Alyx B Porter1, Daniel H Lachance2, Derek R Johnson3. 1. Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA. 2. Division of Clinical Biochemistry and Immunology, Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 3. Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. johnson.derek1@mayo.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with risk of various cancer types because of correlation between SES and causal factors or increased case ascertainment, or both. Studies evaluating the association between glioblastoma and occupational or SES factors have yielded inconsistent results. We evaluated the association between SES and glioblastoma risk using a large, population-based cancer registry dataset. METHODS: Data of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program were used to evaluate the impact of SES on glioblastoma risk. SES was divided into quintiles on the basis of census tract of residence. Census tracts are small, geographically defined areas with relatively homogeneous population characteristics. RESULTS: Higher SES was strongly associated with increased risk of glioblastoma (p < .001). Relative to persons living in census tracts of the lowest SES quintile, the highest SES quintile had a rate ratio of 1.45 (95 % CI 1.39-1.51) (p < .001). Similar associations were seen in population subgroups defined by age, sex, and race. CONCLUSIONS: The strong association between higher SES and greater glioblastoma risk is unlikely to represent an ascertainment effect because glioblastoma is rapidly progressive and ultimately fatal. A number of previously proposed glioma risk factors may be correlated with SES, including atopy and allergy rates, cellular telephone use, and body morphometric measures. Further research is needed to define the mechanism of this association.
PURPOSE: Socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with risk of various cancer types because of correlation between SES and causal factors or increased case ascertainment, or both. Studies evaluating the association between glioblastoma and occupational or SES factors have yielded inconsistent results. We evaluated the association between SES and glioblastoma risk using a large, population-based cancer registry dataset. METHODS: Data of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program were used to evaluate the impact of SES on glioblastoma risk. SES was divided into quintiles on the basis of census tract of residence. Census tracts are small, geographically defined areas with relatively homogeneous population characteristics. RESULTS: Higher SES was strongly associated with increased risk of glioblastoma (p < .001). Relative to persons living in census tracts of the lowest SES quintile, the highest SES quintile had a rate ratio of 1.45 (95 % CI 1.39-1.51) (p < .001). Similar associations were seen in population subgroups defined by age, sex, and race. CONCLUSIONS: The strong association between higher SES and greater glioblastoma risk is unlikely to represent an ascertainment effect because glioblastoma is rapidly progressive and ultimately fatal. A number of previously proposed glioma risk factors may be correlated with SES, including atopy and allergy rates, cellular telephone use, and body morphometric measures. Further research is needed to define the mechanism of this association.
Authors: Ankush Chandra; Jonathan W Rick; Cecilia Dalle Ore; Darryl Lau; Alan T Nguyen; Diego Carrera; Alexander Bonte; Annette M Molinaro; Philip V Theodosopoulos; Michael W McDermott; Mitchel S Berger; Manish K Aghi Journal: Neurosurg Focus Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 4.047
Authors: Damir Nizamutdinov; Eileen M Stock; Jad A Dandashi; Eliana A Vasquez; Ying Mao; Samantha Dayawansa; Jun Zhang; Erxi Wu; Ekokobe Fonkem; Jason H Huang Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2017-09-23 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: David J Cote; Quinn T Ostrom; Haley Gittleman; Kelsey R Duncan; Travis S CreveCoeur; Carol Kruchko; Timothy R Smith; Meir J Stampfer; Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan Journal: Cancer Date: 2019-06-17 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Quinn T Ostrom; Maral Adel Fahmideh; David J Cote; Ivo S Muskens; Jeremy M Schraw; Michael E Scheurer; Melissa L Bondy Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2019-11-04 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Krissia M Rivera Perla; Oliver Y Tang; Shayla N M Durfey; Tito Vivas-Buitrago; Wendy J Sherman; Ian Parney; Joon H Uhm; Alyx B Porter; Heinrich Elinzano; Steven A Toms; Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2022-05-03 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Even Hovig Fyllingen; Tor Ivar Hansen; Asgeir Store Jakola; Asta Kristine Håberg; Øyvind Salvesen; Ole Solheim Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2018-08-02 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Markus K H Wiedmann; Cathrine Brunborg; Antonio Di Ieva; Kristina Lindemann; Tom B Johannesen; Lars Vatten; Eirik Helseth; John A Zwart Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Igor Fischer; Hendrik-Jan Mijderwijk; Ulf D Kahlert; Marion Rapp; Michael Sabel; Daniel Hänggi; Hans-Jakob Steiger; Marie-Therese Forster; Marcel A Kamp Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2020-06-06