Original Article

Cancer in Relation to Socioeconomic Status: Stage at Diagnosis in Texas, 2004–2008

Authors: David R. Risser, PhD, MPH, Eric A. Miller, PhD

Abstract

Objectives: To determine whether stage of cancer diagnosis was associated with the socioeconomic status (SES) of the census tract where the patient resides, and to assess whether this is modified by race, ethnicity, or urban/rural residence, other factors known to affect cancer diagnosis stage.


Methods: Using 2004–2008 data from the Texas Cancer Registry, we examined the distribution of stage at diagnosis in Texas residents for 15 cancer sites by the SES of the census tract of residence. Stage at diagnosis was categorized into the summary stage categories of early (in situ [preinvasive disease] and localized) and late stage (regional and distant spread). Age-adjusted odds ratios for late-stage versus early-stage cancer diagnosis in low versus high SES census tracts were evaluated by cancer site, race, ethnicity, and urban versus rural residence.


Results: For most cancer sites, late-stage cancer diagnosis increased with decreasing SES. These findings were consistent by cancer site, race, ethnicity, and in urban and rural areas of the state.


Conclusions: For most cancer sites, particularly those likely to have patients diagnosed early by screening, late-stage cancer diagnosis is increased in Texas populations residing in lower SES census tracts compared with higher SES census tracts.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Clegg LX, Reichman ME, Miller BA, et al. Impact of socioeconomic status on cancer incidence and stage at diagnosis: selected findings from the surveillance, epidemiology and end results: National Longitudinal Mortality Study. Cancer Causes Control 2009; 20: 417–435.
 
2. Singh GK, Miller BA, Hankey BF, et al. Persistent area socioeconomic disparities in U.S. incidence of cervical cancer, mortality, stage, and survival, 1975-2000. Cancer 2004; 101: 1051–1057.
 
3. Farley TA, Flannery JT. Late stage diagnosis of breast cancer in women of lower socioeconomic status: public health implications. Am J Public Health 1989; 79: 1508–1512.
 
4. Baquet CR, Commiskey P. Socioeconomic factors and breast carcinoma in multicultural women. Cancer 2000; 88 (5 suppl): 1256–1264.
 
5. Hunter CP. Epidemiology, stage at diagnosis and tumor biology of breast carcinoma in multiracial and multiethnic populations. Cancer 2000; 88 (5 suppl): 1192–1202.
 
6. Mendes E. State of the states: midyear 2009. Uninsured: highest percentage in Texas, lowest in Mass. http://www.gallup.com/poll/122387/ininsured-highest-percentage-texas-lowest-mass.aspx. Published August 19, 2009. Accessed June 7, 2011.
 
7. US Census Bureau, Small Area Estimates Branch. Table 1 (est08All.xls). 2008 poverty and median income estimates-counties. http://www.census.gov/did/www/saipe/data/statecounty/data/2008.html. Published November 2009. Accessed June 7, 2011.
 
8. Risser DR, Miller EA, Williams MA, et al. County-level socioeconomic status and cancer rates in Texas, 2001–2005. Tex Med 2010; 106: 53–56.
 
9. Texas Cancer Registry SEER*Stat database, 1995–2008 incidence, Texas statewide, Texas Department of State Health Services. www.dshs.state.tx.us/tcr. Accessed July 6, 2012.
 
10. Young JL Jr, Roffers SD, Ries LAG, et al., (eds). SEER Summary Staging Manual–2000: Codes and Coding Instructions. NIH Pub. No. 01-4969. Bethesda, MD, National Cancer Institute, 2001.
 
11. National Cancer Institute. Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results. 2003 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes, Texas. http://seer.cancer.gov/seerstat/variables/countyattribs/ruralurban.html. Accessed July 6, 2012.
 
12. Mantel N, Haenszel W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 1959; 22: 719–748.
 
13. Booth CM, Gavid L, Zhang-Salomons J, et al. The impact of socioeconomic status on stage of cancer diagnosis and survival. A population-based study in Ontario, Canada. Cancer 2010; 116: 4160–4167.
 
14. Greenlee RT, Howe HL. County-level poverty and distant stage cancer in the United States. Cancer Causes Control 2009; 20: 989–1000.
 
15. Schwartz KL, Crossley-May H, Vigneau FD, et al. Race, socioeconomic status and stage at diagnosis for five common malignancies. Cancer Causes Control 2003; 14: 761–766.
 
16. Segnan N. Socioeconomic status and cancer screening. In: Kogevinas M, Pearce N, Susser M, et al., (eds). Social Inequalities and Cancer. IARC Sci Publ No. 138. Lyon, France, International Agency for Research on Cancer, 1997: 369–376.
 
17. Kim J, Jang S-N. Socioeconomic disparities in breast cancer screening among US women: trends from 2000–2005. J Prev Med Public Health 2008; 41: 186–194.
 
18. Roetzheim RG, Pal N, Tennant C, et al. Effects of health insurance and race on early detection of cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91: 1409–1415.
 
19. Ward E, Jemal A, Cokkinides V, et al. Cancer disparities by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. CA Cancer J Clin 2004; 54: 78–93.
 
20. Byers TE, Wold HJ, Bauer KR, et al. The impact of socioeconomic status on survival after cancer in the United States: findings from the National Program of Cancer Registries Patterns of Care Study. Cancer 2008; 113: 582–591.
 
21. Parikh-Patel A, Bates JH, Campleman S. Colorectal cancer stage at diagnosis by socioeconomic and urban/rural status in California, 1988–2000. Cancer 2006; 107 (5 suppl): 1189–1195.
 
22. Ries LAG, Kosary CL, Hankey BF, et al., (eds). SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1973–1996. Bethesda, MD, National Cancer Institute, 1998.
 
23. Hankey BF, Miller B, Curtis R, et al. Trends in breast cancer in younger women in contrast to older women. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1994; 16: 7–14.
 
24. Kreiger N. Social class and the black/white crossover in the age-specific incidence of breast cancer: a study linking census-derived data to population-based registry records. Am J Epidemiol 1990; 131: 804–814.
 
25. Albain KS, Green SR, Lichter AS, et al. Influence of patient characteristics, socioeconomic factors, geography, and systemic risk on the use of breast-sparing treatment in women enrolled in adjuvant breast cancer studies: an analysis of two intergroup trials. J Clin Oncol 1996; 11: 3009–3017.
 
26. Risser DR, Condon KW. Stage at cancer diagnosis in rural versus urban areas of Texas: implications for changing the disparity through health services. Tex J Rural Health 1995; 14: 20–27.
 
27. Menvielle G, Soerjomataram I, de Vries E, et al. Scenarios of future lung cancer incidence by educational level: modeling study in Denmark. Eur J Cancer 2010; 46: 2625–2632.
 
28. Mackenbach JP, Huisman M, Andersen O, et al. Inequalities in lung cancer mortality by the educational level in 10 European populations. Eur J Cancer 2004; 40: 126–135.
 
29. Ananthakrishnan AN, Hoffman RG, Saeian K. Higher physician density is associated with lower incidence of late-stage colorectal cancer. J Gen Intern Med 2011; 25: 1164–1171.
 
30. Moonesinghe R, Zhu J, Truman BI. Health insurance coverage—United States, 2004 and 2008. MMWR Morbid Mortal Wkly Rep Suppl 2011; 60: 35–37.
 
31. Gumphertz ML, Pickle LW, Miller BA, et al. Geographic patterns of advanced breast cancer in Los Angeles: associations with biological and sociodemographic factors (United States). Cancer Causes Control 2006; 17: 325–339.
 
32. Wang F, McLafferty S, Escamilla V, et al. Late-stage breast cancer diagnosis and health care access in Illinois. Prof Geogr 2008; 60: 54–69.