PURPOSE: We investigated whether prostate cancer was associated with socioeconomic status (SES) at the individual level, area level, or a combination of both levels. METHODS: This population-based case-control study of prostate cancer in men aged 65 to 79 years was conducted between 2000 and 2002 in South Carolina. Complete interviews were available for 407 incident prostate cancer cases and 393 controls (with respective response rates of 61% and 64%). We used educational level to measure individual-level SES and a composite variable capturing income and education from 2000 Census data to measure area-level SES. RESULTS: After adjustment for race, age, geographic region, and prostate-specific antigen testing, men with some college were at reduced risk for prostate cancer (odds ratio [OR], 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-0.72), as were men in the highest quartile of area-level SES (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.34-0.80). When assessing individual-level and area-level SES simultaneously and accounting for their nonindependence, the independent negative associations persisted and appeared to be more striking for men with a diagnosis of localized disease, rather than advanced disease. CONCLUSION: The independent effects of area-level and individual-level SES on prostate cancer risk seen in our study may help explain the conflicting results of previous studies conducted at both levels.
PURPOSE: We investigated whether prostate cancer was associated with socioeconomic status (SES) at the individual level, area level, or a combination of both levels. METHODS: This population-based case-control study of prostate cancer in men aged 65 to 79 years was conducted between 2000 and 2002 in South Carolina. Complete interviews were available for 407 incident prostate cancer cases and 393 controls (with respective response rates of 61% and 64%). We used educational level to measure individual-level SES and a composite variable capturing income and education from 2000 Census data to measure area-level SES. RESULTS: After adjustment for race, age, geographic region, and prostate-specific antigen testing, men with some college were at reduced risk for prostate cancer (odds ratio [OR], 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-0.72), as were men in the highest quartile of area-level SES (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.34-0.80). When assessing individual-level and area-level SES simultaneously and accounting for their nonindependence, the independent negative associations persisted and appeared to be more striking for men with a diagnosis of localized disease, rather than advanced disease. CONCLUSION: The independent effects of area-level and individual-level SES on prostate cancer risk seen in our study may help explain the conflicting results of previous studies conducted at both levels.
Authors: Nancy Krieger; Jarvis T Chen; Pamela D Waterman; Mah-Jabeen Soobader; S V Subramanian; Rosa Carson Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2002-09-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: N Krieger; C Quesenberry; T Peng; P Horn-Ross; S Stewart; S Brown; K Swallen; T Guillermo; D Suh; L Alvarez-Martinez; F Ward Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: B F Hankey; E J Feuer; L X Clegg; R B Hayes; J M Legler; P C Prorok; L A Ries; R M Merrill; R S Kaplan Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1999-06-16 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Ana V Diez Roux; Luisa N Borrell; Mary Haan; Sharon A Jackson; Richard Schultz Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: Stephanie A Robert; Indiana Strombom; Amy Trentham-Dietz; John M Hampton; Jane A McElroy; Polly A Newcomb; Patrick L Remington Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Ann L Coker; Christopher P Desimone; Katherine S Eggleston; Arica L White; Melanie Williams Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Scarlett Lin Gomez; Sally L Glaser; Laura A McClure; Sarah J Shema; Melissa Kealey; Theresa H M Keegan; William A Satariano Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2011-02-12 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Marvella E Ford; Amy E Wahlquist; Celina Ridgeway; June Streets; Katie A Mitchum; R Remus Harper; Ian Hamilton; J James W Etheredge; Melanie S Jefferson; Heidi Varner; Katora Campbell; Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2010-07-31
Authors: Eric J Holowaty; Todd A Norwood; Susitha Wanigaratne; Juanjo J Abellan; Linda Beale Journal: Int J Health Geogr Date: 2010-05-10 Impact factor: 3.918
Authors: Steven A Cohen; Andrey I Egorov; Jyotsna S Jagai; Bela T Matyas; Alfred DeMaria; Kenneth K H Chui; Jeffrey K Griffiths; Elena N Naumova Journal: Environ Res Date: 2008-08-15 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: Stephen C Meersman; Nancy Breen; Linda W Pickle; Helen I Meissner; Paul Simon Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2009-06-20 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Iona Cheng; John S Witte; Laura A McClure; Sarah J Shema; Myles G Cockburn; Esther M John; Christina A Clarke Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2009-06-13 Impact factor: 2.506