The role of socio demographic inequalities on the survival
The role of socio-demographic inequalities on the survival of women with breast cancer according to participation in MSP has been little described. A few studies showed that screen-detected women had the same survival whatever the deprivation level, and that the survival of non-attender women decreased with higher deprivation levels [11,12]. Conversely, another study showed that the survival of both screen-detected and non-attender women decreased when deprivation levels increased . However, most studies were performed without adjusting for lead-time. Lead-time is the time gained due to screen detection before symptomatic state as opposed to symptomatic detection. By correcting for lead-time, the survival difference between screen-detected and symptomatic breast cancer can be attributed to prognostic factors such as stage. For this Galactose 1-phosphate reason, further investigations are needed to better understand the effect of socio-demographic inequalities on the survival with the correction for lead-time.
In France, only a few studies have compared cancer characteristics in women participating in MSP and those that do not undergo screening. One French study showed that women living in the most deprived areas participated less to mammography screening and were diagnosed with a more advanced stage of cancer . In addition, no study has described the socio-demographic characteristics and survival of women with breast cancer based on their participation in a MSP.
Discussion In marine biome study, we classified women according to their participation in breast cancer MSP. The net survival rate at 5 years showed that screen-detected women had higher survival rates than non-attender women (97.3% vs 83.8%). According to socio-demographic inequalities, women from the most affluent areas had higher survival rates than those from the most deprived areas (95.6% vs 91.7%). Furthermore, a significant survival difference was observed among non-attender women between quintile 1 and quintile 5 (91.1% vs 78.1%), contrary to screen-detected women. Finally, a significant difference was observed between non-attenders and screen-detected women in quintiles 2 to 5.
Conflict of interest statement