Most research on cancer patient survival uses registry-based (e.g., SEER) incidence and survival data that have limited socioeconomic status and health-risk information. In this study, we used the 1997-2015 National Health Interview Survey-National Death Index prospectively-linked pooled cohort database (n = 40,291 cancer patients) to examine disparities in patient survival by a broad range of social determinants, including race/ethnicity, nativity, educational attainment, income/poverty level, occupation, housing tenure, physical and mental health status, smoking, physical activity, body mass index, and alcohol consumption. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate mortality hazard ratios and cause-specific 1-year, 5-year, and 10-year survival rates for all-cancer and lung cancer. During 1997-2015, the 10-year age-adjusted (all-cause) survival rate for cancer patients with professional and managerial occupations was 89.66%, significantly higher than the survival rate of 83.17% for laborers or 83.66% for the unemployed. Cancer patients with renting house had significantly lower age-adjusted survival rates than those owning house (82.65% vs. 85.80%). The 10-year age-adjusted survival rates were significantly greater among cancer patients with regular physical activity than those without regular physical activity (90.18% vs. 83.24%). Age-adjusted survival rates were significantly reduced for cancer patients with lower income and education, poor health, and serious psychological distress, and among current and former smokers. The gap in survival narrowed with additional sociodemographic, health, or behavioral adjustment. Similarly large differentials were found in lung cancer survival. Marked disparities in all-cancer and lung cancer survival were found by a wide range of sociodemographic and health characteristics.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The economic recession caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic disproportionately affected poor and vulnerable populations globally. Better uunderstanding of vulnerability to shocks in food supply and demand in the Asia Pacific region is needed. SUBJECTS/METHODS: Using secondary data from rapid assessment surveys during the pandemic response (n = 10,420 in mid-2020; n = 6,004 in mid-2021) in India, Indonesia, Myanmar, and Vietnam, this study examined the risk factors for reported income reduction or job loss in mid-2021 and the temporal trend in food security status (household food availability, and market availability and affordability of essential items) from mid-2020 to mid-2021. RESULTS: The proportion of job loss/reduced household income was highest in India (60.4%) and lowest in Indonesia (39.0%). Urban residence (odds ratio [OR] range, 2.20-4.11; countries with significant results only), female respondents (OR range, 1.40–1.69), engagement in daily waged labor (OR range, 1.54–1.68), and running a small trade/business (OR range, 1.66–2.71) were significantly associated with income reduction or job loss in three out of 4 countries (allP< 0.05). Food stock availability increased significantly in 2021 compared to 2020 in all four countries (OR range, 1.91–4.45) (all P < 0.05). Availability of all essential items at markets increased in India (OR range, 1.45–3.99) but decreased for basic foods, hygiene items, and medicine in Vietnam (OR range, 0.81–0.86) in 2021 compared to 2020 (all P < 0.05). In 2021, the affordability of all essential items significantly improved in India (OR range, 1.18–3.49) while the affordability of rent, health care, and loans deteriorated in Indonesia (OR range, 0.23–0.71) when compared to 2020 (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Long-term social protection programs need to be carefully designed and implemented to address food insecurity among vulnerable groups, considering each country’s market conditions, consumer food purchasing behaviors, and financial support capacity.