16 229 65.26
Varese 600 68.94 640 73.53 541 62.16 555 63.77 526 60.43 572 65.77
Monza-Brianza 514 59.90 514 59.90
Bergamo 614 54.79 605 53.98 682 60.86 663 59.16 662 59.07 645 57.57
Lodi 173 74.52 165 71.07 164 70.64 149 64.18 136 58.58 157 67.80
TOTAL 6566 73.72 6714 75.38 6560 73.66 6290 70.62 6279 64.30 6482 71.54
Veneto Rovigo 139 59.22 165 70.30 186 79.25 210 89.48 185 78.82 177 75.41
Venezia 588 71.07 571 69.02 587 70.95 577 69.75 565 68.29 578 69.82
Verona 601 65.53 627 68.37 658 71.75 595 64.88 602 65.64 617 67.23
Padova 648 69.01 673 71.67 651 69.32 593 63.15 579 61.66 629 66.96
Treviso 548 61.43 577 64.68 576 64.56 519 58.18 531 59.52 550 61.67
Belluno 145 73.71 122 62.02 119 60.49 102 51.85 114 57.95 120 61.20
Vicenza 474 54.12 517 59.03 563 64.28 543 62.00 474 54.12 514 58.71
TOTAL 3143 64.37 3252 66.60 3340 68.40 3139 64.29 3050 62.46 3185 65.22
Emilia-Romagna Rimini 203 62.64 199 61.41 244 75.30 300 92.58 306 94.43 250 77.27
Ravenna 294 79.53 312 84.40 321 86.83 327 88.46 312 84.40 313 84.72
Parma 331 77.79 347 81.55 335 78.73 341 80.14 341 80.14 339 79.67
Bologna 692 72.99 762 80.37 739 77.94 742 78.26 742 78.26 735 77.56
Modena 496 72.61 506 74.08 506 74.08 452 66.17 533 78.03 499 72.99
Ferrara 265 80.76 262 79.85 282 85.94 290 88.38 256 78.02 271 82.59
Piacenza 223 81.59 206 75.37 218 79.76 195 71.34 211 77.20 211 77.05
Forlì-Cesena 253 65.18 284 73.17 255 65.70 285 73.43 297 76.52 275 70.80
Reggio Emilia 392 74.45 399 75.78 392 74.45 408 77.49 380 72.17 394 74.87
TOTAL 3149 73.81 3277 76.81 3292 77.16 3340 78.28 3378 79.17 3287 77.05
Piemonte Alessandria 316 80.79 337 86.16 315 80.53 306 78.23 297 75.93 314 80.33
Vercelli 111 67.41 118 71.67 108 65.59 107 64.98 121 73.49 113 68.63
Biella 111 67.35 114 69.17 123 74.63 143 86.76 121 73.42 122 74.27
Novara 249 68.65 248 68.38 289 79.68 257 70.86 262 72.24 261 71.96
Verbano-Cusio-Ossola 117 77.38 108 71.43 109 72.09 100 66.14 100 66.14 107 70.64
Torino 1346 62.31 1357 62.82 1383 64.03 1396 64.63 1396 64.63 1376 63.68
Cuneo 307 54.25 309 54.60 342 60.43 332 58.67 341 60.26 326 57.64
Asti 135 66.66 128 63.20 127 62.71 111 54.81 119 58.76 124 61.23
TOTAL 2692 64.66 2719 65.31 2796 67.16 2752 66.11 2757 66.23 2743 65.89
Liguria La Spezia 175 86.82 180 89.30 160 79.38 153 75.90 165 81.86 167 82.65
Genova 599 78.90 679 89.44 649 85.49 545 71.79 596 78.51 614 80.83
Savona 194 77.39 193 76.99 207 82.57 179 71.40 187 74.59 192 76.59
Imperia 147 76.21 185 95.91 150 77.77 139 72.06 131 67.92 150 77.97
TOTAL 1115 79.40 1237 88.09 1166 83.03 1016 72.35 1079 76.84 1123 79.94
Friuli Venezia Giulia Udine 381 74.10 419 81.49 404 78.57 376 73.13 397 77.21 395 76.90
Pordenone 232 74.00 221 70.49 193 61.56 203 64.75 238 75.91 217 69.34
Trieste 169 81.64 161 77.77 159 76.81 136 65.70 148 71.49 155 74.68
Gorizia 116 88.62 111 84.80 106 80.98 103 78.69 83 63.41 104 79.30
TOTAL 898 77.04 912 78.24 862 73.95 818 70.18 866 74.29 871 74.74
Trentino-Alto Adige Trento 334 64.51 319 61.61 366 70.69 320 61.80 373 72.04 342 66.13
Bolzano 247 47.60 245 47.22 260 50.11 226 43.55 269 51.84 249 48.06
TOTAL 581 56.05 564 54.41 626 60.39 546 52.66 642 61.93 592 57.09
Valle d’Aosta Aosta 88 70.63 92 73.84 78 62.60 82 65.81 73 58.59 83 66.29
Total Northern Italy 18,232 70.26 18,767 72.32 18,720 72.14 17,983 69.30 18,124 67.61 14,625 70.33
Central Italy
Lazio Roma 3555 87.10 3796 93.00 3804 93.20 3576 87.61 3436 84.18 3633 89.02
Latina 493 86.45 473 82.95 433 75.93 481 84.35 449 78.74 466 81.68
Frosinone 417 83.53 406 81.32 421 84.33 416 83.33 378 75.72 408 81.65
Rieti 139 92.91 120 80.21 119 79.54 132 88.23 105 70.18 123 82.21
Viterbo 230 73.93 217 69.75 251 80.68 267 85.83 191 61.40 231 74.32
TOTAL 4834 86.14 5012 89.31 5028 89.60 4872 86.82 4559 81.24 4861 86.62
Toscana Livorno 266 83.89 268 84.52 271 85.47 252 79.48 229 72.22 257 81.12
Lucca 269 72.02 326 87.29 297 79.52 289 77.38 264 70.68 289 77.38
Massa-Carrara 142 74.87 175 92.27 167 88.06 145 76.46 130 68.55 152 80.04
Pisa 295 72.63 317 78.04 311 76.56 274 67.46 276 67.95 295 72.53
Firenze 627 68.02 651 70.62 648 70.30 651 70.62 596 64.66 635 68.84
Siena 177 69.87 182 71.84 145 57.24 165 65.13 161 63.55 166 65.53
Pistoia 187 66.85 192 68.64 212 75.79 173 61.84 177 63.27 188 67.28
Prato 166 66.79 137 55.12 134 53.91 167 67.19 157 63.16 152 61.23
Arezzo 246 73.49 224 66.92 194 57.96 214 63.93 204 60.95 216 64.65
Grosseto 162 79.47 161 78.98 160 78.49 134 65.73 124 60.83 148 72.70
TOTAL 257 71.90 2633 74.62 2539 71.96 2464 69.83 2318 65.70 2042 70.80
Marche Ancona 350 76.05 399 86.70 365 79.31 369 80.18 392 85.18 375 81.48
Pesaro-Urbino 299 82.85 281 77.86 293 81.19 275 76.20 289 80.08 287 79.64
Fermo 127 75.49 125 74.31 126 74.90
Ascoli Piceno 302 147.68 296 144.75 324 158.44 139 67.97 144 70.42 241 117.85
Macerata 256 82.84 217 70.22 274 88.66 226 73.13 217 70.22 238 77.01
TOTAL 1207 90.44 1193 89.39 1256 94.11 1136 75.59 1167 77.65 1192 85.44
Abruzzo L’Aquila 250 84.50 288 97.35 226 76.39 215 72.67 209 70.64 238 80.31
Pescara 212 67.48 221 70.34 214 68.11 210 66.84 217 69.07 215 68.37
Teramo 225 72.41 208 66.94 219 70.48 216 69.51 213 68.55 216 69.58
Chieti 254 66.72 261 68.56 253 66.46 238 62.52 238 62.52 249 65.36
TOTAL 941 72.30 978 75.15 912 70.08 879 67.54 877 67.39 917 70.49
Umbria Terni 143 66.97 188 88.05 194 90.86 181 84.77 172 80.55 176 82.24
Perugia 419 65.76 484 75.96 492 77.21 521 81.77 478 75.02 479 75.14
TOTAL 562 66.06 672 78.99 686 80.64 702 82.52 650 76.41 654 76.92
Molise Campobasso 189 85.28 200 90.24 187 84.38 190 85.73 165 74.45 186 84.02
Isernia 66 76.81 53 61.68 65 75.64 63 73.31 60 69.82 61 71.45
TOTAL 255 82.91 253 82.26 252 81.94 253 82.26 225 73.16 248 80.51
Total Central Italy 10,336 79.91 10,741 83.04 10,673 82.52 10,306 78.65 9796 74.76 10,370 79.78
Southern Italy
Campania Napoli 2482 77.47 2353 73.45 2416 75.41 2358 73.60 2382 74.35 2398 74.86
Caserta 659 67.93 680 70.09 699 72.05 650 67.00 679 69.99 673 69.41
Salerno 730 64.81 804 71.38 795 70.58 804 71.38 773 68.63 781 69.36
Avellino 313 71.48 309 70.57 320 73.08 319 72.85 277 63.26 308 70.25
Benevento 193 67.73 210 73.69 211 74.04 183 64.22 153 53.69 190 66.67
TOTAL 4377 72.67 4356 72.32 4441 73.73 4314 71.62 4264 70.79 4350 72.23
Sicilia Messina 557 85.84 527 81.21 512 78.90 491 75.66 535 82.44 524 80.81
Caltanissetta 206 75.25 184 67.21 199 72.69 218 79.63 219 80.00 205 74.96
Enna 137 80.20 123 72.01 161 94.25 126 73.76 136 79.62 137 79.97
Catania 1011 91.17 918 82.78 951 85.76 874 78.81 864 77.91 924 83.29
Siracusa 288 69.90 307 74.51 317 76.93 304 73.78 288 69.90 301 73.00
Agrigento 312 69.97 270 60.55 266 59.65 306 68.62 299 67.05 291 65.17
Palermo 854 67.62 835 66.11 824 65.24 799 63.26 803 63.58 823 65.16
Trapani 265 62.52 299 70.54 264 62.28 238 56.15 244 57.56 262 61.81
Ragusa 201 63.70 178 56.41 248 78.59 208 65.91 171 54.19 201 63.76
TOTAL 3831 75.67 3641 71.92 3742 73.91 3564 70.39 3559 70.30 3667 72.44
Puglia Lecce 648 81.48 660 82.98 650 81.73 644 80.97 625 78.58 645 81.15
Taranto 465 77.83 431 72.14 427 71.47 424 70.97 457 76.49 441 73.78
Bari 1180 91.83 1213 94.40 1219 94.87 926 72.07 977 76.04 1103 85.84
Foggia 487 77.00 487 77.00 439 69.41 489 77.32 455 71.94 471 74.53
Brindisi 300 74.06 300 74.06 298 73.57 290 71.59 281 69.37 294 72.53
Barletta-Andria-Trani 248 59.88 269 64.95 259 62.42
TOTAL 3080 82.90 3091 83.20 3033 81.64 3021 81.32 3064 82.47 3058 67.41
Calabria Cosenza 473 64.64 513 70.10 477 65.18 514 70.24 541 73.93 504 68.82
Catanzaro 255 69.53 263 71.71 218 59.44 253 68.98 246 67.07 247 67.35
Reggio Calabria 391 69.81 424 75.70 372 66.42 364 64.99 369 65.88 384 68.56
Crotone 128 72.92 123 70.07 95 54.12 113 64.37 115 65.51 115 65.40
Vibo Valentia 120 72.94 119 72.34 106 64.43 91 55.32 97 58.96 107 64.80
TOTAL 1367 68.40 1442 72.15 1268 63.44 1335 66.79 1368 68.44 1356 67.84
Sardegna Ogliastra 48 82.63 37 63.69 48 82.63 46 79.19 56 96.40 47 80.91
Carbonia-Iglesias 141 110.42 122 95.54 112 87.71 136 106.51 107 83.79 124 96.79
Olbia-Tempio 119 73.83 115 71.35 104 64.53 133 82.52 131 81.28 120 74.70
Sassari 278 82.78 282 83.97 265 78.91 265 78.91 270 80.40 272 80.99
Cagliari 543 93.15 533 91.44 525 90.06 540 92.64 456 78.23 519 89.10
Oristano 109 67.53 109 67.53 142 87.98 135 83.64 123 76.20 124 76.58
Nuoro 167 105.65 159 100.59 133 84.14 122 77.18 119 75.29 140 88.57
Medio Campidano 77 74.78 85 82.55 100 97.11 87 84.49 61 59.24 82 79.63
TOTAL 1482 87.79 1442 85.42 1429 84.65 1464 86.72 1323 78.37 1428 84.59
Basilicata Potenza 245 64.55 249 65.60 253 66.65 278 73.24 281 74.03 261 68.81
Matera 156 77.33 134 66.43 148 73.37 140 69.40 121 59.98 140 69.30
TOTAL 401 68.99 383 65.89 401 68.98 418 71.91 402 69.15 401 68.98
Total Southern Italy 14,538 76.24 14,355 75.28 14,314 75.06 14,116 74.02 13,980 73.31 11,467 74.78

Regional capitals are highlighted in bold.

The average annual number of hospitalizations due to all cancers in Italy was 2362 in pediatric populations (0–19 years old) and 43,141 in adults aged 20–49 years old. Women accounted for the majority of cancer cases in young adults 20–49 (data not presented). As expected, in terms of absolute number of hospitalizations, the biggest cities of Rome, Naples, and Milan display the highest values in both the examined age groups, followed by smaller cities (number of pediatric hospitalizations > 100) such as Turin, Bari, Salerno, Caserta, Catania and Palermo. All these cities were always at the top ten places in both the examined age groups, Particularly, Rome presented the highest average annual number of pediatric cancers (n = 392, SHR = 9.9), followed by Naples (n = 378; SHR = 9.9) and Milan (n = 212; SHR = 7.3). Rome displayed also the highest number of average annual hospitalizations due to cancer in young adults aged 20–49 years old (n = 3633; SHR = 89.0), followed by Milan (n = 2491; SHR = 82.4), Naples (n = 2398; SHR = 74.8), Turin (n = 1376; SHR = 63.6), and minor cities such as Bari (n = 1103; SHR = 85.8), Catania (n = 924; SHR = 83.2), Brescia (n = 906; SHR = 71.1), Salerno (n = 781; SHR = 69.3), Bologna (n = 735; SHR = 77.5), Caserta (n = 673; SHR = 69.4), Lecce (n = 645; SHR = 81.1), Bergamo (n = 645; SHR = 57.5), Florence (n = 635; SHR = 68.8), Padova (n = 629; SHR = 66.9), Verona (n = 617; SHR = 67.2), Genova (n = 614; SHR = 80.0).

When looking only at SHR of pediatric cancers, minor cities (i.e. Imperia, Isernia and others) presented values >10 per 100,000, with only 20 cases per year. Despite huge differences in the number of hospitalizations, when looking at the SHR in pediatric patients, the highest values (≥8 per 100,000) were recorded in provinces belonging to well defined areas: Isernia, Naples, Caserta, Salerno, Avellino (region Molise and Campania); Rome, Frosinone, Rieti, Latina, Viterbo and Terni (Region Lazio and Umbria); Bari, Foggia, Barletta/Andria and Brindisi (Puglia); L’Aquila, Teramo, Chieti, Ascoli Piceno (Abruzzo and Marche); Parma (Emilia Romagna); Aosta (Val d’Aosta Region); Vercelli, and Imperia (Piemonte and Liguria); Cagliari, Oristano, Ogliastra, Medio Campidano (Sardinia); Catania, Messina, Trapani, Enna, Caltanissetta (Sicily).

Similarly, also when looking at the SHR in adult patients aged 20–49 years old, the highest values (≥75 per 100,000) were displayed in the entire Sardinia island, Liguria and Marche Region, and in the following Provinces: Milan, Alessandria, Udine, Gorizia, Ravenna, Ferrara, Rimini, Piacenza, Rovigo, Bologna and Parma (in Northern Italy); Rome, Frosinone, Rieti, Latina, L’Aquila, Lucca, Livorno, Massa-Carrara, Perugia and Terni (Central Italy); Messina, Enna, Caltanissetta, Catania, Campobasso, Bari and Lecce (in Southern Italy).

Women always presented SHR values higher than men (data not presented). Figure 2 and Figure 3 show on a map the average annual value of standardized hospitalization rate (SHR) per 100,000 inhabitants per province in pediatric population aged 0–19 and in young adults 20–49 due to all cancers.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Standardized Hospitalization Rate (SHR) per 100,000 per each Italian province due to main diagnosis of cancer diagnosis of (all tumors) in pediatric population (0–19 years old).

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Standardized Hospitalization Rate (SHR) per 100,000 inhabitants per each Italian province due to main diagnosis of cancer (all tumors) in adults aged 20–49 years old.

4. Discussion

Our objective was to provide a preliminary tabulation of hospitalizations occurred in Italy from 2007 to 2011. The specific goal of our study was to look at the hospitalizations due to all cancers in the Italian provinces, with specific focus on youngest age groups, namely pediatric population and adults ≤50 years old, which are not covered by screening campaigns. The aim was to provide some data about the hospital admissions of cancer patients including those areas where cancer registries (CRs) have not been activated or provide only a partial population coverage. Actually, more than 50% of the Italian population is not covered by CRs and therefore no data are available on cancer incidence rates concerning all the regions, especially for Southern Italy.

Since the potential and limitations of CRs and HDR have already been addressed [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16], this work might provide a first rough general picture about the burden of cancer in Italy concerning younger people, based on real official national data such as hospitalization records. We were not still able to split the database for many age groups (the analyses by smaller age groups will be presented in future publications). The decision to focus on pediatric population (0–19 years old) and young adults (20–49 years old) is closely related to the need of providing information about the possible impact of environmental threats to human health coming from the carcinogen substances officially classified by IARC (International Agency for Cancer Research, Lyon, France) [19]. Among those, special attention should be paid to fine and coarse particulate pollution, whose cardiovascular, respiratory and cancer effects on human health arise even after exposure below the legal thresholds and have been investigated in many big cities across Europe, including Rome [20,21,22]. However, it was not the aim of this study to specifically look at causal relations between tumors and environmental or personal exposures.

Recent reports of a significant increase in childhood cancer in Europe [2] and especially Italy [23] has caused concern, pushing some authors to critically reconsider this dominant model of carcinogenesis [24] and to reconsider quality, comparability and methods of analysis of data on childhood cancer [25]. Cancer has become the leading cause of death among children over the first year of age. Even after adjusting for population growth and improved detection of certain types of cancer, we have observed an increased in childhood cancer over the past 40 years. A large increase in cancer cases has been specifically documented in the first year of age, suggesting that the cancers may originate from maternal and fetal exposure to pro-carcinogenic agents, or have an epigenetic or gametic origin [2,26]. These data suggest that exposure to carcinogens from pollution could play a bigger role in causing children cancer than that played by unhealthy personal habits in adults (i.e., cigarette smoking)”.

Looking only at “rates” might be restrictive when assessing the global burden of cancer diseases and the perception by population. When examining cancer rates in the Campania Region, a big city such as Naples with about 300 new cases per year could show a SHR similar to those of smaller towns with 10–20 new cases per year. For example, the SHR in the large city of Naples was 8.89 in year 2011, which is smaller than the SHR of the smaller town of Isernia with an SHR of 10.43. However, on an absolute scale, more than 300 cases of pediatric cancer would arise in Naples in a single year, which is much higher than 8 pediatric cases per year hospitalized in Isernia. This perceived difference in the number of cancer cases in the population of Naples could contribute to public alarm and panic. Similarly, the overall 280 hospitalizations due to pediatric cancer in Milan (SHR 2011: 5.37) are not considered as a particular problem compared to the 20 cases of Teramo (SHR 2011: 5.73) when looking only at “rates”. We should also look at the problem from an ethical point of view: if we consider as “normal” that cities with a higher number of children must have more incident cancer cases, it could be questioned if we can accept in our society that “more children means more tumors”.

It is interesting to point out that public perception acts in a completely different way (no social alarm) in other areas presenting even more relevant number of pediatric hospitalizations, such as Rome and surroundings (more than 300 new cases per year on average only in the capital city). This would probably suggests that information provided to the population (i.e., the discovery of a huge number of illegal deposits or dumping sites, incineration of dangerous wastes) contribute to create panic and social alarm. Beyond the social consequences of having more children or adults suffering from cancer, we believe it is important for decision makers to have information about the absolute number of cancer cases in order to provide adequate both in-the hospital and in-home-based healthcare facilities to take care of a huge number of patients.

In this paper, we have presented our data per province and for all cancer types. Of course, we are aware that the highest observed hospitalization rates could reflect problems that are specifically attributable to the biggest cities or to single towns within the province (with the rest of the area not being responsible for the increased rates). In addition, particularly high values of SHR observed in smaller provinces might be the consequence of the higher incidence of specific tumors related to particular (environmental or professional) exposures typical of that territory. Of course, only local CRs are able to accomplish this level of characterization. This is the case of Taranto, where the local cancer registry has recorded higher incidence rates of pediatric tumors than those found out in our analyses [27]. Particular attention should be paid to the higher incidence of cancer in adults (mostly women) in the entire Sardinia Island, where the activity of CRs is still at the initial stages.

We believe that cancer hospitalization data per province presented in this study may provide a first interesting rough picture of the global problem, that can be further and deeper investigated through the use of local CRs (where and when available). We are also aware that the use of hospitalization records for epidemiological purposes present a series of limitations mainly consisting in the unavoidable “false negative cases”: cancer patients who are not hospitalized because treated at ambulatorial level and consequently not included in the national hospitalizations database. Despite hospitalization records have not been conceived as a primary epidemiological instrument but as an administrative tool, they are completed only after histological exam has allowed a final diagnosis. Therefore, the use of hospitalization records for epidemiological purposes is particularly valuable. Of course, there is the possibility of an under-estimation produced in our study by the presence of cancer patient not hospitalized, which can be detected only by CRs as gold standard methodology. However, the aim of this study was to provide a first picture of the phenomenon at national level, including also those areas not covered by CRs, which could provide detailed data once activated.

It is interesting to point out that our findings about the incidence of all pediatric cancer in Italy (with about 11,800 new cases per year over a 5-year period) are consistent with AIRTUM projections for years 2016–2020 which estimate about 11,000 new cases of cancer in the age group 0–19 in the National Association of Cancer Registries 2013 Report [28].

Data presented in this paper might represent an initial step which should encourage scientists and public bodies to assess the causes of the increasing cancer hospitalization rates in different Italian areas, with the ending of the traditional gap between Northern and Southern Italy in the field of cancer diseases. The role played by environmental pollutants [29], food and water contamination (i.e., pesticides use, toxic wastes, heavy metals, dioxins and others), nutritional, professional and other personal habits should be investigated. Finally, the higher SHR rates displayed in our study in young women (compared to men) aged 20–49 years old should be considered as a very interesting finding, as it is only partially likely to be the effect of population screening campaigns. Actually, mammographic screening campaigns involve older females aged >50 years old and only tests for the prevention of uterine cervix cancer are performed at younger age. Therefore, this latter finding could probably reflect a higher incidence of some specific female tumors (i.e., breast and thyroid cancer) as suggested by AIRTUM Reports in the younger age groups [28,30,31].

5. Conclusions

Despite the limitations due to the possible underestimation of cancer incidence, it is feasible and potentially useful to use hospitalization records as secondary data source where cancer registries do not cover an entire province or region, in order to provide preliminary information of cancer burden. As expected, the biggest Italian cities showed the highest number of hospitalizations, with well-defined areas being characterized by more pronounced SHR. In addition to the SHR, the absolute number of new cancer cases represents a crucial information for a global assessment of the problem (including healthcare, social, environmental and other evaluations) as well as for adequate planning of healthcare services by decision makers at regional level. Our results over a 5-year period are consistent with AIRTUM projections for years 2016–2020 and call for specific risk assessment programs at local level to search for causal relations with environmental and personal or professionals exposures, that should performed on cancer registries data and case-control studies as the most qualified tool for that.

Acknowledgments

This paper is a result of institutional research activities of Medicina Futura Research (IOS/Coleman Ltd., Naples, Italy) in cooperation with the Euro Mediterranean Scientific Biomedical Institute (ISBEM, Brindisi, Italy) and the International Society Doctors for the Environment (ISDE). The EPIKIT (Epidemiology of Cancer in Italy) Study Group is a result of the COHEIRS project (Civic Observers for Health and Environment: Initiative of Responsibility and Sustainibility), funded by the Europe for Citizens Program 2013–2014 to address the issue of Precautionary Principle application. The COHEIRS Project is coordinated at European Level by the Association of Local Democracy Agency (ALDA) in Strasbourg and it is implemented in Italy by ISBEM and ISDE. Authors are grateful to the ALDA General Director Antonella Valmorbida and to ALDA staff, especially to Marco Boaria, Anna Ditta and Aldo Xhani for their support in carrying out COHEIRS project, as well as to Donato Cafagna (Delegate of Italian Government for environmental affairs in Campania).

Author Contributions

All authors provided substantial contribution to the production, analysis and interpretation of the results. Prisco Piscitelli, Immacolata Marino, Andrea Falco, Matteo Rivezzi, Roberto Romano, Restituta Mazzella, Cosimo Neglia, Giulia Della Rosa, Giuseppe Pellerano, Giuseppe Militerno, Adriana Bonifacino, Gaetano Rivezzi, Roberto Romizi, Giuseppe Miserotti, Maurizio Montella, Fabrizio Bianchi, Alessandra Marinelli, Antonella De Donno, Giovanni De Filippis, Giuseppe Serravezza, Gianluca Di Tanna, Dennis Black, Valerio Gennaro, Mario Ascolese, Alessandro Distante, Ernesto Burgio, Massimo Crespi, Annamaria Colao have conceived the study together and contributed to write and prepare the manuscript before the final approval and submission. Prisco Piscitelli, Immacolata Marino, Andrea Falco, Roberto Romano, Restituta Mazzella, Cosimo Neglia, Giulia Della Rosa, Giuseppe Militerno, Gianluca Di Tanna, Valerio Gennaro, Massimo Crespi performed the statistical analyses.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  • 1.Treccani Editors . Treccani Enciclopedic Dictionary. Treccani; Rome, Italy: 1954. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Steliarova-Foucher E., Stiller C., Kaatsch P., Berrino F., Coebergh J.W., Lacour B., Parkin M. Geographical patterns and time trends of cancer incidence and survival among children and adolescents in Europe since the 1970s (the ACCIS project): An epidemiological study. Lancet. 2004;364:2097–2105. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17550-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Jensen O.M., Whelan S. Planning a cancer registry. IARC Sci. Publ. 1991;95:22–28. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.AIRT Working Group Italian cancer figures, report 2014. Epidemiol. Prev. 2014;38:1–122. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Verdecchia A., Capocaccia R., Egidi V., Golini A. A method for the estimation of chronic disease morbidity and trends from mortality data. Stat. Med. 1989;8:201–216. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780080207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.De Angelis G., De Angelis R., Frova L., Verdecchia A. MIAMOD: A computer package to estimate chronic disease morbidity using mortality and survival data. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 1994;44:99–107. doi: 10.1016/0169-2607(94)90091-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Miller M., Swan J. SEER doubles coverage by adding registries for four states. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2001;93:500. doi: 10.1093/jnci/93.7.500. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Ellekjaer H., Holmen J., Kruger O., Terent A. Identification of incident stroke in Norway: Hospital discharge data compared with a population-based stroke register. Stroke. 1999;30:56–60. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.30.1.56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Mahonen M., Salomaa V., Brommels M., Molarius A., Miettinen H., Pyorala K., Tuomilehto J., Arstila M., Kaarsalo E., Ketonen M., et al. The validity of hospital discharge register data on coronary heart disease in Finland. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 1997;13:403–415. doi: 10.1023/A:1007306110822. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Du X., Freeman J.L., Warren J.L., Nattinger A.B., Zhang D., Goodwin J.S. Accuracy and completeness of medicare claims data for surgical treatment of breast cancer. Med. Care. 2000;38:719–727. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200007000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Icks A., Haastert B., Wildner M., Becker C., Meyer G. Trend of hip fracture incidence in Germany 1995–2004: A population-based study. Osteoporos. Int. 2008;19:1139–1145. doi: 10.1007/s00198-007-0534-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Piscitelli P., Barba M., Crespi M., Di Maio M., Santoriello A., D’Aiuto M., Fucito A., Losco A., Pentimalli F., Maranta P., et al. The burden of breast cancer in Italy: Mastectomies and quadrantectomies performed between 2001 and 2008 based on nationwide hospital discharge records. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 2012;31:96. doi: 10.1186/1756-9966-31-96. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Cooper G.S., Yuan Z., Stange K.C., Dennis L.K., Amini S.B., Rimm A.A. Agreement of medicare claims and tumor registry data for assessment of cancer-related treatment. Med. Care. 2000;38:411–421. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200004000-00008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Freeman J.L., Zhang D., Freeman D.H., Goodwin J.S. An approach to identifying incident breast cancer cases using medicare claims data. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2000;53:605–614. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00173-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Penberthy L., McClish D., Pugh A., Smith W., Manning C., Retchin S. Using hospital discharge files to enhance cancer surveillance. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2003;158:27–34. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwg108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Piscitelli P., Santoriello A., Buonaguro F.M., Di Maio M., Iolascon G., Gimigliano F., Marinelli A., Distante A., Serravezza G., Sordi E., et al. Incidence of breast cancer in Italy: Mastectomies and quadrantectomies performed between 2000 and 2005. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 2009;28:86. doi: 10.1186/1756-9966-28-86. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Piscitelli P., Chitano G., Andreano G., Caroppo O., Andreano S., Gualtieri D., Rasinger M., Seclì M., Melissano A., De Giorgi A., et al. Dal Salento un esempio di Cittadinanza Scientifica. Epidemiol. Prev. 2013;37:3. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Piemonte EPAo: Healthcare Indicators in Piemonte Region. [(accessed on 20 April 2017)]; Available online: https://www.arpa.piemonte.it/reporting/indicatori-on_line/qualita-della-vita/salute_dimissioni-ospedaliere.
  • 19.Samet J.M. The IARC monographs: Critics and controversy. Carcinogenesis. 2015;36:707–709. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgv062. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Beelen R., Raaschou-Nielsen O., Stafoggia M., Andersen Z.J., Weinmayr G., Hoffmann B., Wolf K., Samoli E., Fischer P., Nieuwenhuijsen M., et al. Effects of long-term exposure to air pollution on natural-cause mortality: An analysis of 22 European cohorts within the multicentre ESCAPE project. Lancet. 2014;383:785–795. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62158-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Cesaroni G., Badaloni C., Gariazzo C., Stafoggia M., Sozzi R., Davoli M., Forastiere F. Long-term exposure to urban air pollution and mortality in a cohort of more than a million adults in Rome. Environ. Health Perspect. 2013;121:324–331. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1205862. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Stafoggia M., Faustini A., Rognoni M., Tessari R., Cadum E., Pacelli B., Pandolfi P., Miglio R., Mallone S., Vigotti M.A., et al. Air pollution and mortality in ten Italian cities, results of the EpiAir project. Epidemiol. Prev. 2009;33:65–76. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.AIRTUM Report 2008—Tumors in children: Incidence, survival, temporal trends. Epidemiol. Prev. 2008;32:1–112. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Burgio E., Migliore L. Towards a systemic paradigm in carcinogenesis: Linking epigenetics and genetics. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2015;42:777–790. doi: 10.1007/s11033-014-3804-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Steliarova-Foucher E., Kaatsch P., Lacour B., Pompe-Kirn V., Eser S., Miranda A., Danzon A., Ratiu A., Parkin D.M. Quality, comparability and methods of analysis of data on childhood cancer in Europe (1978–1997): Report from the Automated Childhood Cancer Information System project. Eur. J. Cancer. 2006;42:1915–1951. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2006.05.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Greaves M. Pre-natal origins of childhood leukemia. Rev. Clin. Exp. Hematol. 2003;7:233–245. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Cannone G.A., Lo Monaco M.G., Carone S., Melcarne A., Tanzarella M., Bisceglia L., Ardizzone A., Minerba S., Quarta F., Coviello V., et al. Childhood cancer incidence in Apulia Region (Southern Italy), 2003–2008. Epidemiol. Prev. 2015;39:176–182. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.AIRTUM Working Group I tumori in Italia—Rapporto 2012, I tumori dei bambini e degli adolescenti. Tumors in Italy: Pediatric cancers. Epidemiol. Prev. 2013;37:1–225. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Piscitelli P., Muscogiuri G., Colao A. Environment and health: Not only cancer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2016;13 doi: 10.3390/ijerph13070724. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Quaglia A., Lillini R., Crocetti E., Buzzoni C., Vercelli M. Incidence and mortality trends for four major cancers in the elderly and middle-aged adults: An international comparison. Surg. Oncol. 2013;22:e31–e38. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2013.02.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Michelozzi P., Schifano P. Childood cancers, risk factors and investigations models for the evaluation of spatio-temporal clusters. Epidemiol. Prev. 2016;40:28–30. doi: 10.19191/EP16.5S2.P001.096. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health are provided here courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

RESOURCES