County-level poverty and distant stage cancer in the United States
- 229 Downloads
Late stage cancer at diagnosis increases the likelihood of cancer death. We evaluated the relation of county-level poverty with late stage cancer for 18 anatomic sites using data from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries.
Stratified analysis and logistic regression were applied to 2 million incident cancers (1997–2000) from 32 states representing 57% of the United States.
For 12 sites, higher county poverty significantly increased the odds of late stage, [adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) comparing highest to lowest county poverty: larynx 2.4 (1.8–3.2), oral cavity 2.2 (1.8–2.7), melanoma 2.0 (1.5–2.8), female breast 1.9 (1.7–2.2), prostate 1.7 (1.5–1.9), corpus uteri 1.6 (1.3–1.9), cervix 1.6 (1.3–2.1), bladder 1.6 (1.2–2.1), colorectum 1.4 (1.3–1.5), esophagus 1.3 (1.1–1.7), stomach 1.3 (1.1–1.5), and kidney 1.3 (1.1–1.5)]. With some exceptions, county poverty associations with stage were comparable across gender and race, but stronger among metropolitan cases. A few differences by age may reflect screening patterns.
In this large population-based study, higher county poverty independently predicted distant stage cancer. This held for several non-screenable cancers, suggesting improved area economic deprivation, including access to and utilization of good medical care might facilitate earlier diagnosis and longer survival even for cancers without practical screening approaches.
KeywordsNeoplasms Poverty Social class Early diagnosis
Cancer in North America
North American Association of Central Cancer Registries, Inc
National Cancer Institute
Not otherwise specified
Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results
The authors would like to thank the staff of NAACCR, Inc. and IMS, Inc. for their work in generating CINA analytic files and the NAACCR scientific editorial board for their helpful suggestions.
- 1.Ries LAG, Eisner MP, Kosary CL et al (eds) (2004) SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2001, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2001/
- 3.National Program of Cancer Registries (2003) Cancer Registries: The Foundation for Cancer Prevention and Control. Cancer Registries Fact Sheet (2003) Centers for Disease Control and PreventionGoogle Scholar
- 5.Krieger N, Chen JT, Waterman PD, Soobader M, Subramanian SV, Carson R (2002) Geocoding and monitoring of US socioeconomic inequalities in mortality and cancer incidence: does the choice of area-based measures and geographic level matter? Am J Epidemiol 156:471–482. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwf068 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Singh GK, Miller BA, Hankey BF, Edwards BK (2003) Area socioeconomic variations in U.S. cancer incidence, mortality, stage, treatment, and survival, 1975–1999. NCI Cancer Surveillance Monograph Series, Number 4. National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD. NIH Publication No. 03–5417Google Scholar
- 12.Ellison JH, Wu XC, McLaughlin CC et al (eds) (2006) Cancer in North America, 1999–2003. Volume one: incidence. North American Association of Central Cancer Registries Inc., Springfield, ILGoogle Scholar
- 13.Surveillance Research Program, National Cancer Institute SEER*Stat software version 6.2.4. www.seer.cancer.gov/seerstat
- 14.Havener L, Hulstrom D (eds) (2004) Standards for Cancer Registries Volume II: data standards and data dictionary, Version 1.1, 10th edn. North American Association of Central Cancer Registries, Springfield, IL, November 2004. http://www.naaccr.org
- 15.Phillips JL (ed) (2003) Summary stage: data effects of the changes in 2000. North American Association of Central Cancer Registries, Springfield, IL, December 2003. http://www.naaccr.org
- 16.U.S. Census Bureau (2007) Poverty Definitions. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/definitions.html. Accessed Dec 2007
- 17.Economic Research Service (2007) USDA. Rural-Urban Continuum Codes. http://www.ers.usda.gov/data/RuralUrbanContinuumCodes/. Accessed Dec 2007
- 18.SPSS for Windows, Rel. 10.0.5 (1999). SPSS Inc, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
- 27.Shipp MP, Desmond R, Accortt N, Wilson RJ, Fouad M, Eloubeidi MA (2005) Population-based study of the geographic variation in colorectal cancer incidence in Alabama: relationship to socioeconomic status indicators and physician density. South Med J 98(11):1076–1082. doi: 10.1097/01.smj.0000184844.01148.10 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Miller AB (1996) Fundamental issues in screening for cancer. In: Schottenfeld D, Fraumeni JF Jr (eds) Cancer epidemiology and prevention, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 1434–1435Google Scholar