Is survival rate lower after breast cancer in deprived women according to disease stage?

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic deprivation has been associated with lower breast cancer (BC) survival, but the influence of stage at diagnosis on this association merits further study. Our aim was to investigate this association using the Loire-Atlantique/Vendee Cancer Registry (France). METHODS: Twelve-thousand seven-hundred thirty-eight women living in the area covered by the registry and diagnosed with invasive breast carcinoma between 2008 and 2015 were included in the study. They were censored at maximal 6 years. Deprivation was measured by the French European Deprivation Index. Excess hazard and net survival were estimated for deprivation level, stage and age at diagnosis using a flexible excess mortality hazard model. RESULTS: After adjustment by stage, women living in the most deprived areas had a borderline non-significant higher excess mortality hazard (+25% (95% CI: -3%; +62%)) compared to those living in the least deprived areas. Stage-adjusted 5-year net survival differed significantly between these two subgroups (respectively, 88.2% (95% CI:85.2%-90.5%) and 92.5% (95% CI:90.6%-93.9%)). CONCLUSION: BC survival remained lower in deprived areas in France, despite universal access to cancer care. Intensification of prevention measures could help to reduce advanced BC, responsible for the majority of deaths from BC. A better understanding of remaining social disparities is crucial to implement specific interventions.

Short-term and long-term survival of interval breast cancers taking into account prognostic features.

PURPOSE: The aim of this population-based study was to estimate short-term and long-term survival of interval breast cancers and to compare them to clinically detected cancers, taking into account prognostic features. METHODS: This study included all interval cancers and clinically detected cancers diagnosed in the Loire-Atlantique population-based cancer registry from 2000 to 2010 in women aged 50-76 years. We used the Pohar-Perme method to estimate 5- and 10 year net survival rates and a flexible parametric model to compare interval cancer and clinically detected cancer prognosis with and without adjustment for the main prognostic factors (age, stage, histological grade, and phenotype). RESULTS: This study included 813 interval cancers and 1,354 clinically detected cancers. Interval cancers were diagnosed at a significantly less advanced stage than clinically detected cancers, but more often with a triple-negative phenotype. Interval cancer age-standardised net survival was 88.0% at 5 years (95% CI 84.9-91.2) and 81.7% at 10 years (95% CI 76.9-86.9), whereas clinically detected cancer age-standardised net survival was 77.8% (95% CI 75.1-80.6) and 64.6% (95% CI 60.7-68.7), respectively. After adjustment for covariates, survival no longer differed between interval cancers and clinically detected cancers at 5 and 10 years. CONCLUSION: Although the interval cancer net survival rate was higher, interval cancers had a similar short-term and long-term prognosis than clinically detected cancers after taking into account the main prognostic factors.