Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, 722 West 168th, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009 Oct;18(10):2701-8. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0305. Epub 2009 Sep 29.
Although advances in early detection and treatment of cancer improve overall population survival, these advances may not benefit all population groups equally and may heighten racial/ethnic differences in survival.
We identified cancer cases in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results program, who were ages > or = 20 years and diagnosed with one invasive cancer in 1995 to 1999 (n = 580,225). We used 5-year relative survival rates to measure the degree to which mortality from each cancer is amenable to medical interventions (amenability index). We used Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate survival differences between each racial/ethnic minority group relative to Whites, by the overall amenability index, and three levels of amenability (nonamenable, partly amenable, and mostly amenable cancers, corresponding to cancers with 5-year relative survival rate < 40%, 40-69%, and > or = 70%, respectively), adjusting for gender, age, disease stage, and county-level poverty concentration.
As amenability increased, racial/ethnic differences in cancer survival increased for African Americans, American Indians/Native Alaskans, and Hispanics relative to Whites. For example, the hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for African Americans versus Whites from nonamenable, partly amenable, and mostly amenable cancers were 1.05 (1.03-1.07), 1.38 (1.34-1.41), and 1.41 (1.37-1.46), respectively. Asians/Pacific Islanders had similar or longer survival relative to Whites across amenability levels; however, several subgroups experienced increasingly poorer survival with increasing amenability.
Cancer survival disparities for most racial/ethnic minority populations widen as cancers become more amenable to medical interventions. Efforts in developing cancer control measures must be coupled with specific strategies for reducing the expected disparities.
尽管癌症早期检测和治疗的进步提高了总体人群的生存率,但这些进步可能并不能使所有人群群体平等受益,并且可能会加剧生存方面的种族/民族差异。
我们在监测、流行病学和最终结果计划中确定了癌症病例,这些病例的年龄大于或等于 20 岁,并在 1995 年至 1999 年期间被诊断出患有一种侵袭性癌症(n = 580,225)。我们使用 5 年相对生存率来衡量每种癌症的死亡率对医疗干预的适应程度(适应指数)。我们使用 Kaplan-Meier 方法和 Cox 比例风险回归来估计每个种族/少数民族群体相对于白人的生存差异,使用总体适应指数以及三个适应水平(非适应、部分适应和主要适应癌症,分别对应于 5 年相对生存率<40%、40-69%和>或=70%的癌症),并调整性别、年龄、疾病分期和县级贫困集中程度。
随着适应度的增加,非裔美国人、美洲印第安人/阿拉斯加原住民和西班牙裔相对于白人的癌症生存差异也随之增加。例如,非适应、部分适应和主要适应癌症中,非裔美国人相对于白人的危险比(95%置信区间)分别为 1.05(1.03-1.07)、1.38(1.34-1.41)和 1.41(1.37-1.46)。亚洲/太平洋岛民在适应度水平上相对于白人具有相似或更长的生存率;然而,一些亚组随着适应度的增加,生存状况越来越差。
随着癌症对医疗干预的适应度增加,大多数种族/少数民族人群的癌症生存差异也会扩大。在制定癌症控制措施的努力中,必须结合具体策略来减少预期的差异。