OBJECTIVES: While studies have found lower cancer risks and better cancer survival in immigrant populations, it is debated whether cancer care is offered on equal terms to all residents regardless of background. Our aim was to study patterns of care and outcomes in immigrants in a country with a tax-financed universal health care system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used a population-based database to compare clinical presentation, management and mortality between Swedish-born and immigrant patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Analyses were adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: We identified 40,075 patients diagnosed with NSCLC of which 84% were born in Sweden, 7% in Nordic and 9% in Non-Nordic countries. Non-Nordic immigrants were to a higher extent male, smokers, younger at diagnosis, had a better performance status and a higher educational level. No differences were seen regarding comorbidity burden or stage at diagnosis. Non-Nordic immigrants more often underwent positron emission tomography (PET) (aHR 1.32; 95% CI 1.19-1.45) and were more often discussed in a multidisciplinary team setting (aHR 1.30; 95% CI 1.17-1.44). There were no differences in treatment modalities following adjustment for age, with the exception of concurrent chemoradiotherapy in stage IIIA disease which was more common in Non-Nordic immigrants (aOR 1.34; 95% CI 1.03-1.74). Both overall and cause specific survival in non-metastatic disease were higher among Non-Nordic immigrants. Overall mortality in stage I-II: HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.73-0.90 and stage IIIA: HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.65-0.86. Following full adjustments, cause-specific mortality in stage I-II was aHR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75-0.98. CONCLUSION: Taken together, only minor differences in management and outcomes were observed between Swedish-born and immigrant patients. We conclude that lung cancer care is offered on equal terms. If anything, outcomes were better in Non-Nordic immigrants with early stage NSCLC.