35
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Social and geographical factors affecting access to treatment of colorectal cancer: a cancer registry study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          Cancer outcomes vary between and within countries with patients from deprived backgrounds known to have inferior survival. The authors set out to explore the effect of deprivation in relation to the accessibility of hospitals offering diagnostic and therapeutic services on stage at presentation and receipt of treatment.

          Design

          Analysis of a Cancer Registry Database. Data included stage and treatment details from the first 6 months. The socioeconomic status of the immediate area of residence and the travel time from home to hospital was derived from the postcode.

          Setting

          Population-based study of patients resident in a large area in the north of England.

          Participants

          39 619 patients with colorectal cancer diagnosed between 1994 and 2002.

          Outcomes measured

          Stage of diagnosis and receipt of treatment in relation to deprivation and distance from hospital.

          Results

          Patients in the most deprived quartile were significantly more likely to be diagnosed at stage 4 for rectal cancer (OR 1.516, p<0.05) but less so for colonic cancer. There was a trend for both sites for patients in the most deprived quartile to be less likely to receive chemotherapy for stage 4 disease. Patients with colonic cancer were very significantly less likely to receive any treatment if they came from any but the most affluent area (ORs 0.639, 0.603 and 0.544 in increasingly deprived quartiles), this may have been exacerbated if the hospital was distant from their residence (OR for forth quartile for both travel and deprivation 0.731, not significant). The effect was less for rectal cancer and no effect of distance was seen.

          Conclusions

          Residing in a deprived area is associated with tendencies to higher stage at diagnosis and especially in the case of colonic cancer to reduced receipt of treatment. These observations are consistent with other findings and indicate that access to diagnosis requires further investigation.

          Article summary

          Article focus
          • There is evidence that the poorer survival of British patients' with bowel cancer is related to more advanced stage than in similar countries.

          • Is this related to the environment in which people live?

          • Are there differences in this regard between colonic and rectal cancer?

          Key messages
          • Residing in a deprived area is associated with:

          • tendencies to higher stage at diagnosis.

          • especially in the case of colonic cancer with reduced receipt of treatment.

          Strengths and limitations of this study
          • A cancer registry study looks at the whole population of a defined area and so does not depend on access to specific institutions.

          • A large number of patients have been studied.

          • The patients analysed were diagnosed some years ago.

          • Deprivation indices relate to area of residence rather than to individuals.

          • This is a cross-sectional study so inferences of causality must be cautious.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          EUROCARE-4. Survival of cancer patients diagnosed in 1995-1999. Results and commentary.

          EUROCARE-4 analysed about three million adult cancer cases from 82 cancer registries in 23 European countries, diagnosed in 1995-1999 and followed to December 2003. For each cancer site, the mean European area-weighted observed and relative survival at 1-, 3-, and 5-years by age and sex are presented. Country-specific 1- and 5-year relative survival is also shown, together with 5-year relative survival conditional to surviving 1-year. Within-country variation in survival is analysed for selected cancers. Survival for most solid cancers, whose prognosis depends largely on stage at diagnosis (breast, colorectum, stomach, skin melanoma), was highest in Finland, Sweden, Norway and Iceland, lower in the UK and Denmark, and lowest in the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovenia. France, Switzerland and Italy generally had high survival, slightly below that in the northern countries. There were between-region differences in the survival for haematologic malignancies, possibly due to differences in the availability of effective treatments. Survival of elderly patients was low probably due to advanced stage at diagnosis, comorbidities, difficult access or lack of availability of appropriate care. For all cancers, 5-year survival conditional to surviving 1-year was higher and varied less with region, than the overall relative survival.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Time to diagnosis and mortality in colorectal cancer: a cohort study in primary care

            Background: The relationship between the diagnostic interval and mortality from colorectal cancer (CRC) is unclear. This association was examined by taking account of important confounding factors at the time of first presentation of symptoms in primary care. Methods: A total of 268 patients with CRC were included in a prospective, population-based study in a Danish county. The diagnostic interval was defined as the time from first presentation of symptoms until diagnosis. We analysed patients separately according to the general practitioner's interpretation of symptoms. Logistic regression was used to estimate 3-year mortality odds ratios as a function of the diagnostic interval using restricted cubic splines and adjusting for tumour site, comorbidity, age, and sex. Results: In patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of cancer or any other serious illness, the risk of dying within 3 years decreased with diagnostic intervals up to 5 weeks and then increased (P=0.002). In patients presenting with vague symptoms, the association was reverse, although not statistically significant. Conclusion: Detecting cancer in primary care is two sided: aimed at expediting ill patients while preventing healthy people from going to hospital. This likely explains the counterintuitive findings; but it does not explain the increasing mortality with longer diagnostic intervals. Thus, this study provides evidence for the hypothesis that the length of the diagnostic interval affects mortality in CRC patients.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Understanding variations in survival for colorectal cancer in Europe: a EUROCARE high resolution study.

              Marked differences in population based survival across Europe were found for colorectal cancers diagnosed in 1985-1989. To understand the reasons for these differences in survival in a new analysis of colorectal cancers diagnosed between 1988 and 1991. A total of 2720 patients with adenocarcinoma of the large bowel from 11 European cancer registries (CRs). We obtained information on stage at diagnosis, diagnostic determinants, and surgical treatment (not routinely collected by CRs) and analysed the data in relation to three year observed survival, calculating relative risks (RRs) of death and adjusting for age, sex, site, stage, and determinants of stage. Three year observed survival rates ranged from 25% (Cracow) to 59% (Modena), and were low in the Thames area (UK) (38%). Survival rates between registries for "resected" patients varied less than those for all patients. When age, sex, and site were considered, RRs ranged from 0.7 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.6-0.9) (Modena) to 2.3 (95% CI 1.9-2.9) (Cracow). After further adjustment by stage, between registry RR variation was between 0.8 (95% CI 0.6-0.9) and 1.8 (95% CI 1.5-2.2). Inter-registry RR differences were slightly reduced when the determinants of stage (number of nodes examined and liver imaging) were included in the model. The reduction was marked for the UK registries. The wide differences across Europe in colorectal cancer survival depend to a large extent on differences in stage at diagnosis. There are wide variations in diagnostic and surgical practices. There was a twofold range in the risk of death from colorectal cancer even after adjustment for surgery and disease stage.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2012
                24 April 2012
                24 April 2012
                : 2
                : 2
                : e000410
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Medical Oncology, Airedale NHS Trust, Airedale General Hospital, Keighley, UK
                [2 ]School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
                [3 ]Centre for Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of Leeds, St James's Institute of Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
                [4 ]Northern and Yorkshire Cancer Registry and Information Service, St James's Institute of Oncology, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
                [5 ]Section of Cancer Information, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
                Author notes
                Correspondence to Dr Michael Crawford; michael.crawford@ 123456anhst.nhs.uk
                Article
                bmjopen-2011-000410
                10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000410
                3341592
                22535788
                7825777a-4e0c-4c14-aab5-983905d9fbed
                © 2012, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.

                History
                : 3 October 2011
                : 3 April 2012
                Categories
                Public Health
                Research
                1506
                1724
                1689
                1695
                1717

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article