Assessing ethnic differences in age-standardised net survival of eight common cancer: an English population-based study
Martins, T. O.; Rachet, B.; Hamilton, W.; Majano, S. B.
Show abstract
Background: We examined ethnic differences in age-standardised net survival (ANS) for eight common cancers diagnosed in England between 2010 and 2019. Methods: Analyses included 247,428 patients aged [≥]40 years diagnosed with breast, prostate, lung, colorectal, cervical, ovarian, myeloma, and oesophagogastric cancers. Net survival was estimated at one, three, and five years using the Pohar-Perme estimator and age-standardised with International Cancer Survival Standards weights across four age bands. Results: Compared with White patients, Black patients had higher ANS for lung and prostate cancers at all time points, for myeloma at one year, and for oesophagogastric cancer at one and three years. However, they had lower ANS for breast cancer at three years. Asian patients had higher ANS for lung, prostate, and oesophagogastric cancers at all time points, and for other sites at varying follow-up times. Patients in the Mixed group had higher ANS for most cancers, whereas those in the Other ethnic group generally had lower ANS compared with White patients. Conclusions: Ethnic minority groups in England do not consistently experience poorer cancer survival, with varying patterns observed by cancer site. Universal healthcare access may reduce disparities observed elsewhere, highlighting the importance of context-specific research and public policy.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- The impact of worldwide, national and sub-national severity distributions in Burden of Disease studies: a case study of individual cancer types in Scotland 94%
- A Core Outcome Set to evaluate the impact of prognostication in people living with advanced cancer: an international consensus study 93%
- Do people with disabilities experience disparities in cancer care? A systematic review 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Age-related differences in cancer relative survival in the US: a SEER-18 analysis 94%
- Inequalities in relative cancer survival by race, immigration status, income, and education for 22 cancer sites in Canada, a cohort study 93%
- Cancer and the risk of COVID-19 diagnosis, hospitalisation, and death: a population-based multi-state cohort study including 4,618,377 adults in Catalonia, Spain 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Inequalities in the decline and recovery of pathological cancer diagnoses during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic: a population-based study 94%
- Immortal time bias in older vs younger age groups: a simulation study with application to a population-based cohort of patients with colon cancer 91%
- Diagnostic performance of the faecal immunochemical test for patients with low-risk symptoms of colorectal cancer in primary care: a service evaluation in the South West of England 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Factors associated with excess all-cause mortality in the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a time-series analysis using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink 92%
- A Systematic Review of Machine Learning-based Prognostic Models for Acute Pancreatitis: Towards Improving Methods and Reporting Quality 89%
- Overall and cause-specific hospitalisation and death after COVID-19 hospitalisation in England: cohort study in OpenSAFELY using linked primary care, secondary care and death registration data 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Psychological Impact of the Galleri Test (sIG(n)al): Protocol for a longitudinal evaluation of the psychological impact of receiving a cancer signal in the NHS-Galleri Trial 91%
- Ethnic variation in outcome of people hospitalised with Covid-19 in Wales (UK): A rapid analysis of surveillance data using Onomap, a name-based ethnicity classification tool 91%
- Recent adverse mortality trends in Scotland: comparison with other high-income countries. 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.