Comparison of characteristics in Mexican women with breast cancer according to healthcare coverage

Abstract

Objective: To compare the sociodemographic, diagnostic, clinical, and treatment-related characteristics and outcomes of patients with breast cancer in two hospitals in Mexico according to type of healthcare coverage. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of women with breast cancer according to public or private healthcare coverage in two hospitals was done. Patients were treated by the same group of physicians and healthcare infrastructure. Groups were compared using the chi-square test for categorical variables, Mann–Whitney U-test and Student’s t-test for quantitative variables, and Kaplan–Meier estimator and log-rank test for time dependent outcomes (including recurrence-free and overall survival). A value of p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 282 women were included. Mean age at diagnosis was 52 years. Women with public healthcare coverage were diagnosed more frequently with self-detected tumors (82.8% vs 47.9%, p < 0.001) and advanced clinical stage (III and IV) (31.1% vs 17.8%, p = 0.014). More women with public healthcare insurance underwent initial systemic treatment (41.1% vs 17.8%, p < 0.001) and mastectomy (70.1% vs 54.9%, p = 0.020), and received more chemotherapy (79.4% vs 43.8%, p < 0.001) and adjuvant radiotherapy (68.9% vs 53.4%, p = 0.017). Overall, no differences were found in survival outcomes according to healthcare coverage. Trends suggesting worse recurrence-free and overall survival were observed in patients with public coverage at 3 years follow-up in stage III (85.7% vs 67.3% and 100% vs 84.6%, respectively) and triple negative disease (83.3% vs 74.5% and 100% vs 74.1%, respectively). Conclusion: Strategies to promote preventive medicine, diagnostic mammograms, and prompt diagnosis of breast cancer in Mexican women with public health coverage are needed. Access to the main treatment modalities by Seguro Popular and good quality care by an experienced group of physicians likely explains the similar outcomes between patients with private and public healthcare coverage. However, trends suggesting worse survival for patients with public medical coverage with stage III and triple-negative disease should encourage close follow-up.