ArticlePloS one2017
Effects of socioeconomic status on esophageal adenocarcinoma stage at diagnosis, receipt of treatment, and survival: A population-based cohort study.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Socioeconomic Disparities in the Progression of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Barrett's Esophagus to Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.Annals of surgery · 2026Article
- Does robotic-assisted esophagectomy improve outcomes compared to other techniques? An NCDB analysis of access and disparities.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- The Impact of Distance and Income on Pediatric Solid Extracranial Tumors: A Report From CYP-C.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- The impact of high-risk zip code on receiving standard of care therapy and survival in esophageal adenocarcinoma.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Impact of Residing in Below Median Household Income Districts on Outcomes in Patients with Advanced Barrett's Esophagus.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Socioeconomic Deprivation Is Not Associated with Outcomes after Esophagectomy at a German High-Volume Center.Cancers · 2023Article
- Article
- The Influence of Socioeconomic Status on Esophageal Cancer in Taiwan: A Population-Based Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Impact of socio-demographic co-variates on prognosis, tyrosine kinase-inhibitor use and outcomes in persons with newly-diagnosed chronic myeloid leukaemia.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2022Article
- Article
- Care of acute conditions and chronic diseases in Canada and the United States: Rapid systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of public health research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is increasing worldwide and has overtaken squamous histology in occurrence. We studied the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on EAC stage at diagnosis, receipt of treatment, and survival. A population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using Ontario Cancer Registry-linked administrative health data. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine the association between SES (income quintile) and stage at EAC diagnosis and EAC treatment. Survival times following EAC diagnosis were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis was used to examine the association between SES and EAC survival. Between 2003-2012, 2,125 EAC cases were diagnosed. Median survival for the lowest-SES group was 10.9 months compared to 11.6 months for the highest-SES group; the 5-year survival was 9.8% vs. 15.0%. Compared to individuals in the highest-SES group, individuals in the lowest-SES category experienced no significant difference in EAC treatment (91.6% vs. 93.3%, P = 0.314) and deaths (78.9% vs. 75.6%, P = 0.727). After controlling for covariates, no significant associations were found between SES and cancer stage at diagnosis and EAC treatment. Additionally, after controlling for age, gender, urban/rural residence, birth country, health region, aggregated diagnosis groups, cancer stage, treatment, and year of diagnosis, no significant association was found between SES and EAC survival. Moreover, increased mortality risk was observed among those with older age (P = 0.001), advanced-stage of EAC at diagnosis (P < 0.001), and those receiving chemotherapy alone, radiotherapy alone, or surgery plus chemotherapy (P < 0.001). Adjusted proportional-hazards model findings suggest that there is no association between SES and EAC survival. While the unadjusted model suggests reduced survival among individuals in lower income quintiles, this is no longer significant after adjusting for any covariate. Additionally, there is an apparent association between SES and survival when considering only those individuals diagnosed with stage 0-III EAC. These analyses suggest that the observed direct relationship between SES and survival is explained by patient-level factors including receipt of treatment, something that is potentially modifiable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.