Role of patient characteristics in adherence to first-line treatment guidelines in breast, lung and prostate cancer: insights from the Nordic healthcare system.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the influence of socioeconomic status, health literacy, and numeracy on treatment decisions and the occurrence of adverse events in patients with breast, lung, and prostate cancer within a Nordic healthcare setting. DESIGN: A follow-up to a cross-sectional, mixed-methods, single-centre study. SETTING: A Nordic, tertiary cancer clinic. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 244 participants with breast, lung and prostate cancer were initially identified, of which 138 first-line treatment participants were eligible for this study. First-line treatment participants (n=138) surpassed the expected cases (n=108). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable as this was an observational study. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The study's primary endpoint was the rate of guideline adherence. The secondary endpoint involved assessing treatment toxicity in the form of adverse events. RESULTS: Guideline-adherent treatment was observed in 114 (82.6%) cases. First-line treatment selection appeared uninfluenced by participants' education, occupation, income or self-reported health literacy. A minority (3.6%) experienced difficulties following treatment instructions, primarily with oral cancer medications. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicated lesser cancer health disparities regarding guideline adherence and treatment toxicity within the Nordic healthcare framework. A causal connection may not be established; however, the findings contribute to discourse on equitable cancer health provision.

Socioeconomic status and lifestyle patterns in the most common cancer types-community-based research.

INTRODUCTION: As the global burden of chronic cancer increases, its correlation to lifestyle, socioeconomic status (SES) and health equity becomes more important. The aim of the present study was to provide a snapshot of the socioeconomic and lifestyle patterns for different cancer types in patients at a Nordic tertiary cancer clinic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a descriptive observational study, questionnaires addressed highest-attained educational level, occupational level, economy, relationship status, exposures, and lifestyle habits. The questionnaire was distributed to all cancer patients attending the cancer clinic. Treating physicians added further information about the cancer disease, including primary origin, pathology report, TNM-classification and stage. RESULTS: Patients with lung cancer had the lowest SES, and patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancer, other cancer types and prostate cancer had the second, third and fourth lowest SES, respectively. However, breast cancer patients had the highest SES. Lifestyle and exposure patterns differed among the major cancer types. Lung cancer patients reported the highest proportion of unfavourable lifestyle and exposure patterns, and patients with GI cancer, prostate cancer and other cancer types had the second, third and fourth highest proportion of unfavourable lifestyle and exposure patterns, respectively. The most favourable exposure and lifestyle patterns were observed in breast cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS: The present study indicated significant socioeconomic and lifestyle differences among cancer types at a Nordic cancer centre, with differences in lifestyle being more prominent than socioeconomic differences.