Generation X is surpassing baby boomers, but not in a good way. Cancer is taking over Gen X.
Researchers reported on June 10 in JAMA Network Open that the Gen X generation (born 1965–1980) is developing cancer more frequently per capita than their parents’ and grandparents’ generations.
As they approach the ages at which tumours typically manifest, Philip Rosenberg, a biostatistician at the U.S. National Cancer Institute in Rockville, Md., says the prognosis is not bright for Gen Xers. Rosenberg and his NCI colleague Adalberto Miranda-Filho caution that millennials (those born between 1981 and 1996) and younger generations may also see an increased incidence of cancer if the trend persists.
Rosenberg, a self-described boomer, set out to determine whether his generation, which was born between 1946 and 1964, fared any better or worse than the Greatest (1908–1927) and Silent (1928–1945) generations of his parents. And if his Gen Z (1997–2012) and millennial (1981–1996) offspring would fare even better,.
“One hopes for improvements in health metrics, life expectancy, and cancer rates,” he states. “You want to see progress on all of that.”
Rosenberg and Miranda-Filho collected data from 3.8 million people who had received an invasive cancer diagnosis. The researchers estimated the rate of Gen X at age 60 and studied generational disparities in cancer diagnoses at various body regions. The researchers were able to identify patterns for Gen X, as they are at an age where cancer can occur. The researchers were unable to provide estimates for the millennial generation because they are not yet old enough to have many cancers.
Rosenberg was not pleased with the forecast. In addition to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and leukaemia, Gen X women were predicted to have higher rates of thyroid, renal, rectal, uterine, colon, pancreas, and ovarian cancers than baby boomers. Men of Generation X have predicted increases in malignancies of the thyroid, kidney, rectal, colon, and prostate. The study examines the frequency of new cancer diagnoses rather than the number of cancer-related deaths.
There were also some positive aspects. When compared to baby boomers, Gen X women experienced a decline in lung and cervical cancer, while Gen X males experienced a decrease in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, lung, liver, and gallbladder cancers.
However, the researchers discovered that when all the cancers were combined, the situation became dire since “gaining cancers numerically overtook falling cancers.”
With a 35 per cent increase, Hispanic women saw one of the largest rises. In the Silent and Boomer generations (born 1936–1960), there were 598 cancer diagnoses per 100,000 person-years; in the Gen X generation, there were 806 diagnoses per 100,000 person-years. If you followed 100,000 people for a year, you would anticipate that rate of new cancer diagnoses.
Except for Asian and Pacific Islander men, whose cancer rates decreased by 8.2 per cent from 562 cancers diagnosed per 100,000 person-years at age 60 in the Silent and Boomer generations to 519 cancers per 100,000 person-years for Gen Xers, all racial and ethnic groups included in the study saw increases in cancer diagnoses. The highest cumulative cancer rate in Generation X was seen in non-Hispanic Black men (15,561 incidences per 100,000 person-years). Compared to the 1,399 cancer diagnoses per 100,000 person-years in the baby boomer and silent generations, this is an increase of almost 12%.
Cancer epidemiologist Ahmedin Jemal of the American Cancer Society in Atlanta notes that there had previously been increases in several malignancies, including colorectal cancers in those under 50 and upticks in kidney and thyroid cancers (SN: 8/14/23). Furthermore, the leap does not stop in the US. Other high-income countries have seen increases similar to these.
Gen Xers’ increased cancer rates “are like a yellow flag,” according to Rosenberg. “These figures indicate that some unfavourable trajectories exist.” To determine the cause of such increases and devise strategies to buck the trend, he expects that further studies will utilise the data.
As members of Generation X approach middle age, data on their relationship with cancer is only starting to be collected, according to Corinne Joshu, a cancer epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
According to Joshu, some of the rise might be attributable to improved screening and early detection. It can be difficult to determine how much of this is due to improvements in clinical awareness and detection techniques rather than a real rise. There are concerns about overdiagnosing prostate cancers since, while some can be ugly, many will develop so slowly that they don’t create health issues, the expert says.
Gen Xers are more likely to develop malignancies as a result of unhealthy lifestyle choices like eating too much red meat, being overweight, and not exercising. Joshu asserts that it is not simple to change that. “In our society, making healthy choices is not always simple.”
According to her and Jemal, multifaceted policy measures outlawed smoking indoors and raised the price of cigarettes to a point where people were less likely to start smoking, as youths were the primary causes of the decline in lung cancer cases. Cervical cancer has decreased, thanks in large part to vaccinations against the human papillomavirus (HPV) and other public health initiatives (SN: 4/28/17).
However, Joshu notes that it might be simpler to remove something unhealthy than to make healthy lifestyle choices available and inexpensive for everyone. “We don’t think eating healthier is easier or more affordable,” the woman claims. “I believe we could make a difference in that, but it will require societal effort and a consensus among people that this is a significant issue worth changing.'” And that probably would result in a decline in [other] leading causes of death as well as a decline in cancer.
