ArticleJournal of registry management2025
The Effect of Persistent Poverty on Cancer Outcomes in California.
Article in Journal of registry management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients diagnosed with cancer in persistent poverty areas (PPAs) are more likely to present with advanced-stage disease and experience decreased survival compared to those in more affluent regions nationally. However, prior studies have not considered the independent effects of PPAs on stage at diagnosis and survival in California, which could inform efforts to improve cancer outcomes. Methods: We identified patients (≥15 years) newly diagnosed with nine cancers (female breast, prostate, lung, colorectal, cutaneous melanoma, oropharyngeal, liver, stomach, and cervical) from 2006 to 2020 in the California Cancer Registry. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the association between living in PPAs (defined as having a poverty rate ≥20% for approximately 30 continuous years) and late-stage diagnosis (regional/distant versus in situ/localized). We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression to evaluate the effect of PPA on overall survival. Results: Among the 1,706,573 patients in the cohort, 6.0% (101,820) resided in PPAs. More patients in PPAs were younger, non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic, had public or no insurance, and lived in rural areas. Those living in PPAs (versus non-PPAs) had greater odds of late-stage diagnoses for all cancer types (adjusted odds ratios ranged from 1.09 to 1.46, p<0.02), except stomach. Across all cancer types, patients in PPAs had worse survival, even after considering stage at diagnosis and other factors (adjusted hazard ratios ranged from 1.05 to 1.35, p>0.01). Conclusion: Our findings of worse outcomes for patients living in PPAs highlight the need for more targeted interventions, such as education about cancer screening and funding to support improved access to healthcare in these areas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42110489PMC13151751What 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.