Cervical Cancer Survival by Socioeconomic Status, Race/Ethnicity, and Place of Residence in Texas, 1995–2001

Abstract

SES and race/ethnicity were independently associated with poorer cervical cancer survival in this large Texas sample. Further research is needed to investigate the role of optimal treatment and comorbid conditions in the association between SES and cervical cancer survival.

Racial Differences in Cervical Cancer Survival in the Detroit Metropolitan Area

“…Several previous studies have evaluated race specifically as a predictor of survival for women with cervical cancer. 4,5,7,8,[32][33][34][35][36][37][38] Four of 10 studies demonstrated that AA women had worse survival compared with white women despite adjustment for several potential confounder variables, 5,8,32,36 whereas 6 of 10 studies showed no racial differences in survival after multivariate adjustment. 4,[33][34][35]37,38 Thoms et al 34 reported no survival differences between AA women and white women after adjustment for stage, age and histology.…”

“…In articles that examined cervical cancer survival and SES, 6,7,14,16-23 6 of 11 studies indicated that women with lower SES had poorer survival. 6,7,17,[20][21][22] Eggleston et al 7 reported on 5467 women with cervical cancer. In their study, an SES variable was defined by using measures of employment, income, education, and poverty at the zip code level.…”

“…6,7,14,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] Unlike information on stage and treatment, however, databases used by public health researchers generally do not include information on individual SES. SES has been described in the cervical cancer literature using various combinations of measures, including poverty level, occupation, educational level, and insurance status.…”

Examining the association between socioeconomic status and potential human papillomavirus-associated cancers

“…2 Common factors of SES include income, [3][4][5][6][7] education, [3][4][5][6][7] occupation, 7,8 place of residence, 9 poverty level, 5,7,8 and race. [2][3][4][5] For the purpose of defining SES more comprehensively, these measures are frequently combined, because each indicator alone is considered inadequate to reflect SES.…”

“…14 The body of research that links SES to potentially human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated cancers is sparse and has primarily focused on the HPV to cervical cancer relation. 9,[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] In a sample of women living in Brazil, poverty and access to care inequities were found to be predictive of oncogenic-type HPV and, ultimately, of cervical cancer. 21 A meta-analysis based upon 57 studies found that there was a 2-fold increased risk of invasive cervical cancer among individuals of low social status compared with individuals of high social status.…”