Literature DB >> 33976748

Rural-urban difference in colorectal cancer mortality.

Tomoya Urakawa1, Akihiro Saitsu1, Jun Watanabe1, Kazuhiko Kotani1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33976748      PMCID: PMC8100804          DOI: 10.7150/jca.59434

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cancer        ISSN: 1837-9664            Impact factor:   4.207


× No keyword cloud information.
We read with great interest the recent study by Daniel et al., which showed a different response to knowledge and practice in relation to colorectal cancer screening between minority and majority populations in the deep south of the U.S. 1. As Daniel et al. stated 1, rurality is a possible contributor to increased mortality in patients with colorectal cancer because several factors related to lifestyle, and socioeconomics and healthcare systems are associated with the diagnosis and clinical course of this disease. Thus, the study assumed the difference in responses to colorectal cancer screening between rural and urban residents - interestingly, however, few differences were found 1. This might be an unexpected finding, as it is generally considered that rural-urban health inequity in cancer treatment is an issue that remains to be resolved. Actually, what is the worldwide status of the rural-urban difference in colorectal cancer mortality, which is an ultimate outcome of screening? We performed a search of the PubMed database to identify original articles published prior to December 2020, with a population-based cohort design that reported the colorectal cancer mortality between rural and urban areas. The keywords were “rural[All Fields] OR urban[All Fields]) AND (“rectal neoplasms”[MeSH Terms] OR (“rectal”[All Fields] AND “neoplasms”[All Fields]) OR “rectal neoplasms”[All Fields] OR (“rectum”[All Fields] AND “cancer”[All Fields]) OR “rectum cancer”[All Fields]) AND (“mortality”[Subheading] OR “mortality”[All Fields] OR “mortality”[MeSH Terms]) AND English[lang]. We obtained the hazard ratio or relative risk for cancer death between rural and urban areas, with adjustment for various co-variates. In total, 143 English language articles were identified using the keywords. After evaluating the full text, five articles were finally eligible for the present review (Table 1) 2-6. As a result, one study reported that the mortality risk was high in urban areas 2, while two studies reported that the mortality risk was high in rural areas 3, 5. The remaining two studies reported no clear difference in risk between rural and urban areas 4, 6.
Table 1

The hazard ratio or relative risk of colorectal cancer deaths between rural and urban areas

Study/Country[reference No.]Cohort durationPopulation(number)Age (number)Cancer typeResidenceHazard ratio/relative risk (95% confidence interval)Adjusted co-variables
Kassim, 2019/ China 62007-2011Male 143Female 9154.96 yearsRight colonUrbanRural1.0 (reference)1.082 (0.765-1.529)Age, gender, smoking, drinking, residence, cancer grade, cancer stage, chemotherapy
Male 147Female 9453.93 yearsLeft colonUrbanRural1.0 (reference)1.151 (0.666-1.988)
Male 369Female 23456.86 yearsRectumUrbanRural1.0 (reference)0.934 (0.752-1.159)
Feller, 2018/ Swiss 52000-2008Male 5,700Female 4,388< 50 years (668)50-64 years (3,007)65-74 years (3,180)75-84 years (3,233)ColorectumUrbanRural1.0 (reference)1.15 (1.02-1.30)Age, civil status, nationality, urbanity, residence, cancer localization, cancer stage, socioeconomic position
Hines, 2014/ United States 42000-2012Male 10,702Female 9,74245-64 years (9,675)65-74 years (5,890)75-85 years (4,879)ColorectumUrbanRural1.0 (reference)1.02 (0.94-1.12)Age, gender, race, cancer stage, cancer grade, geography, treatment (surgery, chemotherapy or radiation), socioeconomic status
Hines, 2012/ United States 31992-2007Male 7,365Female 7,809Rural 68.4 yearsUrban 65.8 yearsColonRectumUrbanRuralUrbanRural1.0 (reference)1.15 (1.01-1.32)1.0 (reference)1.13 (0.91-1.41)Age, gender, cancer stage, cancer grade, treatment (surgery or radiation)
Vassallo, 1994/ Uruguay 21988-1992Male 1,121,250Female 1,209,700< 55 years (1,664,150)55-64 years (316,450)65-74 years (209,500)>75 years (140,850)ColonUrbanRuralMale 1.50 (1.32-1.70)Female 1.17 (0.34-1.34)Male 1.0 (reference)Female 1.0 (reference)Age, residence
RectumUrbanRuralMale 1.89 (1.51-2.35)Female 1.35 (1.06-1.72)Male 1.0 (reference)Female 1.0 (reference)
The results of the present review were therefore controversial; namely, a rural-urban difference in colorectal cancer mortality was not obviously proven. Of note, the present findings appear to be in line with the results reported by Daniel et al. 1. While Daniel et al. hypothesized that rural residents often acknowledge a family history of cancer and cope with it well, more studies are warranted to clarify the detailed reasons for these findings.
  6 in total

1.  Clinicopathologic and epidemiological characteristics of prognostic factors in post-surgical survival of colorectal cancer patients in Jiangsu Province, China.

Authors:  Said Abasse Kassim; Weiyan Tang; Muhammad Abbas; Shenzhen Wu; Qingdao Meng; Chengcheng Zhang; Xiaobo Li; Rui Chen
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2019-07-16       Impact factor: 2.984

2.  Differences in late-stage diagnosis, treatment, and colorectal cancer-related death between rural and urban African Americans and whites in Georgia.

Authors:  Robert B Hines; Talar W Markossian
Journal:  J Rural Health       Date:  2011-08-24       Impact factor: 4.333

3.  Geographic residency status and census tract socioeconomic status as determinants of colorectal cancer outcomes.

Authors:  Robert Hines; Talar Markossian; Asal Johnson; Frank Dong; Rana Bayakly
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Urbanization gradients and cancer mortality in Uruguay, 1988-1992.

Authors:  A Vassallo; E de Stéfani; A Ronco; E Barrios
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1994-11-01       Impact factor: 7.396

5.  Differences Related to Cancer Screening by Minority and Rural/Urban Status in the Deep South: Population-based Survey Results.

Authors:  Casey Daniel; Salma Aly; Sejong Bae; Isabel Scarinci; Claudia Hardy; Mona Fouad; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 4.207

6.  Socioeconomic and demographic inequalities in stage at diagnosis and survival among colorectal cancer patients: evidence from a Swiss population-based study.

Authors:  Anita Feller; Kurt Schmidlin; Andrea Bordoni; Christine Bouchardy; Jean-Luc Bulliard; Bertrand Camey; Isabelle Konzelmann; Manuela Maspoli; Miriam Wanner; Marcel Zwahlen; Kerri M Clough-Gorr
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 4.452

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.