medigraphic.com
Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública

2003, Number S3

<< Back Next >>

salud publica mex 2003; 45 (S3)

Cervical cancer, a disease of poverty: Mortality differences between urban and rural areas in Mexico

Palacio-Mejía LS, Rangel-Gómez G, Hernández-Ávila M, Lazcano-Ponce E

Language: English
References: 31
Page: 315-325
PDF size: 195.28 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective. To examine cervical cancer mortality rates in Mexican urban and rural communities, and their association with poverty-related factors, during 1990-2000. Material and Methods: We analyzed data from national databases to obtain mortality trends and regional variations using a Poisson regression model based on location (urban-rural). Results. During 1990-2000 a total of 48 761 cervical cancer (CC) deaths were reported in Mexico (1990=4 280 deaths/year; 2000=4 620 deaths/year). On average, 12 women died every 24 hours, with 0.76% yearly annual growth in CC deaths. Women living in rural areas had 3.07 higher CC mortality risks compared to women with urban residence. Comparison of state CC mortality rates (reference=Mexico City) found higher risk in states with lower socio-economic development (Chiapas, relative risk [RR]=10.99; Nayarit, RR=10.5). Predominantly rural states had higher CC mortality rates compared to Mexico City (lowest rural population). Conclusions. CC mortality is associated with poverty-related factors, including lack of formal education, unemployment, low socioeconomic level, rural residence and insufficient access to healthcare. This indicates the need for eradication of regional differences in cancer detection.


REFERENCES

  1. Sloggett A, Joshi H. Higher mortality in deprived areas: Community or personal disadvantage? BMJ 1994;309:1470-1474.

  2. Soe MN. Screening for cervical cancer in developing countries. BMJ 1992;304:534-535.

  3. Parkin M, Pisani P, Ferlay J. Estimates of the worldwide incidence of 25 major cancers in 1990. Int J Cancer 1999; 80:827-841.

  4. Shavers VL, Brown M. Racial and ethnic disparities in the receipt of cancer treatment. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94(5):334-357.

  5. Drain P, Colmes K, Highes J, Koutsky L. Determinants of cervical cancer rates in developing countries. Int J Cancer 2002;100:199-205.

  6. Muñoz N, Franceschi S, Bosetti C, Moreno V, Herrero R, Smith J et al. Role of parity and human papillomavirus in cervical cancer: The IARC multicentric case-control study. Lancet 2002;359:1093-1101.

  7. Bosch X, Muñoz N, De Sanjose S, Guerrero E, Chaffari AM, Kaldor J et al. Importance of human papillomavirus endemicity in the incident of cervical cancer: An extension of the hypothesis on sexual behavior. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1994;3:375-379.

  8. Lazcano-Ponce E, Herrero R, Muñoz N, Hernández-Avila M, Salmerón J, Leyva A et al. High prevalence of human papillomavirus infection in Mexican males. Comparative study of penile-urethral swabs and urine samples. Sex Transm Dis 2001;28(5):277-280.

  9. Berumen J, Ordóñez RM, Lazcano-Ponce E, Salmerón J, Galván SC, Estrada RA et al. Asian American variants of human papillomavirus 16 and risk for cervical cancer: a case-control study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:1325-1330.

  10. Lazcano-Ponce E, Nájera P, Buiatti E, Alonso P, Kuri P, Cantoral L et al. The cervical cancer screening program in Mexico. Problems with access and coverage. Cancer Causes Control 1997;8:698-704.

  11. Lazcano-Ponce E, Buiatti E, Nájera P, Alonso P, Hernández M. Quality evaluation of Mexican National Program for Early Cervical Cancer Detection and proposals for a new approach. Cancer Causes Control 1998;9;241-251.

  12. Lazcano-Ponce EC, Moss S, Cruz-Valdez A, Alonso-de Ruiz P, Cáseres Queralt S, Martínez-León CJ et al. Factores que determinan la participación en el tamizaje de cáncer cervical en el estado de Morelos. Salud Publica Mex 1999;41(4):278-285.

  13. Schneider E. Measuring mortality outcomes to improve health care. Rational use of ratings and rankings. Med Care 2002;40(1):1-3.

  14. Susser M. The logic in ecological: II. The logic of design. Am J Public Health 1994;84:830-835.

  15. Organización Panamericana de la Salud. Clasificación Internacional de Enfermedades. Manual de clasificación y estadística internacional de enfermedades, traumatismos y causas de defunción. Revisión 1975. Washington, DC: OPS, Volumen I, publicación científica No. 353.

  16. Frome EL, Checkoway H. Use of Poisson regression models in estimating incidence rates and ratios. Am J Epidemiol 1985;121:309.

  17. Lazcano-Ponce E, Rascón-Pacheco R, Lozano-Ascencio R, Velasco E. Mortality from carcinoma of the uterine cervix in Mexico: Impact of screening 1980-1990. Acta Cytol 1996;40(3):506-512.

  18. Ries LA, Eisner MP, Kosary CL, Hankey BF, Millar BA, Clegg L et al. Ed. SEER cancer statistics review, 1973-1998. Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute, 2001.

  19. Freeman H. Race, poverty and cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1991;83:526-527.

  20. Coughlin S, Thompson T, Seeff L, Richards T, Stallings F. Breast, cervical, and colorectal carcinoma screening in a demographically defined region of the Southern U.S. Cancer 2002;95(10):2211-2222.

  21. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, Programa Nacional de la Mujer 1995-2000. Alianza para la Igualdad. México, DF: Poder Ejecutivo Federal, 1-109.

  22. Lazcano-Ponce EC, Castro R, Allen B, Nájera P, Alonso-de Ruiz P, Hernández-Avila M. Barriers to early detection of cervical uterine cancer in Mexico. J Women’s Health 1999;8(3):399-408.

  23. Hildesheim A, Herrero R, Castle PE, Wacholder S, Bratti MC, Sherman ME et al. HPV Co-factors related to the development of cervical cancer: Results from a population-based study in Costa Rica. Br J Cancer 2001 May 4;84(9):1219-1226.

  24. Kjellberg L, Hallmans G, Ahren AM, Johansson R, Bergman F, Wadell G et al. Smoking, diet, pregnancy and oral contraceptive use as risk factors for cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia in relation to human papillomavirus infection. Br J Cancer 2000;82:1332-1338.

  25. Signan N. Socioeconomic status and cancer screening. In: Kogevinas M, Pearce N, Susser M, Boffetta P, eds. Social Inequalities in Cancer. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer 1997:369-376.

  26. Lazcano-Ponce EC, Moss S, Alonso-de Ruiz P, Salmerón-Castro J, Hernández-Avila M. Cervical cancer screening in developing countries: Why is it ineffective? The case of Mexico. Arch Med Res 1999;30(3): 240-250.

  27. Challier B, Meslans Y, Viel JF. Deprived areas and attendance to screening of cervix uteri cancer in a French region. Cancer Causes Control 2000;11:157-162.

  28. Sankaranarayanan R, Wesley R, Somanathan T, Dhakad N, Shyamala- Kumary B, Amman S et al. Visual inspection of uterine cervix after the application of acetic acid in the detection of cervical carcinoma and its precursors. Cancer 1998 nov 15; 83(10):2150-2156.

  29. Cuzick J, Sasieni P, Davies P, Adams J, Normand C, Frater A et al. A systematic review of the role of human papillomavirus testing within a cervical screening programme. Health Technol Assess 1999;3(14):1-204.

  30. Cuzick J, Beverley E, Ho L, Terry G, Sapper H, Mielzynska I et al. HPV testing in primary screening of older women. Br J Cancer 1999;81(3):554-558.

  31. Dzuba IG, Yunes-Díaz E, Allen B, Flores-Leonard Y, Lazcano-Ponce EC, Shah K et al. The acceptability of self-collected samples for HPV testing vs. the Pap test as alternatives in cervical cancer screening. J Womens Health Gen Based Med 2002;11(3):265-275.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com