Literature DB >> 9338473

Socioeconomic status and comorbidity among newly diagnosed cancer patients.

C T Schrijvers1, J W Coebergh, J P Mackenbach.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many studies found better cancer survival in patients with a high socioeconomic status (SES) than in patients with a low SES. Comorbidity at the time of diagnosis may be more frequent in patients of lower SES, and negatively influences their survival. The authors studied the association between SES and serious comorbidity at the time of diagnosis among newly diagnosed cancer patients in The Netherlands.
METHODS: Included in the analyses were patients registered in 1993 in the population-based Eindhoven Cancer Registry (southeastern Netherlands) with one of the most common carcinomas: breast (n = 457), lung (n = 442), colorectum (n = 384), prostate (n = 240), and stomach (n = 118). Information regarding comorbidity came from medical records. The SES of the patients was derived from their postal code of residence and stratified into three categories. The risk of being diagnosed with at least one other chronic condition was calculated using logistic regression analyses.
RESULTS: The risk of being diagnosed with at least one other chronic condition was higher among patients with a low or intermediate SES than among those with a high SES for the five sites combined as well as for carcinomas of the breast or lung. The gradient was less clear for patients with colorectal carcinoma, whereas no socioeconomic variation in comorbidity was found for patients with carcinomas of the prostate or stomach.
CONCLUSIONS: Socioeconomic variation in the prevalence of serious comorbidity at the time of diagnosis does exist in some cancer sites, which may explain (partly) the socioeconomic gradient in survival observed in patients with tumors in these sites.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9338473

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  31 in total

1.  A multi-institutional analysis of the socioeconomic determinants of breast reconstruction: a study of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

Authors:  Caprice K Christian; Joyce Niland; Stephen B Edge; Rebecca A Ottesen; Melissa E Hughes; Richard Theriault; John Wilson; Charles A Hergrueter; Jane C Weeks
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  Disparities in oncologic surgery.

Authors:  Caprice C Greenberg; Jane C Weeks; Steven C Stain
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Afatinib, Erlotinib, and Gefitinib as First-Line Treatments for EGFR Mutation-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in Ontario, Canada.

Authors:  Yong-Jin Kim; Mark Oremus; Helen H Chen; Thomas McFarlane; Danielle Fearon; Susan Horton
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2021-03-31       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Influence of insurance status and income in anaplastic astrocytoma: an analysis of 4325 patients.

Authors:  Jacob Y Shin; Ja Kyoung Yoon; Aidnag Z Diaz
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 4.130

5.  Association of Insurance and Community-Level Socioeconomic Status With Treatment and Outcome of Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Pharynx.

Authors:  Jacob Y Shin; Ja Kyoung Yoon; Aaron K Shin; Philip Blumenfeld; Miranda Mai; Aidnag Z Diaz
Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 6.223

6.  Linking the Ohio Cancer Incidence Surveillance System with Medicare, Medicaid, and Clinical Data from Home Health Care and Long Term Care Assessment Instruments: Paving the Way for New Research Endeavors in Geriatric Oncology.

Authors:  Siran M Koroukian
Journal:  J Registry Manag       Date:  2008

7.  Temporal trends in the association between socioeconomic status and cancer survival in Ontario: a population-based retrospective study.

Authors:  Andrew Dabbikeh; Yingwei Peng; William J Mackillop; Christopher M Booth; Jina Zhang-Salomons
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2017-09-06

8.  Socioeconomic differences in cancer survival: the Norwegian Women and Cancer Study.

Authors:  Tonje Braaten; Elisabete Weiderpass; Eiliv Lund
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-06-08       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  Trends in non-metastatic prostate cancer management in the Northern and Yorkshire region of England, 2000-2006.

Authors:  L Fairley; M Baker; J Whiteway; W Cross; D Forman
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-11-10       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  p53 mutation, deprivation and poor prognosis in primary breast cancer.

Authors:  L Baker; P R Quinlan; N Patten; A Ashfield; L-J Birse-Stewart-Bell; C McCowan; J-C Bourdon; C A Purdie; L B Jordan; J A Dewar; L Wu; A M Thompson
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-01-26       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.