Dataset Information

Breast cancer incidence and survival in Scotland by socio-economic deprivation and tumour subtype.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Women 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.

Methods

Data 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.

Results

In 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.

Conclusions

Deprivation 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.

SUBMITTER: Mesa-Eguiagaray I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9239954 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the impact of socio-economic deprivation on endometrial cancer survival.DesignSingle-centre prospective database study.SettingNorth West England.PopulationWomen with endometrial cancer treated between 2010 and 2015.MethodsAreal-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 measuresOverall survival, cancer-specific survival and patterns and rates of recurrence.ResultsA 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.ConclusionsWe 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 abstractSocio-economic deprivation is linked to an increased risk of death from endometrial cancer in the North West of England.

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.