Tobacco‐attributable burden of cancer according to socioeconomic position in France

Smoking is a major preventable cause of cancers and is increasingly concentrated among the most deprived individuals leading to increasing socioeconomic inequalities in the incidence of cancers linked to smoking. We aimed to estimate the tobacco‐attributable cancer burden according to socioeconomic position in France. The analysis was restricted to cancer sites for which tobacco smoking was recognized as a risk factor. Cancer cases by sex, age group and European Deprivation Index (EDI) among people aged 30–74 between 2006 and 2009 were obtained from cancer registries covering ～20% of the French population. The tobacco‐attributable burden of cancer according to EDI was estimated applying the population attributable fraction (PAF) computed with the Peto‐Lopez method. The PAF increased from 56% in the least deprived EDI quintile to 70% in the most deprived EDI quintile among men and from 26% to 38% among women. In total, 28% of the excess cancer cases in the four most deprived EDI quintiles in men and 43% in women could be prevented if smoking in these 4 EDI quintiles was similar to that of the least deprived EDI quintile. A substantial smoking‐attributable burden of cancer by socioeconomic position was observed in France. The results highlight the need for policies reducing tobacco consumption. More comprehensive interventions integrating the various dimensions of health determinants and proportionate according to socioeconomic position may essentially contribute to the reduction of socioeconomic inequalities in cancer.     

Trends and inequalities in laryngeal cancer survival in men and women: England and Wales 1991-2006

Laryngeal cancer in men is a relatively common malignancy, with a marked socioeconomic gradient in survival between affluent and deprived patients. Cancer of the larynx in women is rare. Survival tends to lower than for men, and little is known about the association between deprivation and survival in women with laryngeal cancer. This paper explores the trends and socio-economic inequalities in laryngeal cancer survival in women, with comparison to men. We examined relative survival among men and women diagnosed with laryngeal cancer in England and Wales during 1991-2006, followed up to 31 December 2007. We estimated the difference in survival between the most deprived and most affluent groups (the 'deprivation gap') at one and five years after diagnosis, for each sex, anatomical subsite and calendar period. Five year survival for all laryngeal cancers combined was up to 8% lower in women than in men. This difference is only partially explained by the differential distribution of anatomical subsites in men and women. Disparities in survival between men and women were also present within specific subsites. In contrast to men, there was little evidence of a consistent deprivation gap in survival for women at any of the anatomical subsites. The stark socioeconomic inequalities in laryngeal cancer survival in men do not appear to be replicated in women. The origins of the socio-economic inequalities in survival among men, and the disparities in survival between men and women at specific tumour subsites remains unclear.     

Incidence of and survival from upper aerodigestive tract cancers in the U.K.: the influence of deprivation

The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of social deprivation on the incidence of and survival from upper aerodigestive tract (UAT) cancers in the U.K. Incidence was calculated on 25 903 cases of malignant upper aerodigestive tract cancers collected from four cancer registries in the U.K. for the period 1984–1993. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to determine the influence of deprivation, measured in Carstairs quintiles for crude and cause-specific survival on 17 393 of these cases. Patients with UAT cancers who were younger, males or of South Asian origin were more likely to live in a deprived area than in an affluent area. The incidence of UAT cancers in a district was correlated with deprivation score for the district for both men (r=0.78) and for women (r=0.60). People who lived in deprived areas had a relative risk of 1.25 (95% confidence interval (CI):1.15–1.35) of dying from their cancer and of 1.24 (95% CI: 1.13–1.35) of dying from all causes compared with people who lived in affluent areas. People living in deprived areas were more likely to get UAT cancer and were more likely to die from their cancer than people living in affluent areas.     

Trends in cancer incidence by socioeconomic deprivation in Germany in 2007 to 2018: An ecological registry-based study

Age-standardized cancer incidence has decreased over the last years for many cancer sites in developed countries. Whether these trends led to narrowing or widening socioeconomic inequalities in cancer incidence is unknown. Using cancer registry data covering 48 million inhabitants in Germany, the ecological association between age-standardized total and site specific (colorectal, lung, prostate and breast) cancer incidence in 2007 to 2018 and a deprivation index on district level (aggregated to quintiles) was investigated. Incidence in the most and least deprived districts were compared using Poisson models. Average annual percentage changes (AAPCs) and differences in AAPCs between deprivation quintiles were assessed using Joinpoint regression analyses. Age-standardized incidence decreased strongly between 2007 and 2018 for total cancer and all cancer sites (except female lung cancer), irrespective of the level of deprivation. However, differences in the magnitude of trends across deprivation quintiles resulted in increasing inequalities over time for total cancer, colorectal and lung cancer. For total cancer, the incidence rate ratio between the most and least deprived quintile increased from 1.07 (95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.12) to 1.23 (1.12-1.32) in men and from 1.07 (1.01-1.13) to 1.20 (1.14-1.26) in women. Largest inequalities were observed for lung cancer with 82% (men) and 88% (women) higher incidence in the most vs the least deprived regions in 2018. The observed increase in inequalities in cancer incidence is in alignment with trends in inequalities in risk factor prevalence and partly utilization of screening. Intervention programs targeted at socioeconomically deprived and urban regions are highly needed.     

Socioeconomic deprivation and cancer survival in Germany: An ecological analysis in 200 districts in Germany

Although socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival have been demonstrated both within and between countries, evidence on the variation of the inequalities over time past diagnosis is sparse. Furthermore, no comprehensive analysis of socioeconomic differences in cancer survival in Germany has been conducted. Therefore, we analyzed variations in cancer survival for patients diagnosed with one of the 25 most common cancer sites in 1997–2006 in ten population‐based cancer registries in Germany (covering 32 million inhabitants). Patients were assigned a socioeconomic status according to the district of residence at diagnosis. Period analysis was used to derive 3‐month, 5‐year and conditional 1‐year and 5‐year age‐standardized relative survival for 2002–2006 for each deprivation quintile in Germany. Relative survival of patients living in the most deprived district was compared to survival of patients living in all other districts by model‐based period analysis. For 21 of 25 cancer sites, 5‐year relative survival was lower in the most deprived districts than in all other districts combined. The median relative excess risk of death over the 25 cancer sites decreased from 1.24 in the first 3 months to 1.16 in the following 9 months to 1.08 in the following 4 years. Inequalities persisted after adjustment for stage. These major regional socioeconomic inequalities indicate a potential for improving cancer care and survival in Germany. Studies on individual‐level patient data with access to treatment information should be conducted to examine the reasons for these socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in more detail.     

Socioeconomic differences in selection for liver resection in metastatic colorectal cancer and the impact on survival

Background

Socioeconomic inequalities in colorectal cancer (CRC) survival are well recognised. The aim of this study was to describe the impact of socioeconomic deprivation on survival in patients with synchronous CRC liver-limited metastases, and to investigate if any survival inequalities are explained by differences in liver resection rates.

Social inequalities and cancer mortality in France, 1975–1990

Objective: to investigate social inequalities in cancer mortality from 1975 through 1990 among men and women in France.Methods: A sample, that included census data for approximately 1% of the French population, has been followed for mortality from 1975 to 1990. Causes of death were obtained through a record-linkage with the French national cause-of-death file. The analysis was restricted to those aged 35:59 in 1975 and included 61,876 men and 65,291 women. Occupational class, coded according to the social class scheme of Erikson, Goldthorpe and Portecarero in 7 categories, and educational level (in 4 categories) in 1975 have been studied. The analysis has been conducted for 15 cancer sites among men and 13 among women. Analysis used a Cox proportional hazards model.Results: For educational level, inequalities among men were more pronounced for cancers of the pharynx Relative Risk (RR) lowest versus highest educational level=9.2, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 2.9–29.1, larynx (RR=6.2, CI=3.0:12.6), oral cavity (RR=2.7, CI=1.3–5.3), lung (RR=3.5, CI=2.5–4.8), esophagus (RR=3.1, CI=1.9–5.2), stomach (RR=2.5, CI=1.2–5.3) and rectum (RR=3.4, CI=1.2–9.6). No association between educational level and cancer mortality was observed for cancers of either the colon or lymphatic and hematopoietic tissue. Social inequalities were less pronounced among women but nevertheless observed for cancer of the uterus (RR=1.9, CI=1.0–3.6), stomach (RR=4.1, CI=1.0–17.1) and lung (RR=1.6, CI=0.7–3.7). No associations were found for mortality from breast or ovarian cancers. Results were similar when socioeconomic status was measured by occupational class.Conclusion: The analysis showed substantial inequalities in cancer mortality in France, with large differences according to cancer site.†for the EDISC groupEDISC group members are listed at the end of this article.     

Deprivation,stage at diagnosis and cancer survival

The association between an area-based measure of deprivation and survival from the 10 most common cancers was studied in 155,682 patients diagnosed between 1980 and 1989 in the area covered by the South Thames Regional Health Authority. Furthermore, the impact of stage of disease at diagnosis on this association was studied. The measure of deprivation was the Car-stairs Index of the census enumeration district of each patient's residence at diagnosis (5 categories) and the cancers studied were: lung, breast, colorectum, bladder, prostate, stomach, pancreas, ovary, uterus and cervix. In the univariate analyses the measure of outcome was the relative survival rate and in the multivariate analyses it was the hazard ratio. Both univariate and multivariate analyses showed that patients from affluent areas had better survival than patients from deprived areas for cancers of the lung, breast, colorectum, bladder, prostate, uterus and cervix. Stage of disease at diagnosis did not explain the survival differences by deprivation category. For cancers of the stomach, pancreas and ovary, no variation in survival by deprivation category was found. For most cancer sites, a clear gradient in survival by deprivation category was observed, which implies a large potential reduction of cancer mortality among the lower socioeconomic groups. Future studies need to incorporate other possible explanatory factors, besides stage, of the association between deprivation and survival.     

Cancer prevalence in France: time trend, situation in 2002 and extrapolation to 2012

BackgroundCancer prevalence is a basic indicator of the cancer burden in a population and essential to estimate the resources needed for care of cancer patients. This paper provides a prevalence estimate for 2002 and 2012 in France and an assessment of the trend in prevalence over the period 1993–2002.MethodIncidence and survival data from French cancer registries were used to estimate specific 5-year partial prevalence rates that were then applied to the whole French population.ResultsIn 2002, the 5-year partial prevalence was over 427,000 in men and 409,000 in women. The most frequent cancer site among men was prostate (35% of the cases) and breast in women (45% of the cases). In 2002, in France, more than 3.5% of men over 74 years old are alive with a prostatic cancer diagnosed within 5 years. The increase in the number of cases between 1993 and 2002 was about 40% and was mainly due to prostate and breast cancers. The demographic variations alone induce an increase of the number of prevalent cases of 75,000 among men and 54,500 among women if both incidence and survival are considered as stable during the period 2002–2012.ConclusionThis study uses a large amount of information from cancer registries which makes it possible to assess the cancer burden. Five-year prevalence is very sensitive to changes in incidence and demographic changes. Prevalence has to be estimated regularly in order to ensure accurate medical care meets demand.     

National estimates of cancer patients survival in Italy: a model-based method

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: To provide model-based estimates of all cancers patient survival in Italy and in Italian large geographical areas (North-West, North-East, Center, South), where only partial coverage of cancer registries data is available, and to describe them in terms of time trends. Moreover, to measure the degree of representativeness of cancer patient survival obtained from Italian cancer registries data. METHODS: Relative survival in the four main Italian geographical areas was estimated by a parametric mixture model belonging to the class of "cure" survival models. Data used are from Italian cancer registries, stratified by sex, period of diagnosis and age. The Italian national survival was obtained as a weighted average of these area-specific estimates, with weights proportional to the number of estimated incident cases in every area. The model takes into account also differences in survival temporal trends between the areas. RESULTS: Relative survival for all cancers combined in Italian patients diagnosed in 1990-1994 was estimated to be higher in women (53%) than in men (38%) at 5 years from the diagnosis. The survival trend is increasing by period and decreasing by age, both for men and women. The greatest gain in terms of survival was obtained by the elderly, with annual mean growth rates in the period 1978-1994 equal to 3.5% and 3.2% for men and women, respectively. More than 50% of the youngest cancer patients were "cured", whereas for the elderly this proportion dropped to 15% and 25% for men and women, respectively. The South of Italy had the lowest survival and the North the most pronounced increase. CONCLUSIONS: The obtained national survival estimates are similar, but not identical, to previously published estimates, in which Italian registries' data were pooled without any adjustment for geographical representativeness. The four Italian areas have different survival levels and trends, showing variability within the country. The differences in survival between men and women may be explained by the different proportion of lethal cancers. Among males, most cases had a poor prognosis (lung and stomach cancers), whereas among females the largest proportion was made up of curable and less lethal cancers (breast cancer).     

Disparities in cancer incidence by area-level socioeconomic status in the French West Indies

Purpose

Social inequalities in cancer incidence and mortality have been reported in France, but no data are available for the French overseas territories. Our objective was to explore the association between cancer incidence and the socioeconomic level of the residence area in the French West Indies.

Methods

Cancer incidence data were obtained from the cancer registries of Guadeloupe and Martinique (2009–2010). To assess socioeconomic status, we developed a specific index of social deprivation from census data at a small area level. We used Bayesian methods to evaluate the association between cancer incidence and the deprivation index, for all cancers combined and for the major cancer sites.

Results

There was no clear association between area-based deprivation and the incidence of all cancers combined. In men, higher area deprivation was associated with a higher incidence of prostate cancer (relative risk (RR) 1.25, 95% credible interval (CI) 1.04–1.49; RR 1.08, CI 0.91–1.29 in the categories of intermediate and high deprivation, respectively, compared to low deprivation), but was not associated with respiratory cancer. Women living in the most deprived areas had a higher incidence of stomach (RR 1.77, CI 1.12–2.89), breast (RR 1.15, CI 0.90–1.45), and cervical (RR 1.13, CI 0.63–2.01) cancers and a lower incidence of respiratory cancer (RR 0.65, CI 0.38–1.11).

Conclusion

These first results in the French West Indies suggest specific patterns for some cancer sites that need to be further investigated.

     

Cancer Prevalence in Aichi,Japan for 2012: Estimates Based on Incidence and Survival Data from Population-Based Cancer Registry

Background: Cancer is the leading cause of death among both men and women in Japan. Monitoring cancer prevalence is important because prevalence data play a critical role in the development and implementation of health policy. We estimated cancer prevalence in 2012 based on cancer incidence and 5-year survival rate in Aichi Prefecture using data from a population-based cancer registry, the Aichi Cancer Registry, which covers 7.4 million people. Methods: The annual number of incident cases between 2008 and 2012 was used. Survival data of patients diagnosed in 2006–2008 and followed up until the end of 2012 were selected for survival analysis. Cancer prevalence was estimated from incidence and year-specific survival probabilities. Cancer prevalence was stratified by sex, cancer site (25 major cancers), and age group at diagnosis. Results: The estimated prevalence for all cancers in 2012 was 68,013 cases among men, 52,490 cases among women, with 120,503 cases for both sexes. Colorectal cancer was the most incident cancer with 6,654 cases, accounting for 16.0% of overall incident cases, followed by stomach cancer with 5,749 cases (13.8%) and lung cancer with 5,593 cases (13.4%). Prostate cancer was the most prevalent among men, accounting for 21.5%, followed by colorectal and stomach cancers. Breast cancer was the most prevalent among women, accounting for 28.6%, followed by colorectal, stomach, and uterine cancers. Conclusion: This study provides cancer prevalence data that could serve as useful essential information for local governments in cancer management, to carry out more practical and reasonable countermeasures for cancer.     

Educational differences in cancer mortality among women and men: a gender pattern that differs across Europe

We used longitudinal mortality data sets for the 1990s to compare socioeconomic inequalities in total cancer mortality between women and men aged 30-74 in 12 different European populations (Madrid, Basque region, Barcelona, Slovenia, Turin, Switzerland, France, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland) and to investigate which cancer sites explain the differences found. We measured socioeconomic status using educational level and computed relative indices of inequality (RII). We observed large variations within Europe for educational differences in total cancer mortality among men and women. Three patterns were observed: Denmark, Norway and Sweden (significant RII around 1.3-1.4 among both men and women); France, Switzerland, Belgium and Finland (significant RII around 1.7-1.8 among men and around 1.2 among women); Spanish populations, Slovenia and Turin (significant RII from 1.29 to 1.88 among men; no differences among women except in the Basque region, where RII is significantly lower than 1). Lung, upper aerodigestive tract and breast cancers explained most of the variations between gender and populations in the magnitude of inequalities in total cancer mortality. Given time trends in cancer mortality, the gap in the magnitude of socioeconomic inequalities in cancer mortality between gender and between European populations will probably decrease in the future.     

Cancer statistics for African American/Black People 2022

African American/Black individuals have a disproportionate cancer burden, including the highest mortality and the lowest survival of any racial/ethnic group for most cancers. Every 3 years, the American Cancer Society estimates the number of new cancer cases and deaths for Black people in the United States and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence (herein through 2018), mortality (through 2019), survival, screening, and risk factors using population-based data from the National Cancer Institute and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2022, there will be approximately 224,080 new cancer cases and 73,680 cancer deaths among Black people in the United States. During the most recent 5-year period, Black men had a 6% higher incidence rate but 19% higher mortality than White men overall, including an approximately 2-fold higher risk of death from myeloma, stomach cancer, and prostate cancer. The overall cancer mortality disparity is narrowing between Black and White men because of a steeper drop in Black men for lung and prostate cancers. However, the decline in prostate cancer mortality in Black men slowed from 5% annually during 2010 through 2014 to 1.3% during 2015 through 2019, likely reflecting the 5% annual increase in advanced-stage diagnoses since 2012. Black women have an 8% lower incidence rate than White women but a 12% higher mortality; further, mortality rates are 2-fold higher for endometrial cancer and 41% higher for breast cancer despite similar or lower incidence rates. The wide breast cancer disparity reflects both later stage diagnosis (57% localized stage vs 67% in White women) and lower 5-year survival overall (82% vs 92%, respectively) and for every stage of disease (eg, 20% vs 30%, respectively, for distant stage). Breast cancer surpassed lung cancer as the leading cause of cancer death among Black women in 2019. Targeted interventions are needed to reduce stark cancer inequalities in the Black community.     

Socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival in England after the NHS cancer plan

Background:

Socioeconomic inequalities in survival were observed for many cancers in England during 1981–1999. The NHS Cancer Plan (2000) aimed to improve survival and reduce these inequalities. This study examines trends in the deprivation gap in cancer survival after implementation of the Plan.

Materials and method:

We examined relative survival among adults diagnosed with 1 of 21 common cancers in England during 1996–2006, followed up to 31 December 2007. Three periods were defined: 1996–2000 (before the Cancer Plan), 2001–2003 (initialisation) and 2004–2006 (implementation). We estimated the difference in survival between the most deprived and most affluent groups (deprivation gap) at 1 and 3 years after diagnosis, and the change in the deprivation gap both within and between these periods.

Results:

Survival improved for most cancers, but inequalities in survival were still wide for many cancers in 2006. Only the deprivation gap in 1-year survival narrowed slightly over time. A majority of the socioeconomic disparities in survival occurred soon after a cancer diagnosis, regardless of the cancer prognosis.

Conclusion:

The recently observed reduction in the deprivation gap was minor and limited to 1-year survival, suggesting that, so far, the Cancer Plan has little effect on those inequalities. Our findings highlight that earlier diagnosis and rapid access to optimal treatment should be ensured for all socioeconomic groups.     

International lung cancer trends by histologic type: male:female differences diminishing and adenocarcinoma rates rising

Lung cancer rates have peaked among men in many areas of the world, but rates among women continue to rise. Most lung cancers are squamous cell carcinoma, small cell carcinoma, or adenocarcinoma; trends vary according to type. We compiled population-based morphology-specific incidence data from registries contributing to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) databases. Unspecified cancers and carcinomas were reallocated based on a registry, time period, sex and age group-specific basis. Where available, data from several registries within a country were pooled for analysis. Rates per 100,000 person-years for 1980-1982 to 1995-1997 were age-adjusted by the direct method using the world standard. Squamous cell carcinoma rates among males declined 30% or more in North America and some European countries while changing less dramatically in other areas; small cell carcinoma rates decreased less rapidly. Squamous and small cell carcinoma rates among females generally rose, with the increases especially pronounced in the Netherlands and Norway. In contrast, adenocarcinoma rates rose among males and females in virtually all areas, with the increases among males exceeding 50% in many areas of Europe; among females, rates also rose rapidly and more than doubled in Norway, Italy and France. Rates of all lung cancer types among women and adenocarcinoma among men continue to rise despite declining cigarette use in many Western countries and shifts to filtered/low-tar cigarettes. Renewed efforts toward cessation and prevention are mandatory to curb the prevalence of cigarette smoking and to reduce lung cancer rates eventually.     

Survival of cancer patients diagnosed between 1993 and 1996: a collaborative study of population-based cancer registries in Japan

BACKGROUND: Survival of cancer patients has been measured only in some limited areas in Japan until recently. The purpose of the present study was to collect data of fairly high quality on the population-based cancer registries and to estimate relative 5-year survival of cancer patients in Japan. METHODS: We requested 11 population-based cancer registries within the research group to submit individual data of the patients diagnosed from 1993 to 1996, together with the prognosis after 5 years, to the collaborative study secretariat. Ten population-based cancer registries (Miyagi, Yamagata, Niigata, Chiba, Kanagawa, Fukui, Aichi, Osaka, Tottori and Nagasaki) then accepted data submission (373,000 data). Among 10 registries, only 7 registries met the required standards for the quality of registration data and prognosis investigation. The relative 5-year survival calculated by pooling 279,000 data from seven registries was taken as the national estimate of that of cancer patients in Japan. RESULTS: The relative 5-year survival was 53.6% for all cancers (males: 49.2%, females: 59.4%); the survivals of stomach, large bowel, prostate and kidney cancer patients were from 62 to 68%; those of breast, uterus, larynx, skin, testis, bladder and thyroid cancer patients were from 74 to 92%; those of liver, gall bladder and bile duct, pancreas and lung cancer patients ranged from 6 to 23%. CONCLUSION: On the basis of the data from seven population-based cancer registries in Japan, we calculated the relative 5-year survival of cancer patients diagnosed from 1993 to 1996 for the first time.     

The cancer survival gap between elderly and middle-aged patients in Europe is widening

The present study is aimed to compare survival and prognostic changes over time between elderly (70–84 years) and middle-aged cancer patients (55–69 years). We considered seven cancer sites (stomach, colon, breast, cervix and corpus uteri, ovary and prostate) and all cancers combined (but excluding prostate and non-melanoma skin cancers). Five-year relative survival was estimated for cohorts of patients diagnosed in 1988–1999 in a pool of 51 European populations covered by cancer registries. Furthermore, we applied the period-analysis method to more recent incidence data from 32 cancer registries to provide 1- and 5-year relative survival estimates for the period of follow-up 2000–2002.A significant survival improvement was observed from 1988 to 1999 for all cancers combined and for every cancer site, except cervical cancer. However, survival increased at a slower rate in the elderly, so that the gap between younger and older patients widened, particularly for prostate cancer in men and for all considered cancers except cervical cancer in women. For breast and prostate cancers, the increasing gap was likely attributable to a larger use of, respectively, mammographic screening and PSA test in middle-aged with respect to the elderly. In the period analysis of the most recent data, relative survival was much higher in middle-aged patients than in the elderly. The differences were higher for breast and gynaecological cancers, and for prostate cancer. Most of this age gap was due to a very large difference in survival after the 1st year following the diagnosis. Differences were much smaller for conditional 5-year relative survival among patients who had already survived the first year.The increase of survival in elderly men is encouraging but the lesser improvement in women and, in particular, the widening gap for breast cancer suggest that many barriers still delay access to care and that enhanced prevention and clinical management remain major issues.     

Changes over time in socioeconomic inequalities in breast and rectal cancer survival in England and Wales during a 32-year period (1973–2004): the potential role of health care

BackgroundSocioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival are well documented but they vary for different cancers and over time. Reasons for these differences are poorly understood.Patients and methodsFor England and Wales, we examined trends in socioeconomic survival inequalities for breast cancer in women and rectal cancer in men during the 32-year period 1973–2004. We used a theoretical framework based on Victora's ‘inverse equity’ law, under which survival inequalities could change with the advent of successive new treatments, of varying effectiveness, which are disseminated with different speed among patients of different socioeconomic groups. We estimated 5-year relative survival for patients of different deprivation quintiles and examined trends in survival inequalities in light of major treatment innovations.ResultsInequalities in breast cancer survival (921,611 cases) narrowed steadily during the study (from -10% to -6%). In contrast, inequalities in rectal cancer survival (187,104 cases) widened overall (form -5% to -11%) with fluctuating periods of narrowing inequality.ConclusionsTrends in socioeconomic differences in tumour or patient factors are unlikely explanations of observed changes over time in survival inequalities. The sequential introduction into clinical practice of new treatments of progressively smaller incremental benefit may partly explain the reduction in inequality in breast cancer survival.