Cancer deaths and tax rates linked in surprising new study: Here's how
The link was revealed in a new study published in JAMA Network Open, which aimed to explore how state-level tax revenue impacts cancer screenings and mortality in the U.S.
Researchers from The Ohio State University, Emory University in Georgia and the University of Verona in Italy analyzed 1,150 state-years of tax data over a 23-year period, between 1997 and 2019. (A state-year refers to one year of data from one state.)
They also reviewed population-level cancer screening rates and cancer-related deaths from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) databases.
The states with higher tax income were found to have increased cancer screening rates and decreased cancer mortality rates, the researchers found.
For each $1,000 increase in tax revenue per capita, the population had a 1.61% increase in colorectal cancer screening, a 2.17% increase in breast cancer screening and a 0.72% increase in cervical cancer screening rate, the research showed.
Among those who had cancerous tumors, each $1,000 increase in tax revenue per capita was linked to up to 4% decreased death rates among White patients. The same reduced risk was not found for racial and ethnic minority populations, according to the study.
"State-level tax policy is an underappreciated social determinant of health that may improve cancer screening and mortality rates," the researchers wrote.
"These findings suggest that state-level tax revenue may serve as one aspect of a multifaceted approach to improve cancer-related outcomes in the U.S. and help bridge cancer care gaps, particularly in more progressive tax policy settings."
Prior studies have identified tax policy as a predictor of public health, particularly for infant mortality risk and overall healthcare outcomes.
"One possible association could be that the higher your taxes, the more money you would have to buy healthier food and more luxury for relaxation and exercise."
"Tax revenue may serve as funding that promotes the common good by ensuring access to safe, healthy environments and quality healthcare, while progressive taxes can substantially increase the disposable income of working-class households, thus enhancing their living standards and improving their health and cancer outcomes," the study stated.
Dr. Marc Siegel, clinical professor of medicine at NYU Langone Health and Fox News senior medical analyst, shared his external reaction to the study.
"One possible association could be that the higher your taxes, the more money you would have to buy healthier food and more luxury for relaxation and exercise," he told Fox News Digital.
"Having more money to pay for extra treatment, earlier diagnosis and better care can also help prevent cancer death."
The study did have some limitations, the researchers acknowledged — chiefly that the results show an association but do not prove that the high tax rates caused the decreased mortality.
Cancer screening rates were also based on patient questionnaires, which could have some level of bias.
There is also the possibility of measurement errors in the data, the researchers cautioned.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
7 hours ago
- Medscape
Oxaliplatin's Benefit in CRC: Is There an Age Threshold?
Does oxaliplatin benefit come with an age limit in patients with stage II or III colorectal cancer (CRC)? New data from a population-based cohort showed that adding oxaliplatin chemotherapy to fluoropyrimidine in the adjuvant setting significantly improved survival in patients with stage III CRC up to age 70 but not in those older than age 70. The analysis also revealed that the drug did not improve survival in those with stage II disease, regardless of patients' age. 'The findings suggest that oxaliplatin may benefit patients aged 70 years or younger with stage III colorectal cancer, while its use in patients aged older than 70 years and those with stage II disease warrants reconsideration,' according to the study authors, led by Jun Woo Bong, MD, PhD, of Korea University Guro Hospital in Seoul, Republic of Korea. Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is standard for patients with stage II to III CRC following surgery, but its benefit in older patients remains unclear, with studies yielding conflicting results. A large retrospective study, for instance, found overall survival improved with oxaliplatin-based adjuvant therapy in patients older than age 70 with stage III disease, while an analysis of three studies did not find a survival benefit associated with oxaliplatin in older patients. The latest analysis, published online in JAMA Network Open , aimed to clarify how, or whether, age should factor into treatment decisions. Bong and colleagues conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using data from the Korea Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service's National Quality Assessment program. The researchers included 8561 patients who underwent curative resection for stage II and stage III CRC and received adjuvant chemotherapy between January 2014 and December 2016. The patients were followed until April 2024 or death. The research team primarily looked at overall survival, assessing age thresholds from 60 to 80 years to identify an age cutoff for a survival benefit. The team also evaluated discontinuation rates. For the 2913 patients with stage II disease, the researchers did not identify an age threshold where oxaliplatin was associated with improved overall survival. Across all age thresholds, oxaliplatin was not linked to better survival outcomes among patients with stage II disease (adjusted hazard ratios [AHRs] ranged from 0.71 to 1.09). In contrast, oxaliplatin was associated with significantly improved overall survival among patients with stage III disease aged 70 years or younger (AHR, 0.59), with a significantly higher 5-year overall survival rate in the oxaliplatin group (84.8% vs 78.1% in the fluoropyrimidine only group). After age 70, oxaliplatin was not associated with improved overall survival (AHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.67-1.07; P = .18), with similar 5-year overall survival rates in both groups (71% vs 68%). In patients with stage III disease, discontinuation rates continuously increased from ages 60 to 80 and was significantly higher among patients older than 70 years — 37.4% vs 23.9% among younger patients (adjusted odds ratio, 1.55; P < .001). Discontinuation was also associated with worse overall survival (AHR, 1.54). The discontinuation data suggest that 'older patients may experience greater difficulty tolerating oxaliplatin-based regimens' potentially affecting treatment efficacy, Alfonso De Stefano, MD, PhD, of Istituto Nazionale Tumori at Fondazione G. Pascale in Naples, Italy, and colleagues wrote in an accompanying editorial. And the findings overall indicate 'clinicians may need to be more cautious when recommending oxaliplatin for patients older than 70 years or those with stage II disease,' according to De Stefano and colleagues wrote. An Age Threshold? Even with the age-focused findings, the researchers noted that age should not be the only consideration when weighing the risks and benefits of oxaliplatin in this population. 'Studies have suggested that biological age, which includes factors such as frailty and organ function, may be more relevant than chronological age in predicting chemotherapy outcomes,' Bong and colleagues wrote. De Stefano and colleagues agreed, noting that clinicians should consider factors beyond age, such as comorbidities, cognitive function, social and economic conditions, and mobility. 'We need to be cautious that we don't interpret the results as an age threshold,' said Nadine Jackson , MD, MPH, of Harvard Medical School and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston. Jackson, who was not involved in the research, recommended against changes to practice guidelines or clinical decision-making based on age before prospective data becomes available. 'As clinicians, we all need to recognize that older adults are the patients who are most likely to be seen and diagnosed with cancer, and there can be complicated care outcomes as a result,' said Jackson. 'This isn't some other doctor's problem — this is where oncology is. We need to support geriatric skills for both practicing oncologists and trainees so we can listen to our patients and determine what to prioritize for their care.' This study was supported and funded by a Korean University Guro Hospital grant, as well as grants from the Institute of Information & Communications Technology Planning & Evaluation, Korean Ministry of Science, Korea Health Industry Development Institute, and Korean Ministry of Health & Welfare. Bong and colleagues reported no disclosures, and De Stefano and colleagues reported nonfinancial support, personal fees, and grants outside of the commentary. Jackson reported no relevant disclosures.
Medscape
8 hours ago
- Medscape
Kids Feel Less Pain With Underused Kidney Stone Treatment
Shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for pediatric patients leads to less pain and fewer abnormal urinary symptoms after recovery than the widely used ureteroscopy (URS) procedure, according to research published in JAMA Network Open . Researchers and other urologists said the findings confirm what they have observed: Fewer children and teens complain of pain and other symptoms in the days after the SWL than the URS, despite similar efficacy rates of each treatment. The incidence of kidney stones has risen in the past few decades, with the majority of these cases receiving URS. 'Patients are increasingly faced with this question of which procedure to choose and have very little information to guide them,' said Gregory Tasian, MD, director of the Pediatric KIDney Stone Care Improvement Network at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, and lead author of the study. 'All of the information that existed has been based on the ability to clear stones, which is important but doesn't account for other factors that patients and their parents find really important.' The researchers undertook the study to gather more robust evidence for treatment protocols, Tasian said. Caregivers and patients were included in initial planning to determine relevant outcomes, including the measures of pain intensity and missed school, he said. In a nonrandomized clinical trial, 1142 patients aged 8-21 years completed a questionnaire 1 week after their procedure. Those who received the shockwave procedure reported an average pain intensity score of 42.8 on a 56-point scale, about 7 points lower than for those who underwent URS. Scores for pain interference with daily life in the shockwave group averaged 10 points lower than among the URS group. Stones were cleared in 71% of patients who received URS and about 68% of those who received SWL. Average patient scores on a questionnaire assessing difficult and uncontrollable urination were about 4 points lower in the SWL group than in the URS group. Patients who received SWL also missed 21% fewer school days, and their parents missed 23% fewer workdays than those who received URS. The study took place between 2020 and 2023 at 31 medical centers in the US and Canada. The majority of the population was women (60%) and White (77%). 'We learned from this research that pain is much greater with ureteroscopy, as are urinary symptoms,' said Tasian. 'And that really drives the patient experience.' The American Urological Association (AUA) currently recommends URS and SWL equally for stones < 20 mm. But the guidance is based on low-level certainty evidence that does not include studies on patient experience, including pain levels. The more frequent use of ureteral stents — tubes used to open and drain the urethra — in URS may account for the higher pain levels and disruptions to daily life, Tasian said. Patients in the study undergoing URS needed a stent 80% of the time compared with 2.6% of those undergoing SWL and were 10 times more likely to need an additional surgery under general anesthesia to remove the stent. Many hospitals do not have the lithotripter needed for the shockwave procedure, said Renea Sturm, MD, an assistant professor of pediatric urology at UCLA Health, Los Angeles, and an author of the study. As a result, 'real-world implementation of the treatment may be a bit challenging,' Sturm said. 'I think a lot of us will want to change our practice, and this research helps us argue with the larger system' to purchase the equipment, said Kathleen Kan, MD, pediatric urologist at Stanford Medicine Children's Health in Los Gatos, California, who was not involved in the study. She said that her patients who receive SWL are less likely to message her afterward with complaints of pain. New AUA kidney stone guidelines are currently in development and expected to be released in 2026, a spokesperson for AUA said. The study was funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). Kan and Sturm reported having no disclosures. Tasian reported receiving grants from the PCORI.
CBS News
a day ago
- CBS News
Nearly a third of people using over-the-counter birth control pills previously used nothing, study finds
Two years after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the first over-the-counter birth control pill, new research is looking at who's switching to it and why. In the study, published Monday in JAMA Network Open, researchers used survey data from 986 people, ages 15 to 45, in 44 states who obtained the over-the-counter pill either online or at a pharmacy. They found that a significant portion of users shifted to the over-the-counter pill from a less-effective method of birth control or from using no contraception at all. Of those surveyed, they found a 31.8 percentage point increase in use by people who previously used no contraceptive method. A 41 percentage point increase was seen in those who switched from a less-effective method, like condoms or emergency contraception. Opill, the over-the-counter, progestin-only pill from drugmaker Perrigo, provides an option for obtaining oral contraceptives without needing to first see a health care provider. Allowing people to access the pill without a prescription was done in hopes of reducing barriers to access, according to the FDA's news release at the time of approval, which noted that almost half of the 6.1 million pregnancies in the U.S. each year are unintended. The new research "is one of the first studies to show that over-the-counter birth control pills are reaching the very people they're meant to help — those who face the greatest barriers to care," lead author Dr. Maria Rodriguez, professor of obstetrics and gynecology in the Oregon Health & Science University School of Medicine, said in a news release. Those accessing the over-the-counter pill were more likely than prescription users to be uninsured, younger (ages 15-20) and living in rural areas, according to the study. The most common reason people gave in the survey for choosing the OTC pill was that it didn't require an appointment, followed by those who said they didn't have a regular physician. "At a time when pregnancy is becoming even more dangerous in the United States — especially for people of color, those with low incomes, and those living in rural communities — our findings underscore that OTC contraception is a powerful tool for reproductive autonomy," Rodriguez said.
