Dataset Information

Is place or person more important in determining higher rural cancer mortality? A data-linkage study to compare individual versus area-based measures of deprivation.

ABSTRACT: Data from Northeast Scotland for 11,803 cancer patients (diagnosed 2007-13) were linked to UK Censuses to explore relationships between hospital travel-time, timely-treatment and one-year-mortality, adjusting for both area and individual-level socioeconomic status (SES). Adjusting for area-based SES, those living >60 minutes from hospital received timely-treatment more often than those living <15 minutes. Substituting individual-level SES changed little. Adjusting for area-based SES those living >60 minutes from hospital died within one year more often than those living <15 minutes. Again, substituting individual-level SES changed little. In Northeast Scotland distance to services, rather than individual SES, likely explains poorer rural cancer survival.

Background and objective

The Northeast and Aberdeen Scottish Cancer and Residence (NASCAR) study found rural-dwellers are treated quicker but more likely to die within a year of a cancer diagnosis. A potential confounder of the relationship between geography and cancer mortality is socioeconomic status (SES). We linked the original NASCAR cohort to the UK Censuses of 2001 and 2011, at an individual level, to explore the relationship between travel time to key healthcare facilities, timely cancer treatment and one-year mortality adjusting for both area and individual-level markers of socioeconomic status.

Methods

A data linkage study of 11803 patients examined the association between travel times, timely treatment and one-year mortality with adjustment for area, and for individual-level, markers of socioeconomic status.

Results

Following adjustment for area-based SES measures those living more than 60 minutes from the cancer treatment centre were significantly more likely to be treated within 62 days of GP referral than those living within 15 minutes (Odds Ratio [OR]) 1.41; 95% (Confidence Interval [CI]) 1.23, 1.60]. Replacing area-based with individual-level SES measures from UK Censuses made little impact on the results [OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.22, 1.57].Following adjustment for area-based SES measures of socioeconomic status those living more than 60 minutes from the cancer treatment centre were significantly more likely to die within one year than those living closer by [OR 1.22; 95% CI 1.08, 1.38]. Again, replacing area-based with individual-level SES measures from UK Censuses made little impact on the result [OR 1.20; CI 1.06, 1.35].

Conclusions

Distribution of individual measures of socioeconomic status did not differ significantly between rural and urban cancer patients. The relationship between distance to service, timely treatment and one-year survival were the same adjusting for both area-based and individual SES. Overall, it seems that distance to services, rather than personal characteristics, influences poorer rural cancer survival.

SUBMITTER: Murchie P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8103996 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AIMS/HYPOTHESES:Our aim was to examine the independent and combined (cross-sectional) associations of sedentary time (ST), higher intensity physical activity (HPA) and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) with metabolic syndrome and diabetes status. METHODS:In 1933 adults (aged 40-75 years) ST and HPA (surrogate measure for moderate to vigorous physical activity) were measured with the activPAL3. CRF was assessed by submaximal cycle-ergometer testing. Metabolic syndrome was defined according to the Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III guidelines. Diabetes status (normal, prediabetes [i.e. impaired glucose tolerance and/or impaired fasting glucose] or type 2 diabetes) was determined from OGTT. (Multinomial) logistic regression analyses were used to calculate likelihood for the metabolic syndrome, prediabetes and type 2 diabetes according to ST, HPA and CRF separately and combinations of ST-CRF and HPA-CRF. RESULTS:Higher ST, lower HPA and lower CRF were associated with greater odds for the metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes independently of each other. Compared with individuals with high CRF and high HPA (CRFhigh-HPAhigh), odds for the metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes were higher in groups with a lower CRF regardless of HPA. Individuals with low CRF and low HPA (CRFlow-HPAlow) had a particularly high odds for the metabolic syndrome (OR 5.73 [95% CI 3.84, 8.56]) and type 2 diabetes (OR 6.42 [95% CI 3.95, 10.45]). Similarly, compared with those with high CRF and low ST (CRFhigh-STlow), those with medium or low CRF had higher odds for the metabolic syndrome, prediabetes and type 2 diabetes, irrespective of ST. In those with high CRF, high ST was associated with significantly high odds for the metabolic syndrome (OR 2.93 [95% CI 1.72, 4.99]) and type 2 diabetes (OR 2.21 [95% CI 1.17, 4.17]). The highest odds for the metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes were observed in individuals with low CRF and high ST (CRFlow-SThigh) (OR [95% CI]: the metabolic syndrome, 9.22 [5.74, 14.80]; type 2 diabetes, 8.38 [4.83, 14.55]). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION:These data suggest that ST, HPA and CRF should all be targeted in order to optimally reduce the risk for the metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes.