Cancer is one of those horrors that can target any person, regardless of age, gender, race, religion, and any other demographic factor. However, that fact comes with a caveat.
Certain cancers, of course, can be more common in certain groups. For example, while men and women can both suffer breast cancer, it’s more common in women, and some cancers become a higher risk with age. There are also non-genetic factors, such as sun exposure, or exposure to certain chemicals or substances.
When it comes to outcomes, though, it is both horrifying and not entirely surprising that wealth can be a factor. A current report shows that this fact holds true in pediatric cancer victims as well.
When Money Equates To Health
Socioeconomic status has specific obvious influences on health. People who can afford health insurance, out-of-pocket costs, preventative care, and healthier lifestyles statistically have better health.
Individuals who can’t afford enough time to rest their bodies adequately, who don’t have sufficient free time for an exercise regime, or who live in food deserts and cannot afford sufficient healthy groceries are likely to have worse outcomes.
Higher stress levels also contribute to adverse health outcomes overall, meaning that struggling to afford rent, groceries, and baby needs such as diapers and other necessities has negative health impacts.
Childhood Cancers
While cancer can attack anyone, studies show that children in higher socioeconomic strata are more likely to survive it. It’s not just wealth, either.
The study used a measure called Area Deprivation Index, or ADI. This evaluates risk factors, including education level and housing availability. It also measured factors including sex, race, ethnicity, and location.
The study found that children who had poorer ADI scores had lower five-year cancer survival rates and specifically that Black children had higher rates of cancer death than white children. Newswise reported:
“Lower socioeconomic status was also associated with later treatment initiation, which can increase the risk of cancer metastasis and death. Among sarcoma patients, for example, the median time between diagnosis and the start of treatment for all children in the study was three days. But the investigators found that treatment began more than 51 days later among Black patients compared with white patients. Children living in rural counties began treatment 34 days later than those living in metropolitan areas, the study showed.”
Outcomes For Adult Cancer Patients
This is all consistent with what is seen in adult cancer patients. However, that may be counterintuitive because children are more likely than adults to be eligible for Medicaid and other programs that help pay for medical care.
A U.C. Berkley study last year discussed this phenomenon in adults and noted one of the same factors: time before initial treatment. That study found that for at least nine different types of cancer studied, cancer patients die an average of 8 months sooner when from poorer socioeconomic strata. It also reported treatment beginning around two weeks later for those patients than more affluent ones.
Studies Have Shown This For Years — And It Continues
While the study addressing childhood cancers is current, studies examining the link between income and cancer survival go way back. For instance, a 1999 study hosted in the National Library of Medicine concluded:
The report, produced by the Office for National Statistics, the Cancer Research Campaign, and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, suggested that over 12700 deaths from cancer could be avoided every year if all patients shared the survival rates of the most affluent patients.
If we’ve known this for decades, why does it continue?
If we see that disparate access to medical care is killing children, why do we allow it?
Access to healthcare, as it currently stands, is a privilege, and it is destroying lives.
The post Pediatric Cancer: A Shocking Factor Influences Outcomes appeared first at Pediatric Cancer: A Shocking Factor Influences Outcomes