Global, regional, and national trends in 34 cancers through a novel burden–quality-of-care framework: a cross-sectional study

Background: Current unidimensional cancer evaluation systems limit precise cancer control. This study establishes a novel burden–quality framework that integrates disease burden and quality-of-care index (QCI) to better assess cancer management effectiveness globally. Methods: The QCI was derived by principal component analysis of six standardized indicators using the Global Burden of Disease data (1990–2021). A four-quadrant framework integrated QCI with disease burden to classify 34 cancers across 204 countries/regions. The sociodemographic index (SDI) and gender disparity ratios (GDR) were used to assess inequalities. Results: Substantial heterogeneity exists in the burden and QCI across 34 cancers. Highly fatal cancers such as TBL cancers (tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancers) and pancreatic cancers are persistently trapped in a “high burden-low quality” dilemma. In contrast, high-burden breast cancer and low-burden thyroid cancer demonstrate superior QCI, though the latter may carry overtreatment risks. Socioeconomic factors have a profound influence on intervention equity, with SDI exhibiting a strong positive correlation with QCI ( r = 0.90, P < 0.001) but a significant negative correlation with GDR ( r = −0.71, P < 0.001). Notably, the trend of QCI improvement and overall reduction in cancer burden is asynchronous: high-survival cancers and high-SDI regions showed slow QCI gains, middle-SDI regions exhibited substantial increases, while low-SDI areas remained persistently disadvantaged. Demographic disparities further exacerbated these inequities – older populations bore a disproportionate disease burden yet achieved the fastest QCI improvements, whereas adolescent groups maintained high baseline quality but stagnated in progress. Additionally, gender disparities were pervasive, with females receiving better-quality care for most cancers and across most regions. Conclusion: This multidimensional burden–quality framework shifts cancer evaluation from singular evaluation to precision intervention. It emphasizes: (1) optimizing resources for high-burden–low-quality cancers, (2) avoiding overtreatment in low-burden cancers, and (3) reducing inequities linked to socioeconomic disparities and vulnerable groups (especially elderly and male patients). This research provides a foundation for precise and equitable global cancer control.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Surgery
Published
2026-03-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/js9.0000000000005067
Primary Topic
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Global, regional, and national trends in 34 cancers through a novel burden–quality-of-care framework: a cross-sectional study

B. Zhang, Wen Lu, Lingkang Dong, Jiaxin Yang et al.
International Journal of Surgery
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
article

Global, regional, and national trends in 34 cancers through a novel burden–quality-of-care framework: a cross-sectional study

B. Zhang, Wen Lu, Lingkang Dong, Jiaxin Yang, Wenqi Dong, Qiang Ma, Yuli Hu, Chao Du, Dongzhen Yu, Yihan Cheng, Haibo Shi
article en

Abstract

Background: Current unidimensional cancer evaluation systems limit precise cancer control. This study establishes a novel burden–quality framework that integrates disease burden and quality-of-care index (QCI) to better assess cancer management effectiveness globally. Methods: The QCI was derived by principal component analysis of six standardized indicators using the Global Burden of Disease data (1990–2021). A four-quadrant framework integrated QCI with disease burden to classify 34 cancers across 204 countries/regions. The sociodemographic index (SDI) and gender disparity ratios (GDR) were used to assess inequalities. Results: Substantial heterogeneity exists in the burden and QCI across 34 cancers. Highly fatal cancers such as TBL cancers (tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancers) and pancreatic cancers are persistently trapped in a “high burden-low quality” dilemma. In contrast, high-burden breast cancer and low-burden thyroid cancer demonstrate superior QCI, though the latter may carry overtreatment risks. Socioeconomic factors have a profound influence on intervention equity, with SDI exhibiting a strong positive correlation with QCI ( r = 0.90, P < 0.001) but a significant negative correlation with GDR ( r = −0.71, P < 0.001). Notably, the trend of QCI improvement and overall reduction in cancer burden is asynchronous: high-survival cancers and high-SDI regions showed slow QCI gains, middle-SDI regions exhibited substantial increases, while low-SDI areas remained persistently disadvantaged. Demographic disparities further exacerbated these inequities – older populations bore a disproportionate disease burden yet achieved the fastest QCI improvements, whereas adolescent groups maintained high baseline quality but stagnated in progress. Additionally, gender disparities were pervasive, with females receiving better-quality care for most cancers and across most regions. Conclusion: This multidimensional burden–quality framework shifts cancer evaluation from singular evaluation to precision intervention. It emphasizes: (1) optimizing resources for high-burden–low-quality cancers, (2) avoiding overtreatment in low-burden cancers, and (3) reducing inequities linked to socioeconomic disparities and vulnerable groups (especially elderly and male patients). This research provides a foundation for precise and equitable global cancer control.

International Journal of Surgery
Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HK), Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN), Capital Medical University (CN), Beijing Tian Tan Hospital (CN), Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital (CN)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.