Evolution of socioeconomic inequalities in site-specific cancer mortality among Belgian women between 1991 and 2008 using a fundamental cause approach

Global disparities in patients with multiple myeloma: a rapid evidence assessment

There are disparities in outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma (MM). We evaluated the influence of sociodemographic factors on global disparities in outcomes for patients with MM. This rapid evidence assessment (PROSPERO, CRD42021248461) followed PRISMA-P guidelines and used the PICOS framework. PubMed and Embase® were searched for articles in English from 2011 to 2021. The title, abstract, and full text of articles were screened according to inclusion/exclusion criteria. The sociodemographic factors assessed were age, sex, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and geographic location. Outcomes were diagnosis, access to treatment, and patient outcomes. Of 84 articles included, 48 were US-based. Worldwide, increasing age and low socioeconomic status were associated with worse patient outcomes. In the US, men typically had worse outcomes than women, although women had poorer access to treatment, as did Black, Asian, and Hispanic patients. No consistent disparities due to sex were seen outside the US, and for most factors and outcomes, no consistent disparities could be identified globally. Too few studies examined disparities in diagnosis to draw firm conclusions. This first systematic analysis of health disparities in patients with MM identified specific populations affected, highlighting a need for additional research focused on assessing patterns, trends, and underlying drivers of disparities in MM.

Socioeconomic Disparity Trends in Cancer Screening Among Women After Introduction of National Quality Indicators

PURPOSE

Primary care physicians have an important role in encouraging adequate cancer screening. Disparities in cancer screening by socioeconomic status (SES) may affect presentation stage and cancer survival. This study aimed to examine whether breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer screening rates in women differed by SES and age, and whether screening rates and SES disparities changed after introduction of a primary care-based national quality indicator program.

METHODS

This repeated cross-sectional study spanning 2002-2017 included all female Israeli residents in age ranges appropriate for each cancer screening assessed. SES was measured both as an individual-level variable based on exemption from copayments and as an area-level variable using census data.

RESULTS

In 2017, the most recent year in the study period, screening rates among 1,529,233 women were highest for breast cancer (70.5%), followed by colorectal cancer (64.3%) and cervical cancer (49.6%). Women in the highest area-level SES were more likely to undergo cervical cancer screening compared with those in the lowest (odds ratio = 3.56; 99.9% CI, 3.47-3.65). Temporal trends showed that after introduction of quality indicators for breast and colorectal cancer screening in 2004 and 2005, respectively, rates of screening for these cancers increased, with greater reductions in disparities for the former. The quality indicator for cervical cancer screening was introduced in 2015, and no substantial changes have occurred yet for this screening.

CONCLUSIONS

We found increased uptake and reduced socioeconomic disparities after introduction of cancer screening indicators. Recent introduction of a cervical cancer screening indicator may increase participation and reduce disparities, as has occurred for breast and colorectal cancer screening. These findings related to Israel's quality indicators program highlight the importance of primary care clinicians in increasing cancer screening rates to improve outcomes and reduce disparities.