Dataset Information

Impact of socio-economic deprivation on endometrial cancer survival in the North West of England: a prospective database analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess the impact of socio-economic deprivation on endometrial cancer survival.

Design

Single-centre prospective database study.

Setting

North West England.

Population

Women with endometrial cancer treated between 2010 and 2015.

Methods

Areal-level socio-economic status, using the English indices of multiple deprivation from residential postcodes, was analysed in relation to survival using Kaplan-Meier estimation and multivariable Cox regression.

Main outcome measures

Overall survival, cancer-specific survival and patterns and rates of recurrence.

Results

A total of 539 women, with a median age of 66 years (interquartile range, IQR 56-73 years) and a body mass index (BMI) of 32 kg/m² (IQR 26-39 kg/m² ), were included in the analysis. Women in the most deprived social group were younger (median 64 years, IQR 55-72 years) and more obese (median 34 kg/m² , IQR 28-42 kg/m² ) than women in the least deprived group (median age 68 years, IQR 60-74 years; BMI 29 kg/m² , IQR 25-36 kg/m² ; P = 0.002 and <0.001, respectively). There were no differences in endometrial cancer type, stage or grade between social groups. There was no difference in recurrence rates, however, women in the middle and most deprived social groups were more likely to present with distant/metastatic recurrence (80.6 and 79.2%, respectively) than women in the least deprived group (43.5%, P < 0.001). Women in the middle and most deprived groups had a two-fold (adjusted hazard ratio, HR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.07-3.73, P = 0.030) and 53% (adjusted HR = 1.53, 95% CI 0.77-3.04, P = 0.221) increase in cancer-specific mortality compared with women in the least deprived group. There were no differences in overall survival.

Conclusions

We found that socio-economically deprived women with endometrial cancer were more likely to develop fatal recurrence. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings and to identify modifiable contributing factors.

Tweetable abstract

Socio-economic deprivation is linked to an increased risk of death from endometrial cancer in the North West of England.

SUBMITTER: Njoku K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8248174 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWomen from socio-economically deprived areas are less likely to develop and then to survive breast cancer (BC). Whether associations between deprivation and BC incidence and survival differ by tumour molecular subtypes and mode of detection in Scotland are unknown.MethodsData consisted of 62,378 women diagnosed with invasive BC between 2000 and 2016 in Scotland. Incidence rates and time trends were calculated for oestrogen receptor positive (ER+) and negative (ER-) tumours and stratified by the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) quintiles and screening status. SIMD is an area-based measure derived across seven domains: income, employment, education, health, access to services, crime and housing. We calculated adjusted hazard ratios (aHR [95% confidence intervals]) for BC death by immunohistochemical surrogates of molecular subtypes for the most versus the least deprived quintile. We adjusted for mode of detection and other confounders.ResultsIn Scotland, screen-detected ER+tumour incidence increased over time, particularly in the least deprived quintile [Average Annual Percentage Change (AAPC) = 2.9% with 95% CI from 1.2 to 4.7]. No marked differences were observed for non-screen-detected ER+tumours or ER- tumours by deprivation. BC mortality was higher in the most compared to the least deprived quintile irrespective of ER status (aHR = 1.29 [1.18, 1.41] for ER+ and 1.27 [1.09, 1.47] for ER- tumours). However, deprivation was associated with significantly higher mortality for luminal A and HER2-enriched tumours (aHR = 1.46 [1.13, 1.88] and 2.10 [1.23, 3.59] respectively) but weaker associations for luminal B and TNBC tumours that were not statistically significant.ConclusionsDeprivation is associated with differential BC incidence trends for screen-detected ER+tumours and with higher mortality for select tumour subtypes. Future efforts should evaluate factors that might be associated with reduced survival in deprived populations and monitor progress stratified by tumour subtypes and mode of detection.

Project description:BackgroundPeople living in more deprived areas of high-income countries have lower cancer survival than those in less deprived areas. However, associations between individual-level socio-economic circumstances and cancer survival are relatively poorly understood. Moreover, few studies have addressed contextual effects, where associations between individual-level socio-economic status and cancer survival vary depending on area-based deprivation.MethodsUsing 9276 individual-level observations from a longitudinal study in England and Wales, we examined the association with cancer survival of area-level deprivation and individual-level occupation, education, and income, for colorectal, prostate and breast cancer patients aged 20-99 at diagnosis. With flexible parametric excess hazard models, we estimated excess mortality across individual-level and area-level socio-economic variables and investigated contextual effects.ResultsFor colorectal cancers, we found evidence of an association between education and cancer survival in men with Excess Hazard Ratio (EHR) = 0.80, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 0.60;1.08 comparing "degree-level qualification and higher" to "no qualification" and EHR = 0.74 [0.56;0.97] comparing "apprenticeships and vocational qualification" to "no qualification", adjusted on occupation and income; and between occupation and cancer survival for women with EHR = 0.77 [0.54;1.10] comparing "managerial/professional occupations" to "manual/technical," and EHR = 0.81 [0.63;1.06] comparing "intermediate" to "manual/technical", adjusted on education and income. For breast cancer in women, we found evidence of an association with income (EHR = 0.52 [0.29;0.95] for the highest income quintile compared to the lowest, adjusted on education and occupation), while for prostate cancer, all three individual-level socio-economic variables were associated to some extent with cancer survival. We found contextual effects of area-level deprivation on survival inequalities between occupation types for breast and prostate cancers, suggesting wider individual-level inequalities in more deprived areas compared to least deprived areas. Individual-level income inequalities for breast cancer were more evident than an area-level differential, suggesting that area-level deprivation might not be the most effective measure of inequality for this cancer. For colorectal cancer in both sexes, we found evidence suggesting area- and individual-level inequalities, but no evidence of contextual effects.ConclusionsFindings highlight that both individual and contextual effects contribute to inequalities in cancer outcomes. These insights provide potential avenues for more effective policy and practice.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Patient choice and access to health care is compromised by many barriers including travel distance. Individuals with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) can seek free specialist care in Britain, without a referral, providing flexible access to care services. Willingness to travel beyond local services for preferred care has funding and service implications. Data from an enhanced HIV surveillance system were used to explore geodemographic and clinical factors associated with accessing treatment services. METHODS: We extracted data on the location, type and frequency of care services utilized by HIV positive persons (n = 3983) accessing treatment in north west England between January 1st 2005 and June 30th 2006. Individuals were allocated a deprivation score and grouped by urban/rural residence, and distance to care services was calculated. Analysis identified independent predictors of distance travelled (general linear modelling) and, for those bypassing their nearest clinic, the probability of accessing a specialist service (logistic regression, SPSS ver 14). Inter-relationships between variables and distance travelled were visualised using detrended correspondence analysis (PC-ORD ver 4.1). RESULTS: HIV infected persons travelled an average of 4.8 km (95% confidence intervals (CI) 4.6-4.9) per trip and had on average 6 visits (95% CI 5.9-6.2) annually for care. Longer trips were made by males (4.8 km vs 4.5 km), white people (6.2 km), the young (>15 years, 6.8 km) and elderly (60+ years, 6.3 km), those on multiple therapy (5.3 km vs 4.0 km), and the more affluent living in rural areas (16.1 km, P < 0.05). Half the individuals bypassed their nearest clinic to visit a more distant facility, and this was associated with being aged under 20 years, multiple therapy, being a male infected by sex between men, relative wealth, and living in rural areas (P < 0.05). Of those bypassing local facilities, poorer people were more likely to access a specialist centre but did not have as far to travel to do so (3.6 km) compared to those from less deprived areas (8.6 km). CONCLUSION: Distance travelled, and type of HIV services used, were associated with socioeconomic status, even after accounting for ethnicity, route of infection and age. Thus despite offering an 'equitable' service, travel costs may advantage those with higher income.

Project description:ObjectivesMost research on health inequalities uses aggregated deprivation scores assigned to the small area where the patient lives; however, the concordance between aggregate area-level deprivation measures and personal deprivation experienced by individuals living in the area is poorly understood. Our objective was to examine the agreement between individual and ecological deprivation. We tested the concordance between metrics of income, occupation and education at individual and area levels, and assessed the reliability of area-based deprivation measures to predict individual deprivation circumstances.SettingEngland and Wales.ParticipantsA cancer patient cohort of 9547 individuals extracted from the Office for National Statistics Longitudinal Study.OutcomesWe quantified the concordance between measures of income, occupation and education at individual and area level. In addition, we used ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curves and the area under the curve (AUC) to assess the reliability of area-based deprivation measures to predict individual deprivation circumstances.ResultsWe found low concordance between individual-level and area-level indicators of deprivation (Cramer's V statistics range between 0.07 and 0.20). The most commonly used indicator in health inequalities research, area-based income deprivation, was a poor predictor of individual income status (AUC between 0.56 and 0.59), whereas education and occupation were slightly better predictors (AUC between 0.62 and 0.65). The results were consistent across sexes and across six major cancer types.ConclusionsOur results indicate that ecological deprivation measures capture only part of the relationship between deprivation and health outcomes, especially with respect to income measurement. This has important implications for our understanding of the relationship between deprivation and health, and, as a consequence, healthcare policy. The results have a wide-reaching impact for the way in which we measure and monitor inequalities, and in turn, fund and organise current UK healthcare policy aimed at reducing them.

Project description:BackgroundHead injury in England is common. Evidence suggests that socio-economic factors may cause variation in incidence, and this variation may affect planning for services to meet the needs of those who have sustained a head injury.MethodsSocio-economic data were obtained from the UK Office for National Statistics and merged with Hospital Episodes Statistics obtained from the Department of Health. All patients admitted for head injury with ICD-10 codes S00.0-S09.9 during 2001-2 and 2002-3 were included and collated at the level of the extant Health Authorities (HA) for 2002, and Primary Care Trust (PCT) for 2003. Incidence was determined, and cluster analysis and multiple regression analysis were used to look at patterns and associations.Results112,718 patients were admitted during 2001-2 giving a hospitalised incidence rate for England of 229 per 100,000. This rate varied across the English HA's ranging from 91-419 per 100,000. The rate remained unchanged for 2002-3 with a similar magnitude of variation across PCT's. Three clusters of HA's were identified from the 2001-2 data; those typical of London, those of the Shire counties, and those of Other Urban authorities. Socio-economic factors were found to account for a high proportion of the variance in incidence for 2001-2. The same pattern emerged for 2002-3 at the PCT level. The use of public transport for travel to work is associated with a decreased incidence and lifestyle indicators, such as the numbers of young unemployed, increase the incidence.ConclusionHead injury incidence in England varies by a factor of 4.6 across HA's and PCT's. Planning head injury related services at the local level thus needs to be based on local incidence figures rather than regional or national estimates. Socio-economic factors are shown to be associated with admission, including travel to work patterns and lifestyle indicators, which suggests that incidence is amenable to policy initiatives at the macro level as well as preventive programmes targeted at key groups.