84 Chapter 3 Table 1. Characteristics invitees and cancer cases, concerning the breast cancer screening programme. Total invitees (n=106,377) Invitees with BC (n=3,820) Attendance group* Attenders Non-attenders Attenders Non-attenders Proportion % (n) 61.9 (65,853) 38.1 (40,524) 50.6 (1,932) 49.4 (1,888) Year of birth Median (25-75%) 1953 (1945–1960) 1955 (1945–1962) 1948 (1942-1954) 1950 (1944–1957) Age at diagnosis Median (25-75%) - - 65 (59-71) 60 (54-67) Neighbourhood SES-score n % n % n % n % 1 17,656 30.5 12,813 38.4 520 27.9 560 31.0 2 12,127 21.0 6,829 20.5 391 20.9 398 22.0 3 4,488 7.8 2,301 6.9 145 7.8 132 7.3 4 23,539 40.7 11,384 34.2 811 43.4 718 39.7 Unknown 8,043 7,197 65 80 BC= breast cancer, SES= social economic status (SES 1: low; SES 4: high) *Attenders: people who participated in >50%, after being invited. Non-attenders: people who participated in ≤50%, after being invited. The neighbourhood SES-score differed statistically significant between attenders and non-attenders (Likelihood Ratio test: p<.01). Women living in a neighbourhood with the highest SES-scores, were more likely to participate (ascending ORs from 1.29 to 1.50; for SES-2 to SES-4, compared to SES-1). The neighbourhood SES-scores were not statistical different between the different attendance-groups with BC (Likelihood Ratio test: p=.08). Despite, people living in a SES-4 neighbourhood were more likely to participate (OR 1.22), compared to people living a SES-1 neighbourhood. Attendance was associated with a lower BC-stage (declining ORs from 0.95 to 0.15). In addition, when the interaction effect for both independent variables was determined, non-attenders were more likely to live in neighbourhoods with lower SES-score and had the more unfavourable cancer stages as an outcome (Likelihood Ratio test: p<.01) (Table 2).3
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw