Malignant pleural mesothelioma in Finland: regional and gender variation

Figures & data

Table 1. Patient characteristics.

N	1010
Age (years) at time of diagnosis, mean (range)	69 (25–96)
<40	5 (1%)
40–49	24 (2%)
50–59	173 (17%)
60–69	347 (34%)
70–79	302 (30%)
80–89	149 (15%)
≥90	10 (1%)
Gender
Male	801 (79%)
Female	209 (21%)
Histology
Epithelioid	311 (31%)
Sarcomatoid	107 (11%)
Mixed (biphasic)	52 (5%)
NOS (not otherwise specified)	540 (53%)
Side
Right	497 (49%)
Left	345 (34%)
Both	30 (3%)
Unknown	138 (14%)

Table 2. Treatment practices among healthcare districts, N (%).

Treatment	Healthcare district
	Helsinki (HYKS)	Kuopio (KYS)	Oulu (OYS)	Tampere (TAYS)	Turku (TYKS)	p-Value^a
	N = 439	N = 100	N = 83	N = 160	N = 228
Chemotherapy
Yes	171 (39%)	45 (45%)	38 (46%)	69 (43%)	117 (51%)	.047
No	268 (61%)	55 (55%)	45 (54%)	91 (57%)	111 (49%)
Radiation therapy
Yes	61 (14%)	28 (28%)	13 (16%)	27 (17%)	38 (17%)	.019
No	378 (86%)	72 (72%)	70 (84%)	133 (83%)	190 (83%)
Surgery
EPP	41 (9%)	0 (0%)	11 (13%)	5 (3%)	2 (1%)	.001
Diagnostic or palliative	198 (45%)	35 (35%)	37 (45%)	71 (44%)	54 (24%)
No	200 (46%)	65 (65%)	35 (42%)	84 (53%)	172 (75%)

^a Difference between University Hospitals, Chi-square test.

Figure 1. The incidence per year for the whole cohort is shown.

Figure 2. Five healthcare districts and major industrial plants. Shipyards are depicted by green pentagons and major asbestos mining locations by orange circles.

Table 3. Occupational aspects among healthcare districts, N (%).

	Healthcare district
	Helsinki (HYKS)	Kuopio (KYS)	Oulu (OYS)	Tampere (TAYS)	Turku (TYKS)	p-Value^a
	N = 439	N = 100	N = 83	N = 160	N = 228
Claims^Table Footnoteb
Yes	251 (57.2%)	42 (42.0%)	39 (47.0%)	75 (46.9%)	146 (64.0%)	.0002
No	188 (42.8%)	58 (58.0%)	44 (53.0%)	85 (53.1%)	82 (36.0%)
Occupational disease^Table Footnotec
Yes	255 (58.1%)	41 (41.0%)	40 (48.2%)	72 (45.0%)	142 (62.3%)	.0009
Suspicion^Table Footnoted	18 (4.1%)	9 (9.0%)	2 (2.4%)	11 (6.9%)	10 (4.4%)
No	166 (37.8%)	50 (50.0%)	41 (49.4%)	77 (48.1%)	76 (33.3%)

^a Difference between University Hospitals, Chi-square test.

^bNumber of patients who submitted a claim for compensation for occupational disease.

^cNumber of cases classified as an occupational disease.

^dThe patient has claimed for compensation with a negative outcome.

Figure 3. Kaplan–Meier curve representing survival of a group treated with chemotherapy versus a group without chemotherapy treatment. *Survival is zero for patients whose disease was diagnosed at autopsy; hence, the vertical line at the beginning of the Kaplan–Meier curve.

Figure 4. Kaplan–Meier curve representing survival of a group treated with pemetrexed versus a group treated with other cytostatic agents.

Figure 5. Kaplan–Meier curve representing survival in terms of the side of mesothelioma.