Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Socioeconomic inequalities in attending the mass screening for breast cancer in the south of the Netherlands—associations with stage at diagnosis and survival

  • Epidemiology
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The associations of socioeconomic status (SES) and participation in the breast cancer screening program, as well as consequences for stage of disease and prognosis were studied in the Netherlands, where no financial barriers for participating or health care use exist. From 1998 to 2005, 1,067,952 invitations for biennial mammography were sent to women aged 50–75 in the region covered by the Eindhoven Cancer Registry. Screening attendance rates according to SES were calculated. Tumor stage and survival were studied according to SES group for patients diagnosed with breast cancer between 1998 and 2006, whether screen-detected, interval carcinoma or not attended screening at all. Attendance rates were rather high: 79, 85 and 87% in women with low, intermediate and high SES (p < 0.001), respectively. Compared to the low SES group, odds ratios for attendance were 1.5 (95%CI:1.5–1.6) for the intermediate SES group and 1.8 (95%CI:1.7–1.8) for the high SES group. Moreover, women with low SES had an unfavorable tumor-node-metastasis stage compared to those with high SES. This was seen in non-attendees, among women with interval cancers and with screen-detected cancers. Among non-attendees and interval cancers, the socioeconomic survival disparities were largely explained by stage distribution (48 and 35%) and to a lesser degree by therapy (16 and 16%). Comorbidity explained most survival inequalities among screen-detected patients (23%). Despite the absence of financial barriers for participation in the Dutch mass-screening program, socioeconomic inequalities in attendance rates exist, and women with low SES had a significantly worse tumor stage and lower survival rate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kim J, Jang SN (2008) Socioeconomic disparities in breast cancer screening among US women: trends from 2000 to 2005. J Prev Med Public Health 41:186–194

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Moser K, Patnick J, Beral V (2009) Inequalities in reported use of breast and cervical screening in Great Britain: analysis of cross sectional survey data. BMJ 338:2025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Peek ME, Han JH (2004) Disparities in screening mammography. Current status, interventions and implications. J Gen Intern Med 19:184–194

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Zackrisson S, Lindstrom M, Moghaddassi M, Andersson I, Janzon L (2007) Social predictors of non-attendance in an urban mammographic screening programme: a multilevel analysis. Scand J Public Health 35:548–554

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dalton SO, During M, Ross L, Carlsen K, Mortensen PB, Lynch J, Johansen C (2006) The relation between socioeconomic and demographic factors and tumour stage in women diagnosed with breast cancer in Denmark, 1983–1999. Br J Cancer 95:653–659

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Macleod U, Ross S, Gillis C, McConnachie A, Twelves C, Watt GC (2000) Socio-economic deprivation and stage of disease at presentation in women with breast cancer. Ann Oncol 11:105–107

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Schrijvers CT, Mackenbach JP, Lutz JM, Quinn MJ, Coleman MP (1995) Deprivation, stage at diagnosis and cancer survival. Int J Cancer 63:324–329

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Schrijvers CT, Coebergh JW, van der Heijden LH, Mackenbach JP (1995) Socioeconomic variation in cancer survival in the southeastern Netherlands, 1980–1989. Cancer 75:2946–2953

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dalton SO, Ross L, During M, Carlsen K, Mortensen PB, Lynch J, Johansen C (2007) Influence of socioeconomic factors on survival after breast cancer—a nationwide cohort study of women diagnosed with breast cancer in Denmark 1983–1999. Int J Cancer 121:2524–2531

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Louwman WJ, van de Poll-Franse LV, Fracheboud J, Roukema JA, Coebergh JW (2007) Impact of a programme of mass mammography screening for breast cancer on socio-economic variation in survival: a population-based study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 105:369–375

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gentil-Brevet J, Colonna M, Danzon A, Grosclaude P, Chaplain G, Velten M, Bonnetain F, Arveux P (2008) The influence of socio-economic and surveillance characteristics on breast cancer survival: a French population-based study. Br J Cancer 98:217–224

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bastiaannet E, de Craen AJ, Kuppen PJ, Aarts MJ, van der Geest LG, van de Velde CJ, Westendorp RG, Liefers GJ (2010) Socioeconomic differences in survival among breast cancer patients in the Netherlands not explained by tumor size. Breast Cancer Res Treat PMID: 21076863 [Epub ahead of print]

  13. Kaffashian F, Godward S, Davies T, Solomon L, McCann J, Duffy SW (2003) Socioeconomic effects on breast cancer survival: proportion attributable to stage and morphology. Br J Cancer 89:1693–1696

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Carnon AG, Ssemwogerere A, Lamont DW, Hole DJ, Mallon EA, George WD, Gillis GR (1994) Relation between socioeconomic deprivation and pathological prognostic factors in women with breast cancer. BMJ 309:1054–1057

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Louwman WJ, Aarts MJ, Houterman S, van Lenthe FJ, Coebergh JW, Janssen-Heijnen ML (2010) A 50% higher prevalence of life-shortening chronic conditions among cancer patients with low socioeconomic status. Br J Cancer 103:1742–1748

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. BoBZ: Jaarverslag 2007 [in Dutch], 2007

  17. Sobin L, Wittekind C (1997) UICC International Union against cancer. TNM classification of malignant tumours, 5th edn. Wiley-Liss, Geneva, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  18. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40:373–383

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Van Duin C, Keij I (2002) Sociaal-economische status indicator op postcodeniveau [in Dutch]. Maandstatistiek van de bevolking 50:32–35

    Google Scholar 

  20. Zackrisson S, Andersson I, Manjer J, Janzon L (2004) Non-attendance in breast cancer screening is associated with unfavourable socio-economic circumstances and advanced carcinoma. Int J Cancer 108:754–760

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. The Health and Social Care Information Centre (2009) Breast screening programme. NHS, England

    Google Scholar 

  22. Vejborg I, Olsen AH, Jensen MB, Rank F, Tange UB, Lynge E (2002) Early outcome of mammography screening in Copenhagen 1991–99. J Med Screen 9:115–119

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. von Euler-Chelpin M, Olsen AH, Njor S, Vejborg I, Schwartz W, Lynge E (2006) Women’s patterns of participation in mammography screening in Denmark. Eur J Epidemiol 21:203–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bare ML, Montes J, Florensa R, Sentis M, Donoso L (2003) Factors related to non-participation in a population-based breast cancer screening programme. Eur J Cancer Prev 12:487–494

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Duport N, Ancelle-Park R (2006) Do socio-demographic factors influence mammography use of French women? Analysis of a French cross-sectional survey. Eur J Cancer Prev 15:219–224

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. von Euler-Chelpin M, Olsen AH, Njor S, Jensen A, Vejborg I, Schwartz W, Lynge E (2008) Does educational level determine screening participation? Eur J Cancer Prev 17:273–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. American Cancer Society (2009) Cancer prevention & early detection facts & figures 2009. American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA

    Google Scholar 

  28. Coughlin SS, Uhler RJ, Bobo JK, Caplan L (2004) Breast cancer screening practices among women in the United States, 2000. Cancer Causes Control 15:159–170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cook NR, Rosner BA, Hankinson SE, Colditz GA (2009) Mammographic screening and risk factors for breast cancer. Am J Epidemiol 170:1422–1432

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lale N, Öry F, Detmar S (2003) Factors associated with non-participation of Turkish women to cervical cancer screening in the Netherlands. Tijdschrift Sociale Geneeskunde 81:184–188

    Google Scholar 

  31. Stein K, Zhao L, Crammer C, Gansler T (2007) Prevalence and sociodemographic correlates of beliefs regarding cancer risks. Cancer 110:1139–1148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wardle J, Steptoe A (2003) Socioeconomic differences in attitudes and beliefs about healthy lifestyles. J Epidemiol Community Health 57:440–443

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Visser O, van Peppen AM, Ory FG, van Leeuwen FE (2005) Results of breast cancer screening in first generation migrants in Northwest Netherlands. Eur J Cancer Prev 14:251–255

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Jensen A, Olsen AH, von Euler-Chelpin M, Helle Njor S, Vejborg I, Lynge E (2005) Do nonattenders in mammography screening programmes seek mammography elsewhere? Int J Cancer 113:464–470

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Adams J, White M, Forman D (2004) Are there socioeconomic gradients in stage and grade of breast cancer at diagnosis? Cross sectional analysis of UK cancer registry data. BMJ 329:142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Bulliard JL, Ducros C, Jemelin C, Arzel B, Fioretta G, Levi F (2009) Effectiveness of organised versus opportunistic mammography screening. Ann Oncol 20:1199–1202

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Cortesi L, Chiuri VE, Ruscelli S, Bellelli V, Negri R, Rashid I, Cirilli C, Fracca A, Gallo E, Federico M (2006) Prognosis of screen-detected breast cancers: results of a population based study. BMC Cancer 6:17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Taylor A, Cheng KK (2003) Social deprivation and breast cancer. J Public Health Med 25:228–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Symonds P, Bolger B, Hole D, Mao JH, Cooke T (2000) Advanced-stage cervix cancer: rapid tumour growth rather than late diagnosis. Br J Cancer 83:566–568

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Schrijvers CT, Mackenbach JP (1994) Cancer patient survival by socioeconomic status in seven countries: a review for six common cancer sites [corrected]. J Epidemiol Community Health 48:441–446

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Kaufman JS, Maclehose RF, Kaufman S (2004) A further critique of the analytic strategy of adjusting for covariates to identify biologic mediation. Epidemiol Perspect Innov 1:4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Weller DP, Patnick J, McIntosh HM, Dietrich AJ (2009) Uptake in cancer screening programmes. Lancet Oncol 10:693–699

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Bos V, Kunst AE, Mackenbach J (2000) Nationale gegevens over sociaal-economische sterfteverschillen op basis van informatie over kleine geografische eenheden [in Dutch]. In: Verslag aan de programmacommissie sociaal-economische gezondheidsverschillen II. Instituut Maatschappelijke Gezondheidszorg, Erasmus Universiteit, Rotterdam

  44. Bos V, Kunst AE, Mackenbach JP (2001) De omvang van sociaal-economische verschillen gemeten op buurtniveau: vergelijking met schattingen op basis van informatie op individueel niveau [in Dutch]. In: Stronks K (ed) Sociaal-economische gezondheidsverschillen: van verklaren naar verkleinen. Zon/MW, Den Haag, pp 8–20

    Google Scholar 

  45. Smits J, Keij I, Westert GP (2001) Effecten van sociaal-economische status van kleine, middelgrote en grote geografische eenheden op de sterfte [in Dutch]. Maandstatistiek van de bevolking 11:4–10

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a grant from Bevolkings Onderzoek Borstkanker Zuid (which organizes the population-based screening for breast cancer in southern Netherlands).

Conflict of interest statement

None declared.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Comprehensive Cancer Centre South (IKZ), Eindhoven Cancer Registry, PO Box 231, 5600 AE, Eindhoven, the Netherlands

    M. J. Aarts, A. C. Voogd, J. W. W. Coebergh & W. J. Louwman

  2. Department of Epidemiology, Research Institute Growth and Development (GROW), Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, the Netherlands

    A. C. Voogd

  3. Department of Radiology, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, the Netherlands

    L. E. M. Duijm

  4. Department of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands

    J. W. W. Coebergh & W. J. Louwman

Authors
  1. M. J. Aarts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. C. Voogd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L. E. M. Duijm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. W. W. Coebergh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. W. J. Louwman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. J. Aarts.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aarts, M.J., Voogd, A.C., Duijm, L.E.M. et al. Socioeconomic inequalities in attending the mass screening for breast cancer in the south of the Netherlands—associations with stage at diagnosis and survival. Breast Cancer Res Treat 128, 517–525 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1363-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1363-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation