Printer Friendly
The Free Library
22,728,043 articles and books

Comorbid Illness and the Early Detection of Cancer.


Background Comorbidity may be associated with later detection of cancer.

Methods. Incident cases of colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer prostate cancer, cancer originating in the prostate gland. Prostate cancer is the leading malignancy in men in the United States and is second only to lung cancer as a cause of cancer death in men.  and melanoma melanoma: see skin cancer.

Dark-coloured malignant tumour of skin cells that produce the protective skin-darkening pigment melanin.
 were determined from the 1994 Florida state tumor tumor: see neoplasm.  registry (N = 32,074). The relationship between comorbidity and late stage at diagnosis was examined using multiple logistic regression In statistics, logistic regression is a regression model for binomially distributed response/dependent variables. It is useful for modeling the probability of an event occurring as a function of other factors. .

Results. Patients with comorbid conditions had greater odds of late stage diagnosis for each of the four cancers (colorectal, melanoma, breast, and prostate). Higher mortality rates were observed among patients with comorbid illness, not as a result of later stage at diagnosis, but rather due to their underlying disease.

Conclusions. Comorbidity was associated with later stage diagnosis. Further research is needed to determine mechanisms by which comorbidity might influence stage at diagnosis.

COMORBIDHY is defined as the presence of concurrent chronic illnesses. [1] Comorbidity generally increases with advancing age and may be the reason behind age-related differences in cancer diagnosis, treatment, and outcome. [2-7] Because the incidence of most cancers increases with advancing age, it is not surprising that comorbidity has been frequently found among patients with cancer. [8] Comorbidity has often been associated with less aggressive treatment and poor cancer outcomes. [9-15] It is less clear, however, whether comorbidity influences the early detection of cancer.

Comorbidity could influence stage at diagnosis of cancer in a number of ways. Some have argued that comorbidity might mask early symptoms of cancer and lead to later stage diagnosis. [16,17] Comorbidity could also serve as a competing demand for primary care physicians, decreasing the likelihood of cancer screening recommendations. [18] Finally, patients and physicians may place less value on cancer screening in the face of competing causes of morbidity and mortality Morbidity and Mortality can refer to:
  • Morbidity & Mortality, a term used in medicine
  • Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, a medical publication
See also
  • Morbidity, a medical term
  • Mortality, a medical term
. [19] A number of clinic based studies have in fact found lower cancer screening rates among patients having comorbid conditions. [20-22]

On the other hand, some aspects of comorbidity could facilitate cancer screening. Patients having comorbid conditions generally have increased contact with the health care system and thus have more opportunities for preventive care Preventive care is a set of measures taken in advance of symptoms to prevent illness or injury. This type of care is best exemplified by routine physical examinations and immunizations. The emphasis is on preventing illnesses before they occur. See also
  • Public health
. Stange et al [23] found that family physicians delivered some preventive service the duty performed by the armed police in guarding the coast against smuggling.

See also: Preventive
 in 39% of visits for chronic disease. Some population-based studies have shown higher cancer screening rates among patients having comorbidity. [24-26]

Few studies have assessed the impact of comorbidity on cancer stage at diagnosis. Studies by Satariano and Ragland [14] and West et al [15] found trends toward earlier stage at diagnosis of breast cancer for patients having comorbid conditions. These studies were limited by not using multivariate analysis multivariate analysis,
n a statistical approach used to evaluate multiple variables.

multivariate analysis,
n a set of techniques used when variation in several variables has to be studied simultaneously.
 to examine the relationship between comorbidity and stage at diagnosis. A separate study by Satariano [27] with the use of multivariate analysis showed a statistically nonsignificant non·sig·nif·i·cant  
1. Not significant.

2. Having, producing, or being a value obtained from a statistical test that lies within the limits for being of random occurrence.
 trend toward earlier diagnosis for breast cancer patients having comorbidity.

It is unclear, therefore, whether comorbidity affects stage at diagnosis for patients with breast cancer. Whether comorbidity affects the early diagnosis of other cancers amenable to screening also remains unknown. We used administrative data from the state of Florida to determine whether patients having comorbid conditions were more likely to have diagnosis at late stage and if so, whether resultant later stage at diagnosis had an impact on their survival. We hypothesized that cancer in patients having comorbidity would more likely be diagnosed at late stage and that these patients would have poorer survival than those without comorbid conditions.


Data Sources

We studied 1994 Florida incident cases (the most recent year for which all relevant data were available) of four cancers for which screening is associated with detection of early stage disease: colorectal, breast (female only), prostate, and melanoma (N = 34,616). [28-36] Cervical cancer Cervical Cancer Definition

Cervical cancer is a disease in which the cells of the cervix become abnormal and start to grow uncontrollably, forming tumors.
 was not included because of different reporting requirements for this site (in situ In place. When something is "in situ," it is in its original location.  cervical cancers are not reportable). Incident cases were identified from the Florida Cancer Data System (FCDS FCDS Future Common Display System (US Navy Multi-Modal Workstation feature) ), Florida's population-based statewide cancer registry A cancer registry is a systematic collection of data about cancer and tumor diseases. The data is collected by Cancer Registrars. Cancer Registrars capture a complete summary of patient history, diagnosis, treatment, and status for every cancer patient in the United States, and . The FCDS has well-established methods to ensure complete case-finding, including cooperative arrangements with other state tumor registries, linkage with other databases, and ad hoc For this purpose. Meaning "to this" in Latin, it refers to dealing with special situations as they occur rather than functions that are repeated on a regular basis. See ad hoc query and ad hoc mode.  audits of reporting facilities. The FCDS is a member of the North American North American

named after North America.

North American blastomycosis
see North American blastomycosis.

North American cattle tick
see boophilusannulatus.
 Association of Central Cancer Registries, whose audits have estimated the completeness of case ascertainment for the period 1990 to 1994 to be 97%.

To include information that is not routinely available from the FCDS (insurance payer, comorbidity, socioeconomic status socioeconomic status,
n the position of an individual on a socio-economic scale that measures such factors as education, income, type of occupation, place of residence, and in some populations, ethnicity and religion.
, urban/ nonurban residence), cases were linked with state discharge abstracts and the 1990 US Census. The State of Florida Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA AHCA Agency for Health Care Administration
AHCA American Health Care Association
AHCA American Hockey Coaches Association
AHCA American Highland Cattle Association
AHCA Australian Health Care Agreement
AHCA Austin Healey Club of America
) maintains discharge abstracts for admissions to all nonfederal acute care hospitals, and patient visits to ambulatory surgical centers, freestanding free·stand·ing  
Standing or operating independently of anything else: a freestanding bell tower; a freestanding maternity clinic.
 radiation therapy centers, and diagnostic imaging centers. Data abstracted include Social Security number, date of birth, sex, race-ethnicity, discharge diagnoses (up to 10), procedures done (up to 10), and insurance payer. The methods of linking FCDS and AHCA records have been previously described [37] and resulted in a match rate of 82.8%, a rate similar to that achieved in a comparable study. [28]

The 1990 United States Census The United States Census is a decennial census mandated by the United States Constitution.[1] The population is enumerated every 10 years and the results are used to allocate Congressional seats ("congressional apportionment"), electoral votes, and government program  was used to obtain aggregate measures of socioeconomic status by either Census tract A census tract, census area, or census district is a particular community defined for the purpose of taking a census. Usually these coincide with the limits of cities, towns or other administrative areas and several tracts commonly exist within a county.  or, if unavailable, by ZIP code zip code

System of postal-zone codes (zip stands for “zone improvement plan”) introduced in the U.S. in 1963 to improve mail delivery and exploit electronic reading and sorting capabilities.
. Each individual was assigned the median income and education level of either the Census tract (87% of cases) or ZIP code (13% of cases) of their residence. The use of Census-derived measures of socioeconomic status have been validated in previous studies. [39-12] Patients were defined as having an urban residence if they lived in a ZIP code that was classified as 100% urban by the US Census. Patients were defined as having nonurban residence if they lived in a ZIP code that contained outside urban or rural components.

Stage at diagnosis was defined using the SEER Site-Specific Summary Staging Guide. [43] Stage at diagnosis is based on a combination of pathologic pathologic /patho·log·ic/ (path?ah-loj´ik)
1. indicative of or caused by some morbid condition.

2. pertaining to pathology.
, operative, and clinical assessments available within 2 months of diagnosis. Stage categories included in situ, local (invasive disease confined con·fine  
v. con·fined, con·fin·ing, con·fines
1. To keep within bounds; restrict: Please confine your remarks to the issues at hand. See Synonyms at limit.
 to the organ of origin), regional (direct spread to adjacent structures or regional lymph nodes Lymph nodes
Small, bean-shaped masses of tissue scattered along the lymphatic system that act as filters and immune monitors, removing fluids, bacteria, or cancer cells that travel through the lymph system.
), and distant (distant metastases Metastasis (plural, metastases)
A tumor growth or deposit that has spread via lymph or blood to an area of the body remote from the primary tumor.

Mentioned in: Malignant Melanoma
). For these analyses, stage at diagnosis was reclassified as either early stage (insitu, local) or late stage (regional, distant). Stage at diagnosis was available for 32,074 FCDS cases (92.7% of all cases: colon 93.5%, melanoma 93.6%, breast 95.5%, prostate 88.9%). Vital status was assessed through December 31, 1997, using FCDS-derived mortality files. The length of time from diagnosis to death, or until the last follow-up contact, was measured in months.

Comorbidity was determined using methods described by Deyo et al [44] and Charison et al. [45] The Charlson comorbidity index was chosen because it has been validated specifically in studies of cancer patients. [15] The Charlson comorbidity index is not an exhaustive list of all possible comorbid conditions but is rather a weighted index of 19 selected categories of disease that were found to be associated with mortality and other important health outcomes. Charlson comorbid conditions (and their corresponding weightings) include myocardial infarction myocardial infarction: see under infarction.  (1), congestive heart failure congestive heart failure, inability of the heart to expel sufficient blood to keep pace with the metabolic demands of the body. In the healthy individual the heart can tolerate large increases of workload for a considerable length of time.  (1), peripheral vascular disease Peripheral Vascular Disease Definition

Peripheral vascular disease is a narrowing of blood vessels that restricts blood flow. It mostly occurs in the legs, but is sometimes seen in the arms.
 (1), cerebrovascular disease cerebrovascular disease Neurology Any vascular disease affecting cerebral arteries–eg ASHD, diabetic vasculopathy, HTN, which may cause a CVA or TIA with neurologic sequelae–speech, vision, movement of variable duration.  (1), dementia (1), chronic pulmonary disease (1), connective tissue disease connective tissue disease Autoimmune disease, collagen-vascular disease Any of the diseases affecting connective tissues, with an autoimmune component, and immunologic/inflammatory defects Clinical Arthritis, connective tissue defects, endocarditis, myositis,  (1), peptic ulcer disease Peptic ulcer disease (PUD)
A stomach disorder marked by corrosion of the stomach lining due to the acid in the digestive juices.

Mentioned in: Indigestion

peptic ulcer disease See Duodenal ulcer, Gastric ulcer, GERD.
 (1), mild liver disease Liver Disease Definition

Liver disease is a general term for any damage that reduces the functioning of the liver.

The liver is a large, solid organ located in the upper right-hand side of the abdomen.
 (1), moderate/severe liver disease (3), diabetes without complications (1), diabetes with complications (2), hemiplegia hemiplegia /hemi·ple·gia/ (-ple´jah) paralysis of one side of the body.hemiple´gic

alternate hemiplegia  paralysis of one side of the face and the opposite side of the body.
 (2), renal disease Renal disease
Kidney disease.

Mentioned in: Glycogen Storage Diseases

hypertension High blood pressure Cardiovascular disease An abnormal ↑ systemic arterial pressure, corresponding to a systolic BP of > 160 mm Hg
 (2), and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, see AIDS.  (6). Increasing scores on the Charlson comorbidity index reflect an increasing burden of comorbid conditions. [15,45,46]

We identified Charlson comorbid conditions using all inpatient and ambulatory discharge abstracts for the calendar year 1994. We used methods described by Deyo et al [44] that were specifically developed to measure Charlson comorbidity from administrative databases. Patients having no Charlson comorbid condition identified in discharge abstracts were assigned a comorbidity score of zero, as were patients who had no record of inpatient or outpatient admissions during the calendar year. We created two variables related to comorbidity: a dichotomous di·chot·o·mous  
1. Divided or dividing into two parts or classifications.

2. Characterized by dichotomy.

 variable indicating the presence or absence of comorbid conditions and a second categorical That which is unqualified or unconditional.

A categorical imperative is a rule, command, or moral obligation that is absolutely and universally binding.

Categorical is also used to describe programs limited to or designed for certain classes of people.
 variable defined by three levels of comorbidity (0, 1, 2+) based on the patient's index score.

Data Analysis

All analyses were conducted separately by site. The proportion of cases diagnosed at a late stage (regional or distant) was first compared for patients having any comorbid condition using the chi-square test chi-square test: see statistics. . We then used the Mantel-Haenszel [[chi].sup.2] test for trend to examine whether the likelihood of late stage diagnosis increased with increasing severity of overall comorbidity.

The multivariate The use of multiple variables in a forecasting model.  relationship between late stage at diagnosis and comorbidity was then examined using multiple logistic regression. Indicator variables were created for the presence or absence of comorbid conditions, and for the three comorbid index categories (0, 1, 2+). Based on previous research, the following variables were included in all logistic models logistic models, statistical models that describe the relationship between a qualitative dependent variable (that is, one that can take only certain discrete values, such as the presence or absence of a disease) and an independent variable.
 to control for potential confounding confounding

when the effects of two, or more, processes on results cannot be separated, the results are said to be confounded, a cause of bias in disease studies.

confounding factor
: age, sex (if appropriate), race-ethnicity, marital status marital status,
n the legal standing of a person in regard to his or her marriage state.
, educational level, income level, urban residence, and insurance payer. [47-49] The statistical significance of individual indicator variables was assessed using the chi-square likelihood ratio test. [50]

To determine whether findings might differ, we also repeated logistic models with cases restricted to invasive cancers only. For colorectal, breast, and prostate cancers, we also repeated analyses with cases restricted to ages for which screening is most often recommended and for which physician agreement is high (ages 50 to 75 years) We also repeated analyses after excluding those FCDS cases that did not match with inpatient and ambulatory discharge abstracts.

Survival was examined for patients having Charlson comorbid conditions compared with those who did not. Survival curves were constructed using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method. [54] The duration of potential follow-up varied from 36 months to a maximum of 48 months; depending on the patient's date of diagnosis. Survival curves were compared using the Mantel-Cox log-rank test. [54] We examined the adjusted risk of death from all-cause mortality for patients with and without comorbidity using Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis In statistics, a mathematical method of modeling the relationships among three or more variables. It is used to predict the value of one variable given the values of the others. For example, a model might estimate sales based on age and gender. . Hazard rates were adjusted for other factors that might be associated with mortality, including age, sex, marital status, smoking status, cancer stage at diagnosis, and community measures of socioeconomic status. To determine the degree to which greater mortality among patients with comorbidity was the result of later stage at diagnosis, we repeated models both with and without variables for stage at diagnosis. We did not have data on the cause of death to allow analysis o f cancer specific mortality.

All analysis was conducted using SAS (1) (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, A software company that specializes in data warehousing and decision support software based on the SAS System. Founded in 1976, SAS is one of the world's largest privately held software companies. See SAS System.  statistical software (LOGISTIC, LIFETEST, PHREG procedures). [55] We present 95% confidence intervals confidence interval,
n a statistical device used to determine the range within which an acceptable datum would fall. Confidence intervals are usually expressed in percentages, typically 95% or 99%.
 for adjusted odds and risk ratios and unless specified, all P values are two-tailed. Statistical significance was determined using an [alpha] level of .05.


Study Population

The study population consisted of the 32,074 Florida residents who had colorectal, breast, or prostate cancer or melanoma diagnosed in 1994 and for whom information on stage was available (Table 1). Reflecting the demographics The attributes of people in a particular geographic area. Used for marketing purposes, population, ethnic origins, religion, spoken language, income and age range are examples of demographic data.  of the state, most patients were over age 65, and Medicare was the most common type of insurance. The majority of the breast and prostate cancers and melanomas were diagnosed at an early stage (either in situ or local). The majority of colorectal cancers colorectal cancer

Malignant tumour of the large intestine (colon) or rectum. Risk factors include age (after age 50), family history of colorectal cancer, chronic inflammatory bowel diseases, benign polyps, physical inactivity, and a diet high in fat.
, however, were diagnosed at a late stage (either regional or distant).

The percentage of patients having Charlson comorbid conditions varied from 7% for melanoma to 30% for colorectal cancer (Table 1). Patients having any comorbid condition were more likely to have diagnosis at late stage for each of the four cancer sites examined (Table 2). For breast and prostate cancer, the likelihood of late stage diagnosis increased in a dose-response fashion with increasing levels of comorbidity. This was not the case for patients with colorectal cancer or melanoma. In multivariate analysis, the presence of any comorbid condition was a significant predictor of late stage diagnosis for all four cancer sites that were examined (Table 3). The magnitude of the effect ranged from 17% greater odds of late stage diagnosis for colorectal cancer to a 62% increased odds of late stage diagnosis for patients with melanoma. Again, only for breast and prostate cancers did the effects of comorbidity demonstrate a dose-response, patients with comorbidity scores of 2 or greater having greater likelihood o f late stage diagnosis than patients with a score of 1.

Results were similar to those described when logistic models were repeated with cases restricted to invasive cancers only. In addition, results did not vary when cases were restricted to ages for which screening is most often recommended (ages 50 to 75 years) or when unmatched FCDS cases were excluded from the analysis (data not presented). We also did not find evidence of statistical interaction between the effects of comorbidity and other patient characteristics (age, sex, race-ethnicity).

Survival for patients with and without Charlson comorbidity is presented in Figures 1 through 4. For each cancer type examined, the proportion of patients surviving through the 4-year follow-up period was lower for patients having Charlson comorbidity than for those who did not (colorectal 58.8% versus 79.3%; breast 71.8% versus 85.4%; prostate 75.8% versus 82.8%; melanoma 58.8% versus 79.3%). Table 3 presents the results of proportional hazards regression analysis. Hazard rates were controlled for other potential predictors of mortality (age, sex, race-ethnicity, marital status, stage at diagnosis, smoking status, socioeconomic status, urban versus rural residence). The presence of comorbidity was associated with higher mortality rates for each cancer type examined. Adjusting for stage at diagnosis, however, did not alter this finding, suggesting that the higher mortality observed among patients with comorbid illness is primarily the result of their underlying illness, rather than later stage at diagnosis.


We found that the presence of comorbidity among patients with cancer was associated with later stage at diagnosis and greater overall mortality. The magnitude of the effects of comorbidity varied considerably by cancer type, however. Among patients with melanoma, those having comorbidity had 62% greater odds of late stage diagnosis and more than double the mortality rate of patients lacking comorbidity. The effects of comorbidity were least among patients with colorectal cancer, for which comorbidity was associated with 17% greater odds of late stage diagnosis and a 27% higher mortality rate.

One possible mechanism by which comorbidity could affect stage at diagnosis is by influencing cancer screening. Comorbidity would seemingly have two opposing influences on cancer screening. Comorbidity should increase the number of patient encounters with the health care system, increasing opportunities for cancer screening recommendations. [23] On the other hand, comorbidity may decrease the likelihood of cancer screening discussions during encounters by serving as a competing demand for primary care physicians, and by decreasing the perceived importance of cancer screening. [18,19] If comorbidity does have separate and opposing influences on cancer screening, our results suggest than in balance it reduces the likelihood of early detection. Further clinical studies examining screening behavior among patients with comorbid illness would be helpful in understanding these issues.

Many would argue that because of competing causes of mortality, cancer screening has less value in patients of advanced age and comorbidity. [14,56] If so, one might expect that comorbidity would have greater effects on stage at diagnosis among patients of advanced age. We found no evidence, however, that the effects of comorbidity on stage at diagnosis increased with advancing age.

Comorbidity showed a dose-response effect only for breast and prostate cancers. Charlson comorbidity index scores are based on the number of comorbid conditions and their assigned weights. Weights were chosen, however, to predict outcomes related to inpatient care inpatient care Managed care Services delivered to a Pt who needs physician care for > 24 hrs in a hospital , such as in-hospital mortality, length of stay, and health care resource use. It is possible that a different assignment of weights would be required to predict early cancer detection activities that largely occur outside of the hospital.

This study has a number of limitations that should be considered. First, we relied on administrative data only, the accuracy of which could not be independently verified. The inherent limitations in assessing comorbidity using administrative data sources have been well described. [57,58] We also did not have information on the severity of individual comorbidities, which may have affected our results. [59-61] We used the Charlson method to assess comorbidity, and it is possible that another method of assessment would have yielded different results. Most current measures of comorbidity have proven to be highly correlated and have shown similar effects, however. [62,63] We also did not have information on the cause of death to allow differentiation of cancer mortality from all-cause mortality. Information about whether patients had cancer screening tests was also not available and would have helped in understanding our findings. Finally, our study was restricted to incident cases in Florida, and our findings mi ght not be generalizable gen·er·al·ize  
v. gen·er·al·ized, gen·er·al·iz·ing, gen·er·al·iz·es
a. To reduce to a general form, class, or law.

b. To render indefinite or unspecific.

 to other parts of the country.

In conclusion, comorbidity was associated with later stage at diagnosis and higher overall mortality rates among patients with colorectal cancer, female breast cancer, prostate cancer, and melanoma. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and if confirmed, to determine the mechanisms by which comorbidity might influence stage at diagnosis. A better understanding of the degree to which the benefits of cancer screening are attenuated Attenuated
Alive but weakened; an attenuated microorganism can no longer produce disease.

Mentioned in: Tuberculin Skin Test


having undergone a process of attenuation.
 with comorbidity and how comorbidity influences physicians' and patients' decisions to pursue cancer screening is also needed.

From the Department of Family Medicine, University of South Florida

, and the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Fla.

Supported by a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, charitable organization devoted exclusively to health care issues. It was established in 1936 by Robert Wood Johnson (1893–1968), board chairman of the Johnson & Johnson medical products company.  Generalist gen·er·al·ist
A physician whose practice is not oriented in a specific medical specialty but instead covers a variety of medical problems.

 Physician Faculty Scholars Award (Dr. Roetzheim).


(1.) Guralnik J, LaCroix AZ, Everett DF, et al: Aging in the Eighties: The Prevalence of Camorbidity and Its Association With Disability. Hyattsville, Md, National Center for Health Statistics National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) is part of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which is part of the United States Department of Health and Human Services.

NCHS is the United States' principal health statistics agency.
, 1989

(2.) Bennett C: Patterns of care related to age of men with prostate cancer. Cancer 1991; 67:2633-2641

(3.) Greenberg E, Chute chute

1. a device used to restrain large animals especially cattle and horses. It is a small stall into which the animal is encouraged to walk. The head is fixed, in cattle by a head bail, the back is closed and the animal can then be examined or treated.
 CG, Stukel T, et al: Social and economic factors in the choice of lung cancer lung cancer, cancer that originates in the tissues of the lungs. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the United States in both men and women. Like other cancers, lung cancer occurs after repeated insults to the genetic material of the cell.  treatment: a population based study in two stages. N Engl J Med 1988; 313:612-617

(4.) Newcomb P, Carbone P: Cancer treatment and age: patient perspectives. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85:1580-1584

(5.) Lazovich D, White E, Thomas DB, et al: Underutilization of breast-conserving surgery breast-conserving surgery Surgical oncology An operation to remove the breast CA but not the breast Types Lumpectomy, quadrantectomy, segmental mastectomy. See Breast reconstruction, Lumpectomy, Quadrantectomy, Segmental mastectomy.  and radiation therapy among women with stage I or II breast cancer. JAMA JAMA
Journal of the American Medical Association
 1991; 266:3433-3438

(6.) Greenfield S, Blanco Blanco (meaning the color white in Spanish) is an adjective often used in Spanish surnames.

Below is a list of famous people and places associated with the word.
, DM, Elashoff RM, et al: Patterns of care related to age of breast cancer patients. JAMA 1987; 257:2766-2770

(7.) Silliman R, Guadagnoli E, Weitberg AB, et al: Age as a predictor of diagnostic and initial treatment intensity in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. J Cerontol 1989; 44:46-50

(8.) Yancik R, Ries LG, Yates JW: Cancer and comorbidity in older patients: a descriptive profile. Ann Epidemiol 1996;6:399-412

(9.) Desch CE, Penberthy L, Newschaffer CJ, et al: Factors that determine the treatment for local and regional prostate cancer. Med Care 1996; 34:152-162

(10.) Newschaffer CJ, Penberthy L, Desch CE, et al: The effect of age and comorbidity in the treatment of elderly women with nonmetastatic breast cancer. Arch Intern intern /in·tern/ (in´tern) a medical graduate serving in a hospital preparatory to being licensed to practice medicine.

in·tern or in·terne
 Med 1996; 156:85-90

(11.) Newschaffer CJ, Bush TL, Penberthy LT: Comorbidity measurement in elderly female breast cancer patients with administrative and medical records data. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50:725-733

(12.) Payne JE, Meyer HJ: The influence of other diseases upon the outcome of colorectal cancer patients. Aust N Z J Surg 1995; 65:398-402

(13.) Satariano WA: Aging, comorbidity, and breast cancer survival: an epidemiologic view. Adv Exp Med Biol 1993; 330:1-11

(14.) Satariano WA, Ragland DR: The effect of comorbidity on 3-year survival of women with primary breast cancer. Ann Intern Med 1994; 120:104-110

(15.) West DW, Satariano WA, Ragland DR, et al: Comorbidity and breast cancer survival: a comparison between black and white women. Ann Epidemiol 1996;6:413-419

(16.) Crawford J, Cohen cohen
 or kohen

(Hebrew: “priest”) Jewish priest descended from Zadok (a descendant of Aaron), priest at the First Temple of Jerusalem. The biblical priesthood was hereditary and male.
 H: Aging and neoplasia neoplasia /neo·pla·sia/ (-pla´zhah) the formation of a neoplasm.

cervical intraepithelial neoplasia
. Ann Rev Gerontol Geriatr 1984; 4:3-32

(17.) Steel K Caring for the elderly person: focusing on cancer. Perspectives on Prevention and Treatment of Cancer in the Elderly. Yancik R, Carbone PP, Patterson WB, et al (eds). New York New York, state, United States
New York, Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of
, Raven Press, 1983, pp 51-61

(18.) Jaen CR, Stange KC, Nutting PA: Competing demands of primary care: a model for the delivery of clinical preventive services clinical preventive service Managed care A health care service delivered in clinical settings for the purpose of preventing the onset or progression of a health condition or illness . J Fam Pract 1994; 38:166-171

(19.) Cooper GS, Fortinsky RH, Hapke R, et al: Primary care physician recommendations for colorectal cancer screening. patient and practitioner factors. Arch Intern Med 1997; 157:1946-1950

(20.) Shoen R, Marcus M, Braham R: Factors associated with the use of screening mammography mammography, diagnostic procedure that uses low-dose X rays to detect abnormalities in the breasts. The early diagnosis of breast cancer made possible by the routine use of mammography for screening women increases a woman's treatment alternatives and improves her  in a primary care setting. J Community Health 1994; 19:239-252

(21.) Burack R, Liang J: The acceptance and completion of mammography by older black women. Am J Public Health 1989; 79:721-726

(22.) Kiefe CI, Funkhouser E, Fouad MN, et al: Chronic disease as a barrier to breast and cervical cancer screening. J Gen Intern Med 1998; 13:357-365

(23.) Stange K, Flocke S. Goodwin M: Opportunistic opportunistic /op·por·tu·nis·tic/ (op?er-tldbomacn-is´tik)
1. denoting a microorganism which does not ordinarily cause disease but becomes pathogenic under certain circumstances.

 preventive services delivery. J Fam Pract 1998; 46:419-424

(24.) Grady K, Lemkau JP, McVay JM, et al: The importance of physician encouragement in breast cancer screening This article or section recently underwent a major revision or rewrite and needs further review. You can help! X-ray mammography
Mammography is still the modality of choice for screening of early breast cancer, since it is relatively fast, reasonably accurate, and
 of older women. Prev Med 1992; 21:766-780

(25.) Bostick R, Sprafka JM, Virnig BA, et al: Predictors of cancer prevention attitudes and participation in cancer screening examinations. Prev Med 1994; 23:816-826

(26.) Chao A, Paganini-Hill A, Ross RK, et al: Use of preventive care by the elderly. Prev Med 1987; 16:710-722

(27.) Satariano WA: Comorbidity and functional status in older women with breast cancer: implications for screening, treatment and prognosis. J Gerontol 1992; 47:24-31

(28.) Catalano RA, Santariano WA: Unemployment and the likelihood of detecting early-stage breast cancer. Am J Public Health 1998; 88:586-590

(29.) Mettlin CJ, Murphy GP, McGinnis LS, et al: The National Cancer Database report on prostate cancer. American College of Surgeons This article or section needs sources or references that appear in reliable, third-party publications. Alone, primary sources and sources affiliated with the subject of this article are not sufficient for an accurate encyclopedia article.  Commission on Cancer and the American Cancer Society American Cancer Society, established in 1913, this national volunteer-based health organization is committed to the elimination of cancer through prevention and treatment and to diminishing cancer suffering through advocacy, scholarship, research,
. Cancer l995; 76:1104-1112

(30.) Mettlin C, Murphy GP, Babaian RJ, et al: The results of a five-year early prostate cancer detection intervention. Investigators of the American Cancer Society National Prostate Cancer Detection Project. Cancer l996; 77:150-159

(31.) Morrison A: Review of evidence on the early detection and treatment of breast cancer. Cancer 1989; 64(suppl):265l-2656

(32.) Shapiro 5, Venet W, Strax P, et al: Periodic Screening for Breast Cancer. The Health Insurance Plan Project and Its Sequelae sequelae Clinical medicine The consequences of a particular condition or therapeutic intervention , 1963-1986. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Johns Hopkins University, mainly at Baltimore, Md. Johns Hopkins in 1867 had a group of his associates incorporated as the trustees of a university and a hospital, endowing each with $3.5 million. Daniel C.  Press, 1988

(33.) Newcomb P, Norlfleet RG, Storer BE, et al: Screening sigmoidoscopy Sigmoidoscopy Definition

Sigmoidoscopy is a procedure by which a doctor inserts either a short and rigid or slightly longer and flexible fiber-optic tube into the rectum to examine the lower portion of the large intestine (or bowel).
 and colorectal cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992; 84:1572-1575

(34.) Selby J, Friedman GD, Quesenberry CP, et al: A case-controlled study of screening sigmoidoscopy and mortality from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 1992; 326:653-657

(35.) Roush C, Berwick M, Koh HK, et al: Screening for melanoma. Cutaneous cutaneous /cu·ta·ne·ous/ (ku-ta´ne-us) pertaining to the skin.

Of, relating to, or affecting the skin.

Pertaining to the skin.
 Melanoma. Balch C (ed). Philadelphia, JB Lippincott Co, 1992

(36.) Berwick M, Begg CB, Fine JA, et al: Screening for cutaneous melanoma by skin self-examination. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996; 88:17-23

(37.) Roetzheim R, Pal N, Tennant C, et al: The effects of health insurance and race-ethnicity on the early detection of cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91:1409-1415

(38.) Ayanian J, Kohler BA, Abe T, et al: The relation between health insurance coverage and clinical outcomes among women with breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1993; 329:326-331

(39.) Diez-Roux A: Bringing context back into epidemiology: variables and fallacies This is a list of fallacies. Formal fallacies
Formal fallacies are arguments that are fallacious due to an error in their form or technical structure.
  • Argument from fallacy
 in multilevel mul·ti·lev·el  
Having several levels: a multilevel parking garage.

Adj. 1. multilevel - of a building having more than one level
 analysis. Am J Public Health 1998; 88:216-222

(40.) Hofer T, Wolfe R, Tedeschi P, et al: Use of community versus individual socioeconomic data predicting variation in hospital use. Health Serv Res 1998; 33:243-259

(41.) Krieger N: Overcoming the absence of socioeconomic data in medical records: validation and application of a census-based methodology. Am J Public Health 1992; 87:703-710

(42.) Krieger N, Fee E: Social class: the missing link in US health data. Int J Health Serv 1994; 24:25-44

(43.) Shambaugh E, Weiss M: Summary Staging Guide: Cancer Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results Reporting. Bethesda, Md: US Department of Health and Human Services Noun 1. Department of Health and Human Services - the United States federal department that administers all federal programs dealing with health and welfare; created in 1979
Health and Human Services, HHS
, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, Publication No. 86-2313, 1977

(44.) Deyo R, Cherkin D, Ciol M: Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM ICD-9-CM International Classification of Disease, 9th edition, Clinical Modification
A standardized classification of disease, injuries, and causes of death, by etiology and anatomic localization and codified into a 6-digit number, which allows
 administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45:613-619

(45.) Charlson M, Pompei P, Ales KL, et al: A new method of classifying prognostic prog·nos·tic
1. Of, relating to, or useful in prognosis.

2. Of or relating to prediction; predictive.

1. A sign or symptom indicating the future course of a disease.

 comorbidity in longitudinal studies longitudinal studies, the epidemiologic studies that record data from a respresentative sample at repeated intervals over an extended span of time rather than at a single or limited number over a short period.
: development and validation. J Chron Dis 1987; 40:373-383

(46.) Charlson M, Szatrowski TP, Peterson J, et al: Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol 1994; 47:1245-1251

(47.) Hunter C, Redmond Ck, Chen V, et al: Breast cancer: factors associated with stage at diagnosis in black and white women, J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85:1129-1137

(48.) Mandelblatt J, Andrews H, Kerner J, et al: Determinants of late stage diagnosis of breast and cervical cancer: the impact of age, race, social class, and hospital type. Am J Public Health 1991; 81:646-649

(49.) Nayeri K, Pitaro C, Feldman JG: Marital status and stage at diagnosis in cancer. N Y State J Med 1992; 92:8-11

(50.) Hosmer D, Lemeshow S: Applied Logistic Regression. New York, John Wiley John Wiley may refer to:
  • John Wiley & Sons, publishing company
  • John C. Wiley, American ambassador
  • John D. Wiley, Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Madison
  • John M. Wiley (1846–1912), U.S.
 & Son, 1989

(51.) American Cancer Society: Survey of physicians' attitudes and practices in early cancer detection. Cancer 1990; 40:77-101

(52.) Czaja R, McFall SL, Warnecke RB, et al: Preferences of community physicians for cancer screening guidelines cancer screening guideline Any guideline promulgated by an authoritative organization–eg Am Cancer Society, for early detection of a malignancy common in a particular population, the diagnosis of which, if caught early, results in a complete cure or improved . Ann intern Med 1994; 120:602-608

(53.) US Preventive Services Task Force According to the Agency for Healthcare Research Quality, US Preventive Services Task Force is "an independent panel of experts in primary care and prevention that systematically reviews the evidence of effectiveness and develops recommendations for clinical preventive services. : Guide to Clinical Preventive Services. Washington, DC, US Department of Health and Human Services, 2nd Ed, 1996

(54.) Kalbfleisch J, Prentice R: The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data. New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1980

(55.) SAS/STAT User's Guide, Version 6. Cary, NC, SAS Institute SAS Institute Inc., headquartered in Cary, North Carolina, USA, has been a major producer of software since it was founded in 1976 by Anthony Barr, James Goodnight, John Sall and Jane Helwig. , 4th Ed, 1990

(56.) Mandelblatt JS, Wheat ME, Monane M: Breast cancer screening for elderly women with and without comorbid conditions, a decision analysis model. Ann Intern Med 1992; 116:722-730

(57.) lezzoni LI, Foley SM, Daley J, et al: Comorbidities, complications, and coding bias, does the number of diagnosis codes matter in predicting in-hospital mortality? JAMA 1992; 267:2197-2203

(58.) lezzoni LI: Assessing quality using administrative data. Ann Intern Med 1997; 127:666-674

(59.) Hughes JS, lezzoni LI, Daley J, et al: How severity measures rate hospitalized patients. J Gen Intern Med 1996; 11:303-311

(60.) lezzoni LI, Ash AS, Shwartz M, et al: Using severity measures to predict the likelihood of death for pneumonia inpatients. J Gen Intern Med 1996; 11:23-31

(61.) lezzoni LI, Ash AS, Shwartz M, et al: Predicting who dies depends on how severity is measured: implications for evaluating patient outcomes. Ann Intern Med 1995; 123:763-770

(62.) Rochon P, Katz JN, Morrow LA, et al: Comorbid illness is associated with survival and length of hospital stay in patients with chronic disability: a prospective comparison of three comorbidity indices. Med Care 1996; 34:1093-1101

(63.) Krousel-Wood MA, Abdoh A, Re R: Comparing comorbidillness indices assessing outcome variation: the case of prostatectomy Prostatectomy Definition

Prostatectomy refers to the surgical removal of part of the prostate gland (transurethral resection, a procedure performed to relieve urinary symptoms caused by benign enlargement), or all of the prostate (radical prostatectomy,
. J Gen Intern Med 1996; 11:32-38

[Graph omitted]

[Graph omitted]

[Graph omitted]

[Graph omitted]

Characteristics of Men and Women With Selected Cancers Diagnosed in
Florida, 1994 (N = 32,074)

                                        (n = 8,933)

Characteristics [*]                    Median (SD)

Age in years                            71.5 (11.6)
Household income                     $28,929 (10,593)
                                         No. (%)

    Male                               4,555 (51.0)
    Female                             4,375 (49.0)
    White, non-Hispanic                7,626 (85.4)
    Black, non-Hispanic                  534 (6.0)
    Hispanic                             701 (7.8)
    Other                                 72 (0.6)
    High school graduate or less       4,162 (46.9)
    More than high school education    4,715 (53.1)
Marital status
    Currently married                  5,399 (60.4)
    Not married                        3,534 (39.6)
Insurance payer
    Medicare                           5,736 (70.9)
    Medicaid                             119 (1.4)
    Commercial insurance                 709 (8.8)
    Commercial HMO                       662 (8.2)
    Commerical PPO                       484 (6.0)
    Uninsured                            234 (2.9)
    Other                                146 (1.8)
    In situ                              612 (6.9)
    Local                              2,858 (32.0)
    Regional                           3,977 (44.5)
    Distant                            1,486 (16.6)
Comorbidity Index
    0                                  6,298 (70.5)
    1                                  1,929 (21.6)
    2+                                   706 (7.9)

                                        (n = 1,884)

Characteristics [*]                    Median (SD)

Age in years                            62.1 (16.7)
Household income                     $31,550 (12,193)
                                         No. (%)

    Male                               1,117 (59.3)
    Female                               767 (40.7)
    White, non-Hispanic                1,763 (93.6)
    Black, non-Hispanic                   15 (0.8)
    Hispanic                              62 (3.3)
    Other                                 44 (2.4)
    High school graduate or less         650 (34.7)
    More than high school education    1,225 (65.3)
Marital status
    Currently married                  1,268 (67.3)
    Not married                          616 (32.7)
Insurance payer
    Medicare                             713 (47.9)
    Medicaid                              28 (1.9)
    Commercial insurance                 274 (17.9)
    Commercial HMO                       180 (11.8)
    Commerical PPO                       186 (12.1)
    Uninsured                             72 (4.7)
    Other                                 58 (3.8)
    In situ                              295 (15.7)
    Local                              1,346 (71.4)
    Regional                             129 (6.8)
    Distant                              114 (6.1)
Comorbidity Index
    0                                  1,754 (93.1)
    1                                    106 (5.6)
    2+                                    24 (1.3)

                                        (n = 10,976)

Characteristics [*]                    Median (SD)

Age in years                            64.0 (13.8)
Household income                     $29,794 (10,913)
                                         No. (%)

    Male                                    -
    Female                            10,976 (100)
    White, non-Hispanic                9,217 (84.0)
    Black, non-Hispanic                  768 (7.0)
    Hispanic                             830 (7.6)
    Other                                161 (1.5)
    High school graduate or less       4,275 (43.5)
    More than high school education    5,557 (56.5)
Marital status
    Currently married                  6,188 (56.4)
    Not married                        4,788 (43.6)
Insurance payer
    Medicare                           4,912 (49.7)
    Medicaid                             249 (2.5)
    Commercial insurance               1,653 (16.7)
    Commercial HMO                     1,081 (10.9)
    Commerical PPO                     1,161 (11.7)
    Uninsured                            472 (4.8)
    Other                                360 (3.7)
    In situ                            1,391 (12.7)
    Local                              6,372 (58.1)
    Regional                           2,632 (24.0)
    Distant                              581 (5.3)
Comorbidity Index
    0                                  9,601 (87.5)
    1                                  1,120 (10.2)
    2+                                   255 (2.3)

                                        (n = 10,281)

Characteristics [*]                    Median (SD)

Age in years                            69.8 (8.1)
Household income                     $29,563 (11,201)
                                         No. (%)

    Male                              10,281 (100)
    Female                                  -
    White, non-Hispanic                8,187 (79.6)
    Black, non-Hispanic                  938 (9.1)
    Hispanic                           1,066 (10.4)
    Other                                 90 (0.9)
    High school graduate or less       4,697 (43.1)
    More than high school education    6,217 (57.0)
Marital status
    Currently married                  8,068 (78.5)
    Not married                        2,213 (21.5)
Insurance payer
    Medicare                           5,737 (65.7)
    Medicaid                              96 (1.1)
    Commercial insurance                 957 (11)
    Commercial HMO                       864 (9.9)
    Commerical PPO                       596 (6.8)
    Uninsured                            245 (2.8)
    Other                                233 (2.7)
    In situ                               60 (0.6)
    Local                              8,254 (80.3)
    Regional                           1,373 (13.4)
    Distant                              594 (5.8)
Comorbidity Index
    0                                  8,876 (86.3)
    1                                  1,099 (10.7)
    2+                                   306 (3.0)

(*)Numbers for individual categories may not sum to total sample size
because of missing data.

Bivariate Relationship of Comorbidity With Stage at Diagnosis

                   No. (%) of Cancers
                Diagnosed at Late Stage

                       Colorectal                Melanoma
                      (n = 8,933)              (n = 1,884)

Comorbid Index
     0          3,748/6,298 (59.5%) [**]  214/1,754 (12.2%) [+]
     1          1,264/1,929 (65.5%)        24/106 (22.6%)
     2+           451/706 (63.9%)           5/24 (20.8 %)
     None       3,748/6,298 (59.5%) [**]  214/1,754 (12.2%) [**]
     Any        1,715/2,635 (65.1%)        29/130 (22.3%)

                         Breast                   Prostate
                      (n = 10,976)              (n = 10,281)

Comorbid Index
     0          2,762/9,601 (28.8%) [**]  1,626/8,876 (18.3%) [**]
     1            356/1,120 (31.8%)         248/1,099 (22.6%)
     2+            95/255 (37.3%)            93/306 (30.4%)
     None       2,762/9,601 (28.8%) [+]   1,626/8,876 (18.3%) [**]
     Any          451/1,375 (32.8%)         341/1,405 (24.3%)

(*)p [less than].05 for chi-square.
(+)P [less than].01 for chi-square.
(**)P [less than].001 for chi-square.

Effects of Comorbidity on the Odds of Late Stage Diagnosis [++]

                     Colorectal            Melanoma
                     (n = 8,035)           (n = 1,524)

Comorbid conditions
  No                 1.00                  1.00
  Yes                1.17 (1.06-1.29) [+]  1.62 (1.01-2.60) [*]
Comorbidity Index
  0                  1.00                  1.00
  1                  1.19 (1.06-1.32) [+]  1.73 (1.04-2.88) [*]
  2+                 1.12 (0.95-1.33)      1.20 (0.40-3.62)

                     Breast                 Prostate
                     (n = 9,832)            (n = 8,659)

Comorbid conditions
  No                 1.00                   1.00
  Yes                1.24 (1.09-1.41) [**]  1.30 (1.14-1.50) [**]
Comorbidity Index
  0                  1.00                   1.00
  1                  1.18 (1.02-1.35) [*]   1.19 (1.02-1.40) [*]
  2+                 1.56 (1.20-2.03) [**]  1.75 (1.35-2.26) [**]

(*)P [less than] .05

(+)P [less than] .01

(**)P [less than] .001

(++)Odds ratios for late stage diagnosis (regional/distant stage)
are adjusted for age, sex (if appropriate), race-ethnicity, marital
status, educational level, income level, urban residence, and
insurance payer.


* Comorbidity was associated with later stage diagnosis for breast cancer, colorectal cancer, prostate cancer, and melanoma.

* Comorbidity was associated with higher mortality for breast cancer, colorectal cancer, prostate cancer, and melanoma.

* Higher mortality appeared to be the result of underlying illness rather than later stage diagnosis.
COPYRIGHT 2001 Southern Medical Association
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2001, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion




Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Publication:Southern Medical Journal
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Sep 1, 2001
Previous Article:Prenatal Screening for Tay-Sachs Disease by Louisiana Obstetricians: A Survey Study.
Next Article:Follow-up Survey of Children and Adolescents With Chest Pain.

Related Articles
Male cancers raise women's breast risks.
The impact of comorbidity and age on survival with laryngeal cancer.
Public Health and Cancer: A New Treatment Linkage.
Prevalent mental health disorders in the aging population: issues of comorbidity and functional disability. (Mental Health Disorders in Aging).
An ounce of prevention: the American Cancer Society offers a free wellness program to businesses throughout Southeast Michigan.
Medical comorbidity in black and white patients with Alzheimer's disease.
Neuropsychological performance, impulsivity, and comorbid psychiatric illness in patients with pathological gambling undergoing treatment at the CORE...
The effect of comorbid AD/HD and learning disabilities on parent-reported behavioral and academic outcomes of children.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2014 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters