Inequalities In Cancer Survival Research Articles

Cancer inequalities experienced by people with disability: a systematic review protocol

IntroductionCancer is a leading cause of death and has a significant impact on individuals, families and society. Emerging evidence shows that people with disability face challenges in accessing services which...

Attendance characteristics of the breast and colorectal cancer screening programmes in a highly urbanised region of the Netherlands: a retrospective observational study

ObjectivesThroughout Europe, many countries offer population-based cancer screening programmes (CSPs). In the Netherlands, two implemented CSPs are targeting people of 50 years and older, aiming at breast cancer (BC) and...

Cancer and Ongoing Climate Change: Who Are the Most Affected?

Cancer has become the leading cause of premature death in many counties in recent decades. Previous studies showed plenty of evidence that control of modifiable risk factors would reduce the cancer burden. Since modifiable risk factors could be eliminated by changing the lifestyles of individuals, a greater uptake of modifiable risk factors is critical to reducing cancer burden and inequality in cancer survival. However, climate change will widen cancer inequities through its complex connections with modifiable risk factors. In this perspective, complex connections between climate change and cancer risks via modifiable risk factors, including abnormal temperature, UV, air pollution, natural disasters, food (diet), water, infections, and inefficient physical activities, have been summarized. The associations between climate change and modifiable risk factors have no doubt expanded the inequities. People who face overlapping modifiable risk factors, but who are unable to change or adapt, are at the highest risk in the climate change-cancer linkage. Though individual actions to avoid exposure to modifiable risk factors have been recommended, limited benefits would be achieved unless the nations strive to ensure the basic needs of the people. No choice makes avoiding exposure to risk factors an empty phrase. Thus, government actions should be taken to reduce the expanded inequities in cancer risks.

Are deprivation-specific cancer survival patterns similar according to individual-based and area-based measures? A cohort study of patients diagnosed with five malignancies in England and Wales, 2008–2016

ObjectiveTo investigate if measured inequalities in cancer survival differ when using individual-based (‘person’) compared with area-based (‘place’) measures of deprivation for three socioeconomic dimensions: income, deprivation and occupation.DesignCohort study.SettingData from...

Socio-economic inequalities in cancer survival: how do they translate into Number of Life-Years Lost?

BackgroundWe aimed to investigate the impact of socio-economic inequalities in cancer survival in England on the Number of Life-Years Lost (NLYL) due to cancer.MethodsWe analysed 1.2 million patients diagnosed with one of the 23 most common cancers (92.3% of all incident cancers in England) between 2010 and 2014. Socio-economic deprivation of patients was based on the income domain of the English Index of Deprivation. We estimated the NLYL due to cancer within 3 years since diagnosis for each cancer and stratified by sex, age and deprivation, using a non-parametric approach. The relative survival framework enables us to disentangle death from cancer and death from other causes without the information on the cause of death.ResultsThe largest socio-economic inequalities were seen mostly in adults <45 years with poor-prognosis cancers. In this age group, the most deprived patients with lung, pancreatic and oesophageal cancer lost up to 6 additional months within 3 years since diagnosis than the least deprived. For most moderate/good prognosis cancers, the socio-economic inequalities widened with age.ConclusionsMore deprived patients and particularly the young with more lethal cancers, lose systematically more life-years than the less deprived. To reduce these inequalities, cancer policies should systematically encompass the inequities component.

Identification of common genes in obesity and cancer through network interaction and targeting those genes by virtual screening approach

Obesity may have an effect on cancer outcomes, resulting in global inequalities in cancer survival and death. Microarray data analysis was done to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in obese and cancer patients. Total 1977 differentially expressed genes among obesity and gastric cancer, breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, and colorectal cancer were used to build a gene interaction network, which was then analyzed by using Cytoscape software. It has been identified that JUN, CXCL12, and LEP genes show a higher degree and stress, and play an important role in obesity and cancer progression. Further, CXCL12 and LEP were taken for virtual screening study with coumarin and its derivatives to develop a drug against obesity and cancer. The interactions of CXCL12 and LEP with coumarins were studied by molecular docking and it shows good interaction as well as docking score as compared to the standard one. The ADME properties were predicted to check the drug-likeness activity of coumarins and the most of the drug-likeness activities are in admire range. The Binding free energy of the docked complex was calculated by performing MM-GBSA. The molecular docking, ADME properties prediction, and MM-GBSA was performed on Maestro 12.6. The top docked score compounds were further subjected to molecular dynamic simulation to check the stability by using GROMACS. The MM-PBSA study was performed to calculate the binding energy components as well as the energy contributions of specific amino acids. The resultant compounds could be a potent anti-obesity and anti-cancer drug. Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma

Cancer as a Chronic Illness in Colombia: A Normative Consensus Approach to Improving Healthcare Services for those Living with and beyond Cancer and Its Treatment.

Cancer survivorship care in Colombia is of increasing importance. International survivorship initiatives and studies show that continuing symptoms, psychological distress, and late effects impact the quality of life for survivors. Priorities for quality survivorship according to Colombian patients and clinicians are unknown. We undertook a nominal consensus approach with 24 participants using virtual meeting technology to identify the priorities for cancer survivorship. We applied an iterative approach conducted over eight weeks with five workshops and one patient focus group followed by a priority setting survey. The consensus group established six main themes, which were subsequently evaluated by experts: (i) symptoms and secondary effects of cancer; (ii) care coordination to increase patient access and integration of cancer care; (iii) psychosocial support after cancer treatment; (iv) mapping information resources and available support services for long-term cancer care; (v) identifying socioeconomic and regional inequalities in cancer survival to improve care and outcomes; and (vi) health promotion and encouraging lifestyle change. The order of priorities differed between clinicians and patients: patients mentioned psychosocial support as the number one priority, and clinicians prioritized symptoms and surveillance for cancer recurrence. Developing survivorship care needs consideration of both views, including barriers such as access to services and socioeconomic disparities.

Socioeconomic position and prediagnostic health care contacts in children with cancer in Denmark: a nationwide register study

BackgroundWhile underlying mechanisms and pathways of social inequalities in cancer survival have been extensively examined in adults, this is less so for children with cancer. Hypothesized mechanisms include prediagnostic utilization of and navigation through the health care system, which may differ by socioeconomic resources of the families. In this nationwide register-based study we investigated the association between measures of family socioeconomic position in relation to prediagnostic health care contacts and stage of disease at diagnosis in children with cancer in Denmark.MethodsWe identified all children diagnosed with a cancer at ages 0–15 years in 1998–2016 (N = 3043) from the Danish Childhood Cancer Registry. We obtained comprehensive information on measures of socioeconomic position, parental health and prediagnostic contacts to both general practitioners and hospitals 24 months prior to diagnosis from various national registries. We fitted multivariable conditional logistic regression models for the association of family socioeconomic and health-related variables with firstly, frequent health care contacts and secondly, advanced stage.ResultsWe found higher odds ratios (OR) of frequent both overall and emergency health care contacts in the last 3 months before diagnosis in children from households with short parental education and mixed affiliation to work market, when compared to children with high family socioeconomic position. Further, children of parents with depression or of non-Western origin, respectively, had higher OR for frequent overall and emergency contacts. We found no association between socioeconomic position, parental health and stage of disease.ConclusionFamilies with socioeconomic disadvantage, non-Western origin or depression more frequently utilize prediagnostic health care services, both generally and in the acute setting, indicating that some disadvantaged families may struggle to navigate the health care system when their child is sick. Reassuringly, this was not reflected in disparities in stage at diagnosis. In order to improve the diagnostic process and potentially reduce health care contacts, attention and support should be given to families with a high number of health care contacts over a short period of time.

Small-area analysis on socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival for 25 cancer sites in Germany.

Socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival have been reported in various countries but it is uncertain to what extent they persist in countries with relatively comprehensive health insurance coverage such as Germany. We investigated the association between area-based socioeconomic deprivation on municipality level and cancer survival for 25 cancer sites in Germany. We used data from seven population-based cancer registries (covering 32 million inhabitants). Patients diagnosed in 1998 to 2014 with one of 25 most common cancer sites were included. Area-based socioeconomic deprivation was assessed using the categorized German Index of Multiple Deprivation (GIMD) on municipality level. We estimated 3-month, 1-year, 5-year and 5-year conditional on 1-year age-standardized relative survival using period approach for 2012 to 2014. Trend analyses were conducted for periods between 2003-2005 and 2012-2014. Model-based period analysis was used to calculate relative excess risks (RER) adjusted for age and stage. In total, 2 333 547 cases were included. For all cancers combined, 5-year survival rates by GIMD quintile were 61.6% in Q1 (least deprived), 61.2% in Q2, 60.4% in Q3, 59.9% in Q4 and 59.0% in Q5 (most deprived). For most cancer sites, the most deprived quintile had lower 5-year survival compared to the least deprived quintile even after adjusting for stage (all cancer sites combined, RER 1.16, 95% confidence interval 1.14-1.19). For some cancer sites, this association was stronger during short-term follow-up. Trend analyses showed improved survival from earlier to recent periods but persisting deprivation differences. The underlying reasons for these persisting survival inequalities and strategies to overcome them should be further investigated.

Socioeconomic deprivation and cancer survival in a metropolitan area: An analysis of cancer registry data from Hamburg, Germany.

BackgroundFew studies have investigated socioeconomic inequalities within cities. Yet, such analyses are particularly important given the increasing international trend to urbanization. Here we investigated area-based socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in Hamburg, a port city in the North of Germany (population: 1.84 million people).MethodsPatients with a diagnosis of colorectal, lung, female breast, and prostate cancer in 2004–2018 (follow-up until 31.12.2018) and registered in the Hamburg cancer registry were included. Area-based socioeconomic deprivation on urban district level was assigned to the patients and grouped in five quintiles. Relative survival in 2014–2018 was calculated using the period approach. Trend analyses between 2004 and 2018 were conducted. Relative excess risks adjusted for age and stage were computed with model-based period analyses.FindingsFor the 73,106 included patients, age-standardized 5-year relative survival in 2014–2018 decreased with increasing deprivation with significant differences between the most and least deprived group of 14·7 (prostate), 10·8 (colorectal), 8·0 (breast), and 2·5 (lung) percent units. Standardization by cancer stage decreased the difference for prostate cancer to 8·5 percent units and for breast cancer to 3·6 percent units but had only a minor effect for colorectal and lung cancer. Similar socioeconomic inequalities were already present in 2004–08.InterpretationStrong socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival were observed in Hamburg, which could be partly explained by differences in the stage distribution. Further research including information on screening participation as well as information on cancer care are important to further understand and finally overcome these inequalities.Funding10.13039/501100005972German Cancer Aid.

Social inequalities Social Inequalities in Cancer Survival in Belgium: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Social inequalities Social Inequalities in Cancer Survival in Belgium: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Estimation of the Potentially Avoidable Excess Deaths Associated with Socioeconomic Inequalities in Cancer Survival in Germany.

Simple SummaryIn this study, we estimate the number of avoidable deaths attributable to socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in Germany. We used data from epidemiological cancer registries. The German Index of Multiple Deprivation (GIMD) 2010 was used to assess deprivation on a municipality level. Results show that summed over the 25 cancer sites, 4100 annual excess deaths (3.0% of all excess deaths) could have been avoided each year in Germany during the period 2013–2016 if relative survival were in all regions comparable with the least deprived regions. Colorectal, oral and pharynx, prostate, and bladder cancer contributed the largest numbers of avoidable excess deaths. We also observed that cancer incidence was generally higher in more deprived areas. Our analyses demonstrate the importance of cancer prevention and of survival improvements in more deprived regions.Many countries have reported survival inequalities due to regional socioeconomic deprivation. To quantify the potential gain from eliminating cancer survival disadvantages associated with area-based deprivation in Germany, we calculated the number of avoidable excess deaths. We used population-based cancer registry data from 11 of 16 German federal states. Patients aged ≥15 years diagnosed with an invasive malignant tumor between 2008 and 2017 were included. Area-based socioeconomic deprivation was assessed using the quintiles of the German Index of Multiple Deprivation (GIMD) 2010 on a municipality level nationwide. Five-year age-standardized relative survival for 25 most common cancer sites and for total cancer were calculated using period analysis. Incidence and number of avoidable excess deaths in Germany in 2013–2016 were estimated. Summed over the 25 cancer sites, 4100 annual excess deaths (3.0% of all excess deaths) could have been avoided each year in Germany during the period 2013–2016 if relative survival were in all regions comparable with the least deprived regions. Colorectal, oral and pharynx, prostate, and bladder cancer contributed the largest numbers of avoidable excess deaths. Our results provide a good basis to estimate the potential of intervention programs for reducing socioeconomic inequalities in cancer burden in Germany.

Factors Explaining Socio-Economic Inequalities in Cancer Survival: A Systematic Review.

Background:There is strong and well-documented evidence that socio-economic inequality in cancer survival exists within and between countries, but the underlying causes of these differences are not well understood.Methods:We systematically searched the Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases up to 31 May 2020. Observational studies exploring pathways by which socio-economic position (SEP) might causally influence cancer survival were included.Results:We found 74 eligible articles published between 2005 and 2020. Cancer stage, other tumor characteristics, health-related lifestyle behaviors, co-morbidities and treatment were reported as key contributing factors, although the potential mediating effect of these factors varied across cancer sites. For common cancers such as breast and prostate cancer, stage of disease was generally cited as the primary explanatory factor, while co-morbid conditions and treatment were also reported to contribute to lower survival for more disadvantaged cases. In contrast, for colorectal cancer, most studies found that stage did not explain the observed differences in survival by SEP. For lung cancer, inequalities in survival appear to be partly explained by receipt of treatment and co-morbidities.Conclusions:Most studies compared regression models with and without adjusting for potential mediators; this method has several limitations in the presence of multiple mediators that could result in biased estimates of mediating effects and invalid conclusions. It is therefore essential that future studies apply modern methods of causal mediation analysis to accurately estimate the contribution of potential explanatory factors for these inequalities, which may translate into effective interventions to improve survival for disadvantaged cancer patients.

Social Inequalities in Cancer Survival in Belgium: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

Socioeconomic status (SES) is an important factor in cancer survival; however, results are heterogeneous and linked to characteristics of the study population and health care system. This population-based cohort study evaluates the association between individual-level socioeconomic and demographic factors and cancer survival for the first time in Belgium. From the Belgian Cancer Registry, we identified 109,591 patients diagnosed between 2006 and 2013 with one of eight common cancer types. Information on treatment, socioeconomic parameters, and vital status were retrieved from multiple data sources and linked using a unique personal identification number. The outcome was 5-year observed survival. Associations between survival and socioeconomic and demographic factors were assessed using multivariable Cox proportional-hazard regression models. Lower income, unemployment, and living alone were all associated with worse cancer survival. These associations were most pronounced for certain lifestyle-related cancer types (e.g., head and neck cancers) and those with good to moderate prognosis (e.g., colorectal and female breast cancer). These results indicate that, despite a comprehensive and nationwide health insurance program in which equity in rights and access to health care are pursued, SES is associated with disparities in cancer survival in Belgium. This population-based study with individual-level socioeconomic information of more than 100,000 patients with cancer identifies patient groups that may be at highest risk for socioeconomic disparities in cancer survival. Reasons behind the observed disparities are multiple and complex and should be further examined. Health policy interventions should consider the observed deprivation gap to plan targeted actions.

The effect of a severe psychiatric illness on colorectal cancer treatment and survival: A population-based retrospective cohort study.

ObjectivesTo identify inequalities in cancer survival rates for patients with a history of severe psychiatric illness (SPI) compared to those with no history of mental illness and explore differences in the provision of recommended cancer treatment as a potential explanation.DesignPopulation-based retrospective cohort study using linked cancer registry and administrative data at ICES.SettingThe universal healthcare system in Ontario, Canada.ParticipantsColorectal cancer (CRC) patients diagnosed between April 1st, 2007 and December 31st, 2012. SPI history (schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorders, other psychotic disorders, bipolar disorders or major depressive disorders) was determined using hospitalization, emergency department, and psychiatrist visit data and categorized as ‘no history of mental illness, ‘outpatient SPI history’, and ‘inpatient SPI history’.Main outcome measuresCancer-specific survival, non-receipt of surgical resection, and non-receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation.Results24,507 CRC patients were included; 482 (2.0%) had an outpatient SPI history and 258 (1.0%) had an inpatient SPI history. Individuals with an SPI history had significantly lower survival rates and were significantly less likely to receive guideline recommended treatment than CRC patients with no history of mental illness. The adjusted HR for cancer-specific death was 1.69 times higher for individuals with an inpatient SPI (95% CI 1.36–2.09) and 1.24 times higher for individuals with an outpatient SPI history (95% CI 1.04–1.48). Stage II and III CRC patients with an inpatient SPI history were 2.15 times less likely (95% CI 1.07–4.33) to receive potentially curative surgical resection and 2.07 times less likely (95% CI 1.72–2.50) to receive adjuvant radiation or chemotherapy. These findings were consistent across multiple sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsIndividuals with an SPI history experience inequalities in colorectal cancer care and survival within a universal healthcare system. Increasing advocacy and the availability of resources to support individuals with an SPI within the cancer system are warranted to reduce the potential for unnecessary harm.

Socioeconomic Inequalities in Colorectal Cancer Survival in Southern Spain: A Multilevel Population-Based Cohort Study.

BackgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in Spain. Socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival are not documented in Spain. We aim to study the association of socioeconomic inequalities with overall mortality and survival among CRC patients in southern Spain.MethodsWe conducted a multilevel population-based cohort study, including CRC cases for the period 2011–2013. The study time-to-event outcome was death, and the primary exposure was CRC patients’ socioeconomic status assessed by the Spanish deprivation index at the census tract level. We used a mixed-effects flexible hazard model, including census tract as a random intercept, to derive overall survival estimates by deprivation.ResultsAmong 3589 CRC patients and 12,148 person-years at risk (pyr), 964 patients died before the end of the follow-up. Mortality by deprivation showed the highest mortality rate for the most deprived group (96.2 per 1000 pyr, 95% CI: 84.0–110.2). After adjusting for sex, age, cancer stage, and the area of residence, the most deprived had a 60% higher excess mortality risk than the less deprived group (excess mortality risk ratio: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.1–2.3).ConclusionsWe found a consistent association between deprivation and CRC excess mortality and survival. The reasons behind these inequalities need further investigation in order to improve equality cancer outcomes in all social groups.

Differences in cancer survival by remoteness of residence: an analysis of data from a population-based cancer registry.

Cancer survival is generally lower for rural compared with urban residents, but findings have been inconsistent. We aimed to assess inequalities in cancer survival by remoteness of residence in Victoria, Australia. Incident cancer cases diagnosed in 2001-2015 with 30 cancer types (n = 331,302) were identified through the Victorian Cancer Registry and followed to the end of 2015 through death registries. Five-year net survival was estimated using the Pohar-Perme method and differences assessed by excess mortality rate ratios (EMRRs) using Poisson regression, adjusting for sex, age and year of diagnosis. EMRRs adjusted for socio-economic disadvantage were also estimated. People living outside major cities had lower survival for 11 cancers: esophagus, stomach, colorectum, liver, gallbladder/biliary tract, pancreas, lung, connective/soft tissue, ovary, prostate, kidney. No differences in survival were found for cancers of uterus, small intestine and mesothelioma. After adjusting for socio-economic disadvantage, the observed differences in survival decreased for most cancers and disappeared for colorectal cancer, but they remained largely unchanged for cancers of esophagus, stomach, liver, pancreas, lung, connective/soft tissue, ovary and kidney. People with cancer residing outside major cities had lower survival from some cancers, which is partly due to the greater socio-economic disadvantage of rural residents.

Social inequalities in cancer survival: A population-based study using the Costa Rican Cancer Registry

BackgroundSocial inequalities in survival after cancer diagnosis have been described in several high-income countries, all cancer sites combined and for several specific cancer sites. The objective of this study was to analyze 5-year net survival after cancer diagnosis in a middle-income country (Costa Rica), according to the characteristics at the district level. MethodsCosta Rican Cancer Registry is a national population-based registry. All cases diagnosed between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2015 were included (N = 46,904). Deaths that occurred before December 31, 2018 were identified. An ecological study was implemented. The 477 districts were described using the 2011 Census. Urbanity and wealth was assessed. Socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival were measured using multivariable flexible parametric models. Life tables by socio-economic status were used. Results5-year net survival ranged from 9% for liver cancer to 98 % for in situ cervical cancer. Patients living in socioeconomically disadvantaged districts experienced poorer cancer survival at 5 years, after taking into account the inequalities in survival in the general population (HR = 1.23, p < 0.01). This result was robust and was found at 1, 2 and 5 years, in all-cancer combined, and in low-, medium- and high-lethality cancers. There was no difference according to the area, except for low-lethality cancers at 1 year. DiscussionDespite its universal and solidarity-based health system, Costa Rica is experiencing social inequalities in survival after cancer diagnosis.

Occupational Class and Cancer Survival in Korean Men: Follow-Up Study of Nation-Wide Working Population.

Background: We aimed to describe inequalities in site-specific cancer survival across different occupational classes in Korean men. Methods: Subjects included cancer diagnosed members of the national employment insurance program during 1995–2008. A total of 134,384 male cases were followed by linking their data to the Death registry until 2009. Occupational classes were categorized according to the Korean Standard Occupational Classification (KSOC). Hazard ratio adjusting age and diagnosed year were calculated for each occupation by cancer sites. Results: Men in service/sales and blue-collar occupations had lower survival of all cancer sites combined and esophagus, stomach, colorectal, liver, larynx, lung, prostate, thyroid cancer and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma than men in professional and managerial positions. Cancer sites with good prognosis like prostate cancer showed wider gap across occupational class. Conclusions: Considerable inequalities in cancer survival were found by occupation among Korean men. Cancer control policy should more focus on lower socioeconomic occupational class.

Are social inequalities in acute myeloid leukemia survival explained by differences in treatment utilization? Results from a French longitudinal observational study among older patients

BackgroundEvidences support social inequalities in cancer survival. Studies on hematological malignancies, and more specifically Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML), are sparser. Our study assessed: 1/ the influence of patients’ socioeconomic position on survival, 2/ the role of treatment in this relationship, and 3/ the influence of patients’ socioeconomic position on treatment utilization.MethodsThis prospective multicenter study includes all patients aged 60 and older, newly diagnosed with AML, excluding promyelocytic subtypes, between 1st January 2009 to 31st December 2014 in the South-West of France. Data came from medical files. Patients’ socioeconomic position was measured by an ecological deprivation index, the European Deprivation Index. We studied first, patients’ socioeconomic position influence on overall survival (n = 592), second, on the use of intensive chemotherapy (n = 592), and third, on the use of low intensive treatment versus best supportive care among patients judged unfit for intensive chemotherapy (n = 405).ResultsWe found an influence of patients’ socioeconomic position on survival (highest versus lowest position HRQ5: 1.39 [1.05;1.87] that was downsized to become no more significant after adjustment for AML ontogeny (HRQ5: 1.31[0.97;1.76] and cytogenetic prognosis HRQ5: 1.30[0.97;1.75]). The treatment was strongly associated with survival. A lower proportion of intensive chemotherapy was observed among patients with lowest socioeconomic position (ORQ5: 0.41[0.19;0.90]) which did not persist after adjustment for AML ontogeny (ORQ5: 0.59[0.25;1.40]). No such influence of patients’ socioeconomic position was found on the treatment allocation among patients judged unfit for intensive chemotherapy.ConclusionsFinally, these results suggest an indirect influence of patients’ socioeconomic position on survival through AML initial presentation.