The European Union Council Recommendation of 2 December 2003 on cancer screening suggests the implementation of organised, population-based breast cancer screening programmes based on mammography every other year for women aged 50 to 69years, ensuring equal access to screening, taking into account potential needs for targeting particular socioeconomic groups. A European survey on coverage and participation, and key organisational and policy characteristics of the programmes, targeting years 2010 and 2014, was undertaken in 2014. Overall, 27 countries contributed to this survey, 26 of the 28 European Union member states (92.9%) plus Norway. In 2014, 25 countries reported an ongoing population-based programme, one country reported a pilot programme and another was planning a pilot. In eight countries, the target age range was broader than that proposed by the Council Recommendation, and in three countries the full range was not covered. Fifteen countries reported not reaching some vulnerable populations, such as immigrants, prisoners and people without health insurance, while 22 reported that participation was periodically monitored by socioeconomic variables (e.g. age and territory). Organised, population-based breast cancer screening programmes based on routine mammograms are in place in most EU member states. However, there are still differences in the way screening programmes are implemented, and participation by vulnerable populations should be encouraged.
This paper examines the influence of gender and socio-economic status (SES) on participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Qualitative study with eight focus groups comprised of participants and non-participants in a CRC screening programme in Valencia (Spain), structural sample design and discursive analysis by gender, SES and participation. Non-participants and those with lower SES tended to have less knowledge about both the disease and the programme. Reasons for participation varied according to gender: women were motivated because they value the importance of self-care and early detection in order to prevent personal and family suffering while men were encouraged by their partners. Reasons for non-participation were also influenced by gender: women feared the results and considered the test unpleasant whereas men showed carelessness and lack of concern. In population-based programmes, people with lower SES and men are those with the most obstacles to participation due to low health literacy and traditional gender roles respectively. To increase participation in CRC screening programmes based on informed decision making and taking into account social inequalities, information should be more accessible, comprehensible and adapted to gender and SES differences and emphasise the greater vulnerability of men for CRC and the benefits of early detection.
AimsThe aim of this study was to evaluate the association of diabetes and diabetes treatment with risk of postmenopausal breast cancer.MethodsHistologically confirmed incident cases of postmenopausal breast (N = 916) cancer were recruited from 23 Spanish public hospitals. Population-based controls (N = 1094) were randomly selected from primary care center lists within the catchment areas of the participant hospitals. ORs (95 % CI) were estimated using mixed-effects logistic regression models, using the recruitment center as a random effect term. Breast tumors were classified into hormone receptor positive (ER+ or PR+), HER2+ and triple negative (TN).ResultsDiabetes was not associated with the overall risk of breast cancer (OR 1.09; 95 % CI 0.82–1.45), and it was only linked to the risk of developing TN tumors: Among 91 women with TN tumors, 18.7 % were diabetic, while the corresponding figure among controls was 9.9 % (OR 2.25; 95 % CI 1.22–4.15). Regarding treatment, results showed that insulin use was more prevalent among diabetic cases (2.5 %) as compared to diabetic controls (0.7 %); OR 2.98; 95 % CI 1.26–7.01. They also showed that, among diabetics, the risk of developing HR+/HER2− tumors decreased with longer metformin use (ORper year 0.89; 95 % CI 0.81–0.99; based on 24 cases and 43 controls).ConclusionThis study reinforces the need to correctly classify breast cancers when studying their association with diabetes. Given the low survival rates in women diagnosed with TN breast tumors and the potential impact of diabetes control on breast cancer prevention, more studies are needed to better characterize this association.
BackgroundSex hormones play a role in gastric cancer and colorectal cancer etiology, however, epidemiological evidence is inconsistent. This study examines the influence of menstrual and reproductive factors over the risk of both tumors.MethodsIn this case-control study 128 women with gastric cancer and 1293 controls, as well as 562 female and colorectal cancer cases and 1605 controls were recruited in 9 and 11 Spanish provinces, respectively. Population controls were frequency matched to cases by age and province. Demographic and reproductive data were directly surveyed by trained staff. The association with gastric, colon and rectal cancer was assessed using logistic and multinomial mixed regression models.ResultsOur results show an inverse association of age at first birth with gastric cancer risk (five-year trend: OR = 0.69; p-value = 0.006). Ever users of hormonal contraception presented a decreased risk of gastric (OR = 0.42; 95%CI = 0.26–0.69), colon (OR = 0.64; 95%CI = 0.48–0.86) and rectal cancer (OR = 0.61; 95%CI = 0.43–0.88). Postmenopausal women who used hormone replacement therapy showed a decreased risk of colon and rectal tumors. A significant interaction of educational level with parity and months of first child lactation was also observed.ConclusionThese findings suggest a protective role of exogenous hormones in gastric and colorectal cancer risk. The role of endogenous hormones remains unclear.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.