Literature DB >> 27373878

Socioeconomic factors and penile cancer risk and mortality; a population-based study.

Christian Torbrand1,2, Annette Wigertz3, Linda Drevin3, Yasin Folkvaljon3, Mats Lambe3,4, Ulf Håkansson1, Peter Kirrander5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate possible associations between socioeconomic status (SES) and penile cancer risk, stage at diagnosis, and mortality. PATIENTS/SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A population-based register study including men in Sweden diagnosed with penile cancer between 2000 and 2012 (1676 men) and randomly chosen controls (9872 men). Data were retrieved from the National Penile Cancer Register (NPECR) and several other population-based healthcare and sociodemographic registers. Educational level, disposable income, marital status, and number of individuals in the household, were assessed as indicators of SES. The risk of penile cancer and penile cancer death in relation to SES were estimated using logistic regression and proportional hazards models, respectively. Cumulative cause-specific mortality (CSM) estimates by SES were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.
RESULTS: A low educational level and low disposable income were associated with an increased risk of invasive penile cancer. Furthermore, low educational level was associated with more advanced primary tumour stage. Divorced and never married men had a generally increased risk of penile cancer and were diagnosed with more advanced primary tumour stages. However, neither educational level nor marital status was associated with lymph node or distant metastases. Also, men in single-person households had an increased risk of both non-invasive and invasive disease. In men with invasive penile cancer, there were no significant associations of indicators of SES and CSM.
CONCLUSIONS: Low educational level, low disposable income, being divorced or never married, and living in a single-person household, all increase the risk of advanced stage penile cancer, but not lymph node or distant metastases. The assessed indicators of SES did not influence penile CSM. In conclusion, our findings indicates that SES influences the risk and stage of penile cancer, but not survival.
© 2016 The Authors BJU International © 2016 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  educational level; marital status; mortality; penile cancer; risk; socioeconomic status

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27373878     DOI: 10.1111/bju.13534

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  16 in total

1.  Penile cancer: Welcome changes in disease management and remaining challenges.

Authors:  Ben Ayres; Nick Watkin
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  Examining the relationship between self-reported lifetime cancer diagnosis and nativity: findings from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2011-2018.

Authors:  Luceta McRoy; Josué Epané; Zo Ramamonjiarivelo; Ferhat Zengul; Robert Weech-Maldonado; George Rust
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2021-10-27       Impact factor: 2.506

Review 3.  Immune-based therapies in penile cancer.

Authors:  Vidhu B Joshi; Philippe E Spiess; Andrea Necchi; Curtis A Pettaway; Jad Chahoud
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 16.430

Review 4.  Progress on Management of Penile Cancer in 2020.

Authors:  Mohamed E Ahmed; Mahmoud I Khalil; Mohamed H Kamel; R Jeffrey Karnes; Philippe E Spiess
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2020-11-23

5.  Factors Explaining Socio-Economic Inequalities in Cancer Survival: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Nina Afshar; Dallas R English; Roger L Milne
Journal:  Cancer Control       Date:  2021 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.302

Review 6.  Updates on the epidemiology and risk factors for penile cancer.

Authors:  Antoin Douglawi; Timothy A Masterson
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-10

7.  The impact of insurance status on the survival outcomes of patients with renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Yan Li; Ming-Xi Zhu; Bing Zhang
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-08

8.  A modified clinicopathological tumor staging system for survival prediction of patients with penile cancer.

Authors:  Zai-Shang Li; Antonio Augusto Ornellas; Christian Schwentner; Xiang Li; Alcides Chaux; Georges Netto; Arthur L Burnett; Yong Tang; JiunHung Geng; Kai Yao; Xiao-Feng Chen; Bin Wang; Hong Liao; Nan Liu; Peng Chen; Yong-Hong Lei; Qi-Wu Mi; Hui-Lan Rao; Ying-Ming Xiao; Qi-Lin Wang; Zi-Ke Qin; Zhuo-Wei Liu; Yong-Hong Li; Zi-Jun Zou; Jun-Hang Luo; Hui Li; Hui Han; Fang-Jian Zhou
Journal:  Cancer Commun (Lond)       Date:  2018-11-23

9.  Socioeconomic inequalities in cancer incidence in Europe: a comprehensive review of population-based epidemiological studies.

Authors:  Ana Mihor; Sonja Tomsic; Tina Zagar; Katarina Lokar; Vesna Zadnik
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 2.991

10.  Novel Prognostic Models for Patients With Penile Carcinoma.

Authors:  Monica E Reyes; Heloise Borges; Muhamed Said Adjao; Nisha Vijayakumar; Philippe E Spiess; Matthew B Schabath
Journal:  Cancer Control       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.302

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.