Paramita Dasgupta1, Philippa H Youl2, Joanne F Aitken3, Gavin Turrell4, Peter Baade5. 1. Cancer Council Queensland, PO Box 201, Spring Hill, QLD 4004, Australia. Electronic address: paramitadasgupta@cancerqld.org.au. 2. University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, QLD, 4556, Australia. Electronic address: philippa.youl@qut.edu.au. 3. Cancer Council Queensland, PO Box 201, Spring Hill, QLD 4004, Australia; School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Herston Road, Kelvin Grove, QLD, 4059, Australia; School of Population Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. Electronic address: joanneaitken@cancerqld.org.au. 4. Institute for Health and Ageing, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, 3065, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: Gavin.Turrell@acu.edu.au. 5. Cancer Council Queensland, PO Box 201, Spring Hill, QLD 4004, Australia; Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, Parklands Drive, Southport, QLD, 4222, Australia; School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Gardens Point, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia. Electronic address: peterbaade@cancerqld.org.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reducing geographical inequalities in breast cancer stage remains a key focus of public health policy. We explored whether patterns of advanced breast cancer by residential accessibility and disadvantage in Queensland, Australia, have changed over time. METHODS: Population-based cancer registry study of 38,706 women aged at least 30 years diagnosed with a first primary invasive breast cancer of known stage between 1997 and 2014. Multilevel logistic regression was used to examine temporal changes in associations of area-level factors with odds of advanced disease after adjustment for individual-level factors. RESULTS: Overall 19,401 (50%) women had advanced breast cancer. Women from the most disadvantaged areas had higher adjusted odds (OR = 1.23 [95%CI 1.13, 1.32]) of advanced disease than those from least disadvantaged areas, with no evidence this association had changed over time (interaction p = 0.197). Living in less accessible areas independently increased the adjusted odds (OR = 1.18 [1.09, 1.28]) of advanced disease, with some evidence that the geographical inequality had reduced over time (p = 0.045). Sensitivity analyses for un-staged cases showed that the original associations remained, regardless of assumptions made about the true stage distribution. CONCLUSIONS: Both geographical and residential socioeconomic inequalities in advanced stage diagnoses persist, potentially reflecting barriers in accessing diagnostic services. Given the role of screening mammography in early detection of breast cancer, the lack of population-based data on private screening limits our ability to determine overall participation rates by residential characteristics. Without such data, the efficacy of strategies to reduce inequalities in breast cancer stage will remain compromised.
BACKGROUND: Reducing geographical inequalities in breast cancer stage remains a key focus of public health policy. We explored whether patterns of advanced breast cancer by residential accessibility and disadvantage in Queensland, Australia, have changed over time. METHODS: Population-based cancer registry study of 38,706 women aged at least 30 years diagnosed with a first primary invasive breast cancer of known stage between 1997 and 2014. Multilevel logistic regression was used to examine temporal changes in associations of area-level factors with odds of advanced disease after adjustment for individual-level factors. RESULTS: Overall 19,401 (50%) women had advanced breast cancer. Women from the most disadvantaged areas had higher adjusted odds (OR = 1.23 [95%CI 1.13, 1.32]) of advanced disease than those from least disadvantaged areas, with no evidence this association had changed over time (interaction p = 0.197). Living in less accessible areas independently increased the adjusted odds (OR = 1.18 [1.09, 1.28]) of advanced disease, with some evidence that the geographical inequality had reduced over time (p = 0.045). Sensitivity analyses for un-staged cases showed that the original associations remained, regardless of assumptions made about the true stage distribution. CONCLUSIONS: Both geographical and residential socioeconomic inequalities in advanced stage diagnoses persist, potentially reflecting barriers in accessing diagnostic services. Given the role of screening mammography in early detection of breast cancer, the lack of population-based data on private screening limits our ability to determine overall participation rates by residential characteristics. Without such data, the efficacy of strategies to reduce inequalities in breast cancer stage will remain compromised.
Authors: Paramita Dasgupta; Peter D Baade; Danny R Youlden; Gail Garvey; Joanne F Aitken; Isabella Wallington; Jennifer Chynoweth; Helen Zorbas; Philippa H Youl Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-04-29 Impact factor: 2.692