Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Feb 3;16(2):e0246333. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246333

Spatial distribution of advanced stage diagnosis and mortality of breast cancer: Socioeconomic and health service offer inequalities in Brazil

Nayara Priscila Dantas de Oliveira 1, Marianna de Camargo Cancela 2, Luís Felipe Leite Martins 3, Dyego Leandro Bezerra de Souza 4,5,*
Editor: Bernardo Lanza Queiroz6
PMCID: PMC7857585  PMID: 33534799

Abstract

Breast cancer presents high incidence and mortality rates, being considered an important public health issue. Analyze the spatial distribution pattern of late stage diagnosis and mortality for breast cancer and its correlation with socioeconomic and health service offer-related population indicators. Ecological study, developed with 161 Intermediate Region of Urban Articulation (IRUA). Mortality data were collected from the Mortality Information System (MIS). Tumor staging data were extracted from the Hospital Cancer Registry (HCR). Socioeconomic variables were obtained from the Atlas of Human Development in Brazil; data on medical density and health services were collected from the National Registry of Health Institutions (NRHI) and Supplementary National Health Agency. Global Moran's Index and Local Indicator of Spatial Association (LISA) were utilized to verify the existence of territorial clusters. Multivariate analysis used models with global spatial effects. The proportion of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer was 39.7% (IC 39.4–40.0). The mean mortality rate for breast cancer, adjusted by the standard world population was 10.65 per 100,000 women (± 3.12). The proportion of late stage diagnosis presented positive spatial correlation with Gini’s Index (p = 0.001) and negative with the density of gynecologist doctors (p = 0.009). The adjusted mortality rates presented a positive spatial correlation with the Human Development Index (p<0.001) and density of gynecologist doctors (p<0.001). Socioeconomic and health service offer-related inequalities of the Brazilian territory are determinants of the spatial pattern of breast cancer morbimortality in Brazil.

Introduction

Breast cancer presents the highest incidence and mortality rates in the female population. Estimates indicate increases in the numbers of cases and deaths due to breast cancer, with regional differences related to different political and socioeconomic different contexts in countries and regions [1]. In countries with high development levels, incidence rates for breast cancer in 2020 were 55.8 cases per 100,000 women, being the highest among female malignant neoplasms [2].

In Brazil, the incidence rate of breast cancer is 61.9 cases per 100,000 women, and it is estimated that 59 thousand new cases and almost 29 thousand new deaths will occur until 2025 [2]. Breast cancer presents significant variations in incidence and mortality across Brazilian regions, with geographic differences that follow health-related inequalities of the population [3,4].

When detected early, the malignant breast neoplasms present a good prognosis, with high cure potential. Late stage diagnosis of breast cancer affects the perspectives of survival, being associated with high treatment costs and worse health indicators [5].

Globally, survival trends for breast cancer have increased. In Brazil, despite the high rates of late-stage diagnosis (40.2%) [5], the five-year survival rates for women diagnosed with breast cancer between 2010–2014 was 75.2%. These survival rates were the highest in the last 10 years, but are still lower than the survival rates of other countries, such as Australia (89.5%), United States (90.2%), Argentina (84.4%) and Costa Rica (86.7%) [6].

Health-related inequalities related to the diagnosis and mortality of breast cancer are affected by contextual socioeconomic conditions and the offer and access to health services [7]. In Brazil, there are high social and income-related inequalities [5,8]. The significant territorial extension and accentuated regional socioeconomic diversity contribute to the irregular distribution of health services and technologies in the Brazilian geographic space. There is limited offer and access to healthcare directed to early detection and timely treatment of breast cancer, incapable of meeting the necessities of the population [7].

Although some studies have analyzed the sociodemographic factors that act as catalysts or mitigating agents of inequalities in breast cancer morbimortality [811], spatial distribution patterns and associated factors are frequently ignored [7]. The mapping of geographic patterns of late stage diagnosis and mortality of breast cancer in the Brazilian territorial context can help plan, assess, and implement public policies aimed at the control of breast cancer at local and national levels [7,12].

Besides, the analysis of breast cancer focusing on its geographic location and establishing its relationship with external factors, such as socioeconomic conditions and offer of health services to the population, can reveal underexplored results for the late stage diagnosis and mortality of this cancer.

The objective of this study is to analyze the pattern of spatial distribution of late stage diagnosis and mortality of breast cancer and its correlation with socioeconomic population indicators and health service offer in Brazil.

Methods

Study design

This is an observational, ecological study that used the 161 Intermediate Regions of Urban Articulation (IRUA) as an analysis unit, defined by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) in 2013 [13].

The IRUA correspond to an intermediate territorial scale between Federation Units (FU) and the Immediate Geographic Regions of Urban Articulation [13]. IRUA are agglomerates of neighboring municipalities, which organize the territory from regional capitals or smaller urban centers, taking into consideration the territorial existence of higher complexity urban functions, including health services [13]. This territorial design emphasizes the municipal flows of public and entrepreneurial management, the mobility of population for work and study purposes, and the regions influenced by the cities [13,14].

The choice to employ the IRUA as the territorial delimitation, referencing year 2013, was based on the capacity of depicting the urban articulations and the contextual reality of the evaluated period in the study. The delimitation of the 161 IRUA presents a dynamic character, depicting urban functions established among the Brazilian municipalities [13]. Besides the portrayed contextual reality, the choice of this geographic unit is also related to the quality of data from health information systems. More disaggregated geographic units are challenged by issues related to coverage and under-registry, which compromises the quality of the information generated.

Study variables and data sources

The outcomes analyzed in this study were the Adjusted Mortality Rates and the proportion of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer, per IRUA, for 2011–2015. Data on malignant breast neoplasm (CID 10—C50) [15] were obtained from the Brazilian Mortality Information System (MIS) [16]. The place of residence was considered, along with age group for the study period. Deaths with no data on residence and age group were excluded.

The number of deaths was corrected, considering redistribution according to sex, age group, completeness of death records, and ill-defined deaths, following Santos & Souza [17]. Crude and adjusted mortality rates (per 100,000) were calculated for the IRUA, according to the standard world population [18,19] using the direct standardization method [20]. The population in the middle of the evaluated period was used as a reference, collected from the population estimates according to the municipality, sex, and age, available from IBGE [21].

The proportion of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer was extracted from the Brazilian Hospital Cancer Registry Integrator (IHCR) [22]. This registry groups standardized data collected by the HCR, which are located in general or specialized cancer hospitals (public, private, or philanthropic) [23]. The IHCR includes 273 hospital information units for the study period [23], with higher coverage in the South region (75.0%) and lower coverage in the Midwest (50.0%) [5].

Cases of malignant breast neoplasms were collected from IHCR for women aged 18–99 years old, diagnosed in 2011–2015. The cases with no data on the TNM staging of the tumor were excluded, along with carcinoma In Situ (TNM 0) cases, and those with no information on the age and residence at the time of diagnosis.

The clinical tumor staging employed the TNM Classification of Malignant Tumors [24], dichotomized in late stage (TNM III and IV) and early stage (TNM I and II). The proportion of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer was calculated for each IRUA.

Socioeconomic population indices, Gini’s Index, and the Human Development Index (HDI) were obtained from the Atlas of Human Development in Brazil for 2010, made available by the United Nations Development Programme [25]. These indicators were collected per municipality and then grouped per IRUA, using the weighted average population. Data on medical density and health service offer were extracted from the National Registry of Health Institutions (NRHI) [26] and Supplementary National Health Agency [27], from which specific indicators were calculated for 2013. The denominators of the indicators were extracted from census data, population counts, and population estimates per municipality, sex, and age, carried out by IBGE [21]. Table 1 presents the study variables and corresponding descriptions.

Table 1. Characteristics and details of the dependent and independent variables for the assessment of the spatial pattern of mortality and late-stage diagnosis of breast cancer in Brazil, 2011–2015.

Variable Source Description
Dependent Mortality Adjusted rate of breast cancer mortality SIM Data from 2011 to 2015 Female mortality rate for breast cancer adjusted by age and standard world population
Late staging Proportion of breast cancer late-staging IRHC Data from 2011 to 2015 Proportion of late-stage diagnosis of breast cancer considering the TNM System for Tumor Classification (TNM III and IV)
Independent (Contextual) Socioeconomic Gini Index s Measures the degree of inequality in the distribution of individuals according to the per capita household income
Human Development Index HDI Statistics constituted by data on life expectancy, education of GDP per capita
Independent (Contextual) Density of professionals and offer of health services Density of General Practitioners CNES (January-December 2013) Ratio between the average number of general practitioners registered by CNES in 2013 and the total population, multiplied by 100,000, per IRUA.
Density of Gynecologists Ratio between the average number of gynecologists registered by CNES in 2013 and the female population, multiplied by 1,000,000, per IRUA.
Density of Mastologists Ratio between the average number of mastologists registered by CNES in 2013 and the female population, multiplied by 1,000,000, per IRUA.
Density of mammographic equipment Ratio between the average number of gynecologists registered by CNES in 2013 and the female population, multiplied by 1,000,000, per IRUA.
Proportion of private health plan holders ANS (January-December 2013) Average of the ratio, expressed in percentage, between the number of private health plan holders and the total population of 2013, per IRUA.
Basic attention coverage List of guidelines, goals and indicators 2014 (2013) Coverage of the Basic Attention Teams in 2013 from the results achieved by the process of establishing the List of Guidelines, Objectives, Goals, and Indicators 2013–2015 of the Ministry of Health, per RIAU.

Statistical analysis

The descriptive analysis of data was carried out using geolocation with software TerraView 5.0.0 [28], using the IRUA for the creation of thematic maps. The analysis describes the spatial distribution of the proportions of late stage diagnosis and adjusted mortality rates of breast cancer in the Brazilian territory in 2011–2015.

Global Moran's Index was used to verify the existence of territorial clusters, which is capable of identifying areas with specific spatial dynamics. The Local Indicator of Spatial Association (LISA) was used to identify significant patterns of spatial correlation [29]. In function of the level of significance of LISA, the IRUA were classified as positively correlated, when the region presents neighbors with similar values (High-high, Low-low), or negatively correlated when the values of the neighboring regions are different (High-low, Low-high). Spatial analysis employed first order queen contiguity.

According to the spatial autocorrelation identification, the independent variables that presented a statistically significant correlation with the dependent variables of the study and non-colinear variables (correlation<0.7) were selected to participate in the spatial regression multivariate analysis.

Multivariate analysis used the Spatial Error Model, which indicates global spatial effects. The decision of the final model considered the highest values of the likelihood log, and lowest values for Akaike's Information Criterion and the Schwarz Information Criterion [29]. The final multivariate model included statistically significant variables and those with theoretical plausibility for inclusion in the statistical model.

The residues generated were analyzed by Moran’s I and data dispersion histogram to verify the elimination of spatial correlation after the execution of the multivariate statistical model. The statistical models and calculation of Moran’s I and LISA employed Software GeoDa version 1.14 [30].

This study was carried out with secondary data obtained with health information systems, publicly available, which prevents the identification of individuals. Therefore the approval of a Research Ethics Committee (REC) was not necessary, according to Resolution 580/2018 [31].

Results

In Brazil, for the analyzed period, the IHCR registered the diagnosis of 195,201 cases of malignant breast neoplasms in women aged 18–99 years old. The proportion of late stage diagnosis was 39.7% (IC 39.4–40.0), varying across the Brazilian regions. The mean adjusted mortality rate for breast cancer, considering the world population, was 10.65 per 100,000 women with a standard deviation of 3.12.

Fig 1 presents the spatial distribution of the proportion of late stage diagnosis and the adjusted mortality rates of breast cancer for the 161 IRUA, for 2011–2015.

Fig 1. Spatial distribution of the proportion of late stage diagnosis and adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer in the IRUA, for 2011–2015.

Fig 1

The existence of spatial autocorrelation between the proportion of late stage diagnosis and adjusted mortality rates of breast cancer at IRUA levels is observed by Global Moran’s Index (I 0.404/ p 0.01; I 0.555/ p 0.01). From the calculation of LISA, it was possible to identify the IRUA in function of its statistical significance levels. Fig 2 presents the spatial correlation analyses of the proportion of advanced stage diagnosis and adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer in the Brazilian territory.

Fig 2. Spatial distribution of the clusters of proportion of advanced stage diagnosis and adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer with global and local indicators of spatial association, per IRUA, 2011–2015.

Fig 2

(A) BoxMap of the proportion of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer; (B) MoranMap of the proportion of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer. Moran’s I Moran 0.5549; p 0.001; (C) BoxMap of the adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer; (D) MoranMap adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer. Moran’s I 0.4036; p 0.001.

Fig 3 shows the spatial correlations observed between the proportions of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer and socioeconomic and health service-related population indicators. Most correlations presented negative values, except for the correlation with Gini’s Index. The independent variables “Density of Mastologists” (p 0.552) and “Coverage of Basic Attention” (p 0.929) did not present a significant correlation according to the correlation matrix.

Fig 3. Spatial correlation between the proportion of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer and socioeconomic and health service-related population indicators, per IRUA, 2011–2015.

Fig 3

Fig 4 depicts the spatial correlations observed between the adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer and the socioeconomic and health service-related population indicators. The result of the correlation matrix indicates that all independent variables studied herein presented statistically significant correlation with the adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer, except for “Density of Mastologists” (p 0.967) and “Coverage of Basic Attention” (p 0.262)

Fig 4. Spatial correlation between the adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer and socioeconomic and health service-related population indicators, per IRUA, 2011–2015.

Fig 4

Table 2 presents data of the spatial regression analyses for the proportion of late stage diagnosis and adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer, per IRUA. The final spatial model for the analysis of the proportion of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer included Gini’s Index and the indicators of health service offer “Density of Gynecologists” and “Density of Mammographic equipment”. The model for the analysis of breast cancer mortality was composed of the HDI socioeconomic indicator and indicators related to the offer of health services (Density of Gynecologists” and “Density of Mammographic equipment”). The variable “Density of Mammographic equipment” remained in both models, despite not presenting statistical significance, due to its theoretical plausibility and capacity of statistical fit. Some variables that presented statistical importance in bivariate spatial analysis were not inserted in the model due to the presence of collinearity with other variables already included.

Table 2. Spatial regression analysis of the proportions of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer and its correlation with socioeconomic and health service offer-related population indicators, per IRUA, 2011–2015.

Coefficient Standard error t p
Late stage diagnosis of breast cancer
Socioeconomic population indicators
Gini’s I 55.11 21.47 2.57 0.010*
Health service-related population indicators
Density of gynecologists -0.23 0.09 -2.61 0.009*
Density of mammographic equipment 0.02 0.43 0.05 0.956
Adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer
Socioeconomic population indicators
HDI 31.82 5.78 5.51 <0.001*
Health service-related population indicators
Density of gynecologists 0.12 0.03 4.01 <0.001*
Density of mammographic equipment -0.05 0.12 -0.44 0.660

* Statistically significant.

Proportions of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer: Spatial Error Model’s R-Squared = 0.453.

Adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer: Spatial Error Model’s R-Squared = 0,623.

The multivariate model of spatial regression for analysis of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer has an explanatory power of 34.3%. The analysis model for breast cancer mortality presented an explanatory power of 65.7%. These models showed the highest likelihood values and lowest values for Akaike's and Schwarz’s Information Criteria. The residues of the models presented normal distribution, and Global Moran’s I was -0.025 (p0.344) for the analysis of late stage diagnosis and -0.027 (p 0.333) for the analysis of mortality. S1 Fig and S1 Table, inserted as supplementary material, present the analysis of residues and compare the values of each regression developed.

Late stage diagnosis of breast cancer presents a positive spatial correlation with Gini’s Index (p 0.001) and a negative correlation with the density of gynecologists (p 0.009). The adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer presented a positive, statistically significant correlation with HDI (p <0.001) and with the density of gynecologists (p <0.001). In both spatial models, the socioeconomic population indicators presented higher values than the indicators related to health service offer. This indicates the high predictive power of these variables in the statistical models.

Discussion

The spatial distribution of morbimortality associated with breast cancer presented herein evidences the socioeconomic inequalities across the Brazilian territory. The results demonstrate the presence of spatial clusters in the IRUA located in the North, Northeast, and Midwest Brazil regarding the high proportions of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer. The results suggest that the IRUA with the highest levels of local socioeconomic inequality and lower offer of specialized health services presented high proportions of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer.

The high proportions and unequal territorial distribution of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer verified herein are compatible with previous studies developed in Brazil. The prevalence of late staging for female breast cancer varies between 40.2% and 53.5% and presents regional variations, with the North (48.7%), Northeast (44.5%), and Midwest (47.5%) displaying the highest levels of late stage detection of breast cancer [5,32].

Brazil presents the most extensive public health system in the world, with universal character, aimed at equity and integral care. Approximately 80% of the Brazilian population is assisted exclusively by the national public health system [33]. However, the high demand for healthcare causes the incapacity of the public system to attend the collective health necessities, which leads the population to search for private health services [34]. The unequal territorial distribution of resources and health technology results in the concentration of cancer assistance services in large urban centers of Brazil [35].

The IRUA of the South and Southeast have the best urban organization, with structured health services and orderly distributed across the territory, besides presenting the highest coverage rates of private health plans in Brazil. The North and Northeast regions show irregular population distribution, with large areas presenting low population density, limiting the distribution of health services in the territory. Despite depicting a well-defined territorial occupation, the Northeast concentrates health services and technology in large urban centers the occupy the coastal region, which limits the offer of healthcare and technology to the population of the interior [7,36].

In other countries with different territorial and sociopolitical contexts, it is possible to observe territorial variations associated with late stage diagnosis of breast cancer [37,38]. North-American studies have identified spatial clusters in different states of the USA, with rates of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer varying between 33.5 and 48.2 per 100,000 women. The low socioeconomic conditions and census indicators of poverty have been related to late stage diagnosis of breast cancer in these regions [37,38]. In Iran, areas of territorial clusters have also been studied, with high rates of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer, which presented differences related to access to healthcare and diagnostic delays [39].

The sociopolitical and economic contexts associated with the access to healthcare are considered the main factors contributing to inequalities in morbimortality for breast cancer [7]. In Brazil, the vast extension of the territory and its historical and unequal spatial distribution of municipalities and population have contributed significantly to the contrasts in income distribution in the country [40].

The results of this study indicate a spatial correlation between late stage diagnosis of breast cancer and inequalities related to local income at IRUA levels, measured by Gini’s Index. This can be explained by the irregular distribution of financial resources and health services among the municipalities that constitute the IRUA. The scenario leads to the maintenance and increase of inequalities related to the access to health services and, consequently, to the high prevalence of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer in the most unequal areas of Brazil [7,41,42].

Access to health services reflects the inequalities in the distribution of hierarchical levels of assistance to cancer patients [43,44]. The density of gynecologist doctors presented herein acts as a proxy to analyze the general access of the female population to services related to women’s health.

Data indicate that the low offer of gynecologists is associated with higher rates of late stage detection of female breast cancer [45]. Findings of a Brazilian study have revealed that the access to gynecological assistance in the last two years and regular Papanicolaou tests lead to higher levels of information and early detection of breast cancer in Brazilian women [46]. The association between early detection and access to gynecologists can be explained by a higher adherence to breast cancer screening programs [47].

This study showed territorial clusters with high adjusted mortality rates located in the IRUA of the South and Southeast. These regions present high levels of global socioeconomic development and a wider offer of intermediate-level healthcare. The South and Southeast regions present the highest incidence rates of breast cancer in Brazil, with an estimated risk of 81.06 and 71.16 per 100,000, respectively [4].

In low- and intermediate- income countries, it is possible to observe a change in the profile of breast cancer morbimortality, especially in the displacement of diagnosis related to poverty and cancer-related infections to areas with higher development. This observation is associated with the processes of population increase and aging, accompanied by alterations in the distribution and prevalence of cancer risk factors [1].

A previous study developed in Brazil, in the South, shows a positive spatial correlation between high mortality rates for breast cancer and better socioeconomic conditions and access to healthcare in the municipalities [7]. The correlation described between mortality and high levels of global development can be related to the reverse causality idea. In more developed regions, with a better offer of health services and technology, the number of breast cancer diagnoses is higher. Consequently, there is a higher mortality burden for the disease [48].

The results of this study are discussed based on the Law of Inverse Care. This law is the result of policies that limit the access of the population to healthcare in such a manner that the availability of health services is inversely proportional to the necessities of the population [49,50]. The most vulnerable women, living in more developed areas with a higher concentration of population, face difficulties in obtaining health assistance related to prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of breast cancer [7]. This fact suggests s direct relationship with high mortality rates for breast cancer in these regions.

The scenario constituted by territorial regions with higher development levels and better availability of resources and the high costs associated with modern cancer treatment options can restrict the offer and access to these technologies [51]. The inaccessibility to modern treatment options for breast cancer, which are effective but more expensive, affects the health outcomes related to the disease.

The spatial correlation between breast cancer mortality and the density of gynecologists indicated that the IRUA with higher mortality levels detain or are close to specialized women's healthcare centers, which enhances the secondary prevention strategies for breast cancer.

International studies show an association between the high density of medical professionals and high mortality rates for cancer in countries with low- and intermediate- incomes [51,52]. However, the studies that assess the density of gynecologists in the context of breast cancer are directed to the secondary prevention of the disease, aiming to discuss early detection by mammographic screenings.

The study of Rocha-Brischialiri et al. shows a positive spatial correlation between breast cancer mortality and access to chemotherapy and radiotherapy in Brazil [7]. The recent study by Oliveira et al., who evaluated breast cancer mortality in Brazilian IRUA, evidences that the areas with a higher offer of specialized cancer services and higher density of general practitioners presented high adjusted mortality rates for this neoplasm [48].

Cancer-related studies that focus on its spatial location enable the comprehension of the causal relationships regarding contextual socioeconomic conditions and health-related opportunities of the population, aimed at the offer and access to health services and technologies. The specific analysis of IRUA evaluated the Brazilian territory from an organization that considers the influence regions of cities, establishing territorial flows of access to essential activities and health services in the municipalities. The study presented herein bridges the gap regarding the spatial context of late-stage breast cancer diagnosis and mortality, considering a geographic unit of the Brazilian territory that is scientifically underexplored.

The utilization of secondary sources from health information systems in Brazil can be a possible fragility of this study. The socioeconomic contextual indicators (2010 reference) are a limitation of the Atlas of Human Development in Brazil. However, considering the period analyzed herein, there were no significant changes in the national socioeconomic context. Regarding SIM, there has been a significant improvement in the completeness of epidemiological variables in recent years [53]. Regarding cancer staging, IRHC is the most complete secondary source of data in Brazil, reuniting epidemiological data of the main hospital units providing cancer assistance in the country. It is relevant to ponder the possibilities of spatial analyses considering other Brazilian territorial organization units and other determinant factors regarding the health of individuals and their collectivities. There are more disaggregated geographic units in Brazil–however, these are challenged by issues related to coverage and data registry, which at the end compromise the quality of the information generated.

Conclusions

Based on the geographic information presented, the socioeconomic and health service-related inequalities in the Brazilian territory are determinants of the spatial pattern of morbimortality for breast cancer in the country. The areas with higher needs and worst health assistance conditions are marked by high indices of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer. The more developed regions, which concentrate services and technology, present high mortality rates due to malignant breast neoplasms.

This study contributes to the establishment and reorientation of public policies aimed at controlling breast cancer in the most diverse realities of the Brazilian territory. Implementing effective tracking programs, timely access to appropriate cancer diagnosis and treatment, and the guarantee of equity and integrality in healthcare can help reach better results regarding morbimortality due to breast cancer in Brazil.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Analysis of residues for the Spatial Error Model.

(TIF)

S1 Table. Comparative data between the spatial regressions of the proportion of late stage diagnosis and adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer.

(DOCX)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This study was financed by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001. The author NAYARA PRISCILA DANTAS DE OLIVEIRA obtained funding in the doctoral course of the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel LR, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA: A cancer journal for clinicians, Hoboken, 2018; 68; 6: 394–424. 10.3322/caac.21492 . [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Ferlay J, et al. (ed.). Global Cancer Observatory. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2018. (IARC CAncerBase, n.15). Available: https://gco.iarc.fr/ (ecessed march 16, 2020).
  • 3.Islam N, Patel S, Brooks-Griffin Q, Kemp P, Raveis V, Riley L, et al. Understanding Barriers and Facilitators to Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening among Muslim Women in New York City: Perspectives from Key Informants. SM J Community Med. 2017; 3: 124–138. PMCID: PMC5889113. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Instituto Nacional de Câncer José Alencar Gomes da Silva. Estimativa 2020: Incidência de Câncer no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro, RJ: INCA 2019. Available: https://www.inca.gov.br/sites/ufu.sti.inca.local/files//media/document//estimativa-2020-incidencia-de-cancer-no-brasil.pdf.
  • 5.Santos-Silva I, Stavola BLD, Junior NLR, Nogueira MC, Aquino EML, Bustamante-Teixeira MT, et al. Ethnoracial and social trends in breast cancer staging at diagnosis in Brazil, 2001–14: a case only analysis. The Lancet Global Health. 2019; 7: 784–797. 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30151-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Allemani C, Matsuda T, Di Carla V, Harewood R, Matz M, Niksic M, et al. Global surveillance of trends in cancer survival 2000–14 (CONCORD-3): analysis of individual records for 37 513 025 patients diagnosed with one of 18 cancers from 322 population-based registries in 71 countries. The Lanchet. 2018; 391: 1023–1075. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Rocha-Brischiliari SC, Andrade L, Nihei OK, Brischiliri A, Hortelan MS, Carvalho MDB, et al. Spatial distribution of breast cancer mortality: Socioeconomic disparities and access to treatment in the state of Parana, Brazil. Plos One. 2018; 31: 1–15. 10.1371/journal.pone.0205253 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Moller H, Henson K, Luchtenborg M, Broggio G, Charman J, Coupland VH, et al. Short-term breast cancer survival in relation to ethnicity, stage, grade and receptor status: national cohort study in England. British Journal of Cancer. 2016; 115: 1408–1415. 10.1038/bjc.2016.335 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Unger-Saldaña K. Challenges to the early diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer in developing countries. World J Clin Oncol 2014; 5: 465–477. 10.5306/wjco.v5.i3.465 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ren JX, Gong Y, Ling H, Hu X, Shao ZM. Racial/ethnic differences in the outcomes of patients with metastatic breast cancer: contributions of demographic, socioeconomic, tumor and metastatic characteristics. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2019; 173: 225–237. 10.1007/s10549-018-4956-y . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Ji P, Gong Y, Jiang C, Hu X, Di G, Shao Z. Association between socioeconomic factors at diagnosis and survival in breast cancer: A population-based study. Cancer Medicine 2020; 9: 1922–1936. 10.1002/cam4.2842 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Herrmann C, Ess S, Thurlimann B, Probst-Hensch N, Vounatsou P. 40 years of progress in female cancer death risk: a Bayesian spatio-temporal mapping analysis in Switzerland. BMC Cancer. 2015; 15: 1–10. 10.1186/1471-2407-15-1 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Brasil. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Bioestatística. Diretoria de Geociência. Coordenação de Geografia. Divisão Urbano Regional. Brasília, 2013. Available: https://geoftp.ibge.gov.br/organizacao_do_territorio/divisao_regional/divisao_urbano_regional/documentacao/divisao_urbano_regional_apresentacao_do_trabalho.pdf.
  • 14.Brasil. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Bioestatística. O recorte das Regiões Geográficas Imediatas e Intermediárias de 2017. Brasília, 2017. Available: https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/visualizacao/livros/liv100600.pdf.
  • 15.Who. World Health Organization. CID- 10: International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. 10th Review. Vol 2. Instruction Manual. 2010. Available: https://icd.who.int/browse10/Content/statichtml/ICD10Volume2_en_2010.pdf.
  • 16.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Sistema de Informações sobre Mortalidade. Available: http://www2.datasus.gov.br/DATASUS/index.php?area=0205&id=6937. (acessed January 19, 2019).
  • 17.Santos CA, Souza DLB. Melanoma mortality in Brazil: trends and projections (1998–2032). Cien. Saude Colet.; 2019; 24; 4: 1551–1561. 10.1590/1413-81232018244.13932017 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Segi M. Cancer mortality for selected sites in 24 countries (1950–57). Department of Public Health, Tohoku University of Medicine; Sendai, Japan: 1960. Available: https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/12323699. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Preston SH, Heuveline P, Guillot M. Chapter2: Age‐Specific Rates and Probabilities. 21–37. In Demography: Measuring and Modeling Population Processes. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. ISBN: 978-1-557-86451-2. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Who. World Health Organization. International Agency for Research on Cancer. International Association of Cancer Registries. Cancer Registration: Principles and Methods. IARC Scientific Publications, n. 95. Lyon, France. 1991. Available: https://publications.iarc.fr/Book-And-Report-Series/Iarc-Scientific-Publications/Cancer-Registration-Principles-And-Methods-1991.
  • 21.Brasil. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Bioestatística. Brasília, 2013. Available: https://www.ibge.gov.br/ (accessed January 10, 2020).
  • 22.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Instituto Nacional do Câncer. Integrador Registro Hospitalar de Câncer RHC. Available: https://irhc.inca.gov.br/RHCNet/ (accessed December 02, 2019).
  • 23.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Instituto Nacional do Câncer. Coordenação de Prevenção e Vigilância. Registros Hospitalares de Câncer. Planejamento e Gestão. 2ª edição. Rio de Janeiro, 2010. Available: https://www.inca.gov.br/sites/ufu.sti.inca.local/files//media/document//registros-hospitalares-de-cancer-2010.pdf.
  • 24.UICC. International Union Against Cancer. Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C. TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours. 2009; 7 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Publication: New York. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Brasil. Programa das Nações Unidas para o Desenvolvimento. Atlas do Desenvolvimento Humano no Brasil. Brasília, 2013. Available: http://atlasbrasil.org.br/2013/ (accessed January 10, 2020).
  • 26.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Cadastro Nacional de Estabelecimentos de Saúde. Brasília, 2019. Available: http://cnes.datasus.gov.br/ (accessed January 10, 2020).
  • 27.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Agência Nacional de Saúde Suplementar. Brasília, 2019. Available: http://www.ans.gov.br/anstabnet/ (acessed September 10, 2019).
  • 28.Monteiro AMV, Câmara G, Souza RCM. Software TerraView Version 5.0.0. Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais INEP. Available: http://www.dpi.inpe.br/terralib5/wiki/doku.php (acessed June 01, 2020).
  • 29.Câmara G, Carvalho MS, Cruz OG, Correa V. Análise espacial de áreas. Available: http://www.dpi.inpe.br/gilberto/livro/analise/cap5-areas.pdf (acessed June 01, 2020).
  • 30.Anselin L. Software GeoDa and Open GeoDa. Geoespatial Analysis and Computation. Version 1.14. University of Chicago. 2003. Available: https://spatial.uchicago.edu/software (acessed June 01, 2020).
  • 31.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Conselho Nacional de Saúde. Diário Oficial da União. Resolução N° 580, de 22 de março de 2018. 208; 135: 55p. Available: https://www.in.gov.br/materia/-/asset_publisher/Kujrw0TZC2Mb/content/id/31546309/do1-2018-07-16-resolucao-n-580-de-22-de-marco-de-2018-31546295 (acessed July 26, 2020).
  • 32.Abrahão KS, Bergman A, Aguiar SS, Thuler LCS. Determinants of advanced stage presentation of breast cancer in 87,969 Brazilian women. Maturitas. 2015, 82: 365–370. 10.1016/j.maturitas.2015.07.021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Figueiredo FWS, Almeida TCC, Schoueri JHM, Luisi C, Adami F. Association between primary care coverage and breast cancer mortality in Brazil. Plos One 2018; 13: 1–10. 10.1371/journal.pone.0200125 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Oliveira NPD, Guedes TSR, Holanda AM, Reis MA, Silva CP, Rocha e Silva BL, et al. Functional Disability in Women Submitted to Breast Cancer Treatment. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, 2017; 18: 1207–1214. 10.22034/APJCP.2017.18.5.1207 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Ramaswani R, Paulino E, Barrichello A, Nogueira-Rodrigues A, Bukowski A, St.Louis J, et al. Disparities in Breast, Lung, and Cervical Cancer Trials Worldwide. Journal of Global Oncology, 2018; 1: 1–11. 10.1200/JGO.17.00226 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Barbosa IR, Souza DLB, Bernal MM, Costa ICC. Regional inequalities in cervical cancer mortality in Brazil: trends and projections through to 2030. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 2016; 21: 253–262. 10.1590/1413-81232015211.03662015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Tatalovich Z, Zhu L, Rolin A, Lewis DR, Harlan LC, Winn DM. Geographic disparities in late stage breast cancer incidence: results from eight states in the United States. Int J Health Geogr. 2015; 14: 1–11. 10.1186/1476-072X-14-1 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Roche LM, Niu X, Stroup AM, Henry KA. Disparities in Female Breast Cancer Stage at Diagnosis in New Jersey: A Spatial-Temporal Analysis. Journal of Public Health Management and Pactice. 2017; 23: 477–486. 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000524 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Olfatifar M, Karami M, Hosseini SM, Parvin M, Moghimbeigi A, Kousha A, et al. Space-time Analysis of Breast Cancer and Its Late-stage Cases among Iranian Women. Iranian Journal of Public Health. 2017; 46: 1555–1562. Available: https://ijph.tums.ac.ir/index.php/ijph PMCID: PMC5750354. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Neri MC. A escalada da desigualdade: Qual foi o impacto da crise sobre a distribuição de renda e a pobreza? FGV Social. 2019. Available: https://cps.fgv.br/desigualdade (accessed July 20, 2020). [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Ferreira NAS, Carvalho SMF, Valenti VE, Bezerra IMP, Batista HMT, Abreu LC, et al. Treatment delays among women with breast cancer in a low socio-economic status region in Brazil. BMC Women's Health, 2017; 17: 1–8. 10.1186/s12905-016-0358-7 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Figueiredo FWS, Adami F. Effects of the high-inequality of income on the breast cancer mortality in Brazil. Scientific reports, 2019; 9: 1–6. 10.1038/s41598-018-37186-2 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Stopa SR, Malta DC, Monteiro CN, Szwarcwald CL, Goldbaum M, Cesar CLG. Use of and access to health services in Brazil, 2013 National Health Survey. Rev Saude Publica, 2017; 51:1–11. 10.1590/S1518-8787.2017051006113 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Malta DC, Bernal RTI, Neto EV, Curci KA, Pasinato MTM, Libôa RM, et al. Trends in risk and protective factors for non-communicable diseases in the population with health insurance in Brazil from 2008 to 2015. Rev B ras Epidemiol, 2018; 21: 1–14. 10.1590/1980-549720180020.supl.1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Akinyemiju T, Moore JX, Ojesina AL, Waterbor JW, Altekruse S. Racial disparities in individual breast cancer outcomes by hormone-receptor subtype, area-level socio-economic status and healthcare resources. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016; 157: 575–586. 10.1007/s10549-016-3840-x . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Schilling MPP, Silva IF, Opitz SP, Borges MFSO, Koifman S, Koifman RJ. Breast Cancer Awareness among Women in Western Amazon: a Population Based Cross-Sectional Study. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, 2017; 18: 847–856. 10.22034/APJCP.2017.18.3.847 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Bertaut A, Coudert J, Bengrine L, Dancourt V, Binquet C, Douvier S. Does mammogram attendance influence participation in cervical and colorectal cancer screening? A prospective study among 1856 French women. Plos One. 2018; 13: 1–15. 10.1371/journal.pone.0198939 . [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Oliveira NPD, Siqueira CAS, Lima KYN, Cancela MC, Souza DLB. Association of cervical and breast cancer mortality with socioeconomic indicators and availability of health services. 2020. Cancer Epidemiology. 2020; 64: 1–7. 10.1016/j.canep.2019.101660. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Hart JT. The inverse care law. The Lancet. 1971; 27: 405–412. 10.1016/s0140-6736(71)92410-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Broeiro P. Justiça social e lei dos cuidados inversos. Rev Port Med Geral Fam. 2016; 32: 167–9. Available: http://www.scielo.mec.pt/pdf/rpmgf/v32n3/v32n3a01.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Batouli A, Jahanshahi P, Gross CP, Makarovi DV, Yu JB. The global cancer divide: Relationships between national healthcare resources and cancer outcomes in high-income vs. middle- and low-income countries. Journal of Epidemiology and Global Health 2014; 4: 115–124. 10.1016/j.jegh.2013.10.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Nguyen KD, Hyder ZZ, Shaw MD, Maness SB, Cookson MS, Patel SG, et al. Effects of primary care physician density, urologist presence, and insurance status on stage of diagnosis for urologic malignancies. Cancer Epidemiology. 2018; 52: 10–14. 10.1016/j.canep.2017.10.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Felix JD, Helena M, Amorim C, De Castro DS, Evaluation of the plenitude of epidemiological variables of the Information System on Mortality of women with deaths from breast cancer in the Southeast Region—Brazil (1998–2007). Cien. Saude Colet. 2012; 17: 945–953. 10.1590/S1413-81232012000400016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Bernardo Lanza Queiroz

17 Dec 2020

PONE-D-20-34094

SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF ADVANCED STAGE DIAGNOSIS AND MORTALITY OF BREAST CANCER: SOCIOECONOMIC AND HEALTH SERVICE OFFER INEQUALITIES IN BRAZIL

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. de Souza,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

This is a very interesting and important paper. The paper needs to review some parts to improve the discussion and clarify some points, There are interesting results across regions of the countries that should have a more detailed discussion. I also would like to see a more detailed analysis of data quality (some additional references on the quality of information) and limitations of data use (death registration, population estimates). Please, see detailed comments by the reviewers are presented below. 

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 31 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Bernardo Lanza Queiroz, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating in your Funding Statement:

'This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001.  The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript'

a. Please provide an amended statement that declares *all* the funding or sources of support (whether external or internal to your organization) received during this study, as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now

Please also include the statement “There was no additional external funding received for this study.” in your updated Funding Statement.

b. Please include your amended Funding Statement within your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. We note that Figures 1, 2, 3, 4 and S5 in your submission contain map images which may be copyrighted.

All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (a) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (b) remove the figures from your submission:

a. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figures 1, 2, 3, 4 and S5 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. 

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

b. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Dear Editor:

Thank you for offering me the opportunity to contribute to the review of this study that may allow new perspectives to lessen the severe statistics of breast cancer.

This article envisions the spatial distribution pattern of the final stage of breast cancer diagnosis and mortality and its correlation with socio-economic aspects and population indicators related to the provision of health services. The theme is relevant, bring in robust data and the results found may reflect the high incidence of breast cancer mortality of the above-mentioned country. I also highlight that some variables assessed contributes greatly to reflect on the improvement of public health policies concerning breast cancer. Another highlight is that spatial analyzes in continental countries are essential for improving health policies due to the faced social barriers. Thus, I make some suggestions to the authors that may contribute to the disclosure of the study.

Introduction

In general, the introduction is relevant to data that refer to the objective of the study. I only suggest adding data from first world countries in the introduction show emphatically the magnitude of breast cancer in the country under study. Also, I suggest including data on breast cancer survivors diagnosed in late breast cancer diagnoses. These data would add even more relevance to the study.

Methods

1- I would suggest replacing “Materials and Methods” with “Methods”.

2- The section presents the distinct data that helps in understanding the methodological path. However, it is still unclear how the IRUA representation in data collection happened for a continental country like Brazil. I suggest adding a concise statement of this extent collection and the importance of using it in the study. And I would like to highlight positively that the authors have made the rate adjustments.

3- Also, it would be suitable for the authors to explain the socioeconomic and demographic indicators selected to be analyzed in the research.

4- The authors searched for mortality data up to 99 years of age. The suggestion is for the authors to explain the reason for not using a lower age range of mortality for the study and instead of seeming like a limitation of bias due to elderly women having other impairments, it may highlight a gap for older women’s lack of care concerning the disease.

Discussion:

This is a consistent research and can adequately explain the results found.

Greater concerns

1. In general, there was no explanation of the negative results found for the South and Southeast. For greater robustness of the study, the authors could give this information at the beginning of the discussion just as they did with the other regions of the country. There is no relation between socioeconomic variables and lack of professionals according to the other regions, but they show relevant data for these two regions that stand out the most in breast cancer mortality. Subsequently, a deeper interpretation of these findings is necessary.

Minor concerns:

1. Page 15, line 334-337: Although a limitation of the study was described in the paragraph, there is no link from the negative to the positive highlight of the information system. Furthermore, I suggest reviewing the writing so there is a continuity of data about the information system so that the content is globally understandable.

3. Page 15, line 337-339: there was an emphasis on other spatial analysis arrangements and other health determinants. As a suggestion to the authors, there is a need to be more specific in the gap signaled. Thus, researchers will be more supported to produce new research when reading this study.

Reviewer #2: Title: SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF ADVANCED STAGE DIAGNOSIS AND MORTALITY OF BREAST CANCER: SOCIOECONOMIC AND HEALTH SERVICE OFFER INEQUALITIES IN BRAZIL

First, the reviewer declares that no competing interests exist.

The article aims to analyze the spatial distribution pattern of late stage diagnosis and mortality for breast cancer and its correlation with socioeconomic and health service offer-related population indicators. Mortality data were collected from the Mortality Information System (MIS). Tumor staging data were extracted from the Hospital Cancer Registry (HCR). Socioeconomic variables were obtained from the Atlas of Human Development in Brazil. Global Moran's Index and Local Indicator of Spatial Association (LISA) were utilized to verify the existence of territorial clusters. Multivariate analysis used models with global spatial effects. The author found a very important result for the implementation of health policies to combat breast cancer: the proportion of late stage diagnosis of breast cancer was 39.7% (IC 39.4 – 40.0), and the proportion of late stage diagnosis presented positive spatial correlation with Gini’s Index (p = 0.001) and negative with the density of gynecologist doctors (p = 0.009).

The authors begin the article presenting information about the incidence of breast cancer in the world, and the authors contextualize the Brazilian case very well, when they argue that health-related inequalities related to the diagnosis and mortality of breast cancer are affected by contextual socioeconomic conditions and the offer and access to health services, in turn related to high social and income-related inequalities. Therefore, they carry out an updated bibliographic review.

In the section “Materials and Methods”, the first subsection “Study design and participants” could just be called “Study design”, because the authors presented only the selected unit of analysis. The choice for Immediate Geographic Regions of Urban Articulation (IGRUA) is justified due to its representativeness of the urban articulations and contextual reality of the period. In Brazil, there are more disaggregated geographical units, such as the micro-regions or even the municipalities. It is important that the authors justify the choice of the geographical unit in view of the quality of the data. For example, it was decided not to work with the municipalities as there are problems about quality in working with more disaggregated data, such as registration or coverage problems. It is common the use of statistical methods (such as empirical bayes) for the correction of records, in small areas. Therefore, even if such problems have not been identified, it is important to contextualize a little more the choice by IGRUA, in view of the other geographical units.

In the section “Study variables and data sources” a table must be created with the variables used, data sources and year of information. In this section, the data collected from ICD 10 were presented, obtained from the Brazilian Mortality Information System (MIS). The methods used to correct the data are adequate. I just suggest the citation of Preston et al (2001): Demography, Measuring and Modeling Population Processes, for direct standardization. In relation to the population estimates used for the denominator of rates, the IBGE estimates were used. There is no necessity of change, no doubt it is a good option, but best population estimates in Brazil today are from UFRN, from the Department of Demography and Actuarial Sciences. This group has been a reference in Brazil (including in IBGE committees) in the development of stochastic municipal projections, by sex and age. There is a project, called “Brazil three times”, financed by the Secretariat of Strategic Affairs of the Presidency of the Republic, which provides estimates (by sex and age) that are more robust, when compared to IBGE estimates. You do not need to change this information in the article, but this is a good option for the next publications.

In addition, in relation to the data processing stages, the authors are very careful, explaining how they dealt with situations of lack of data, missings, etc. I only suggest that a highlight is given to the fact that data on inequality were obtained from the Atlas of Human Development in Brazil for 2010, while mortality rates, for example, were estimated for the period between 2011-2015. Of course, it is a good assumption to consider that the socioeconomic context did not change significantly, for example, between 2010 and 2015. But these assumptions (which represent limitations of the data sources) need to be described in the methodology.

Regarding the geographic information system used, Terraview, it is a good GIS, created by INPE. But the maps need to be corrected. It's necessary to export them with a higher resolution (.dpi), since the low resolution is compromising the visualization, mainly of the thematic maps. This is a requirement for the publication of this article.

Regarding the cluster maps, it was evident that the authors printed the maps and graphs from the Geoda. There are ways to export the table of attributes of the results of spatial autocorrelation, to the elaboration of a more complete layout, in a more robust GIS. But, in this case, you don't need to change the cluster maps for the publication.

In the subsection “Statistical analysis”, both the auto correlation method and the spatial regression method were not detailed, but references were cited that allow the reader to known the methods, if interested. On the other hand, the parameters and procedures adopted in the models were presented (such as the neighborhood matrix and the residue analysis). Therefore, this section is well structured and does not need correction.

The “Results” section is well structured, the results are very interesting, and represent an important contribution to this field of knowledge. In Brazil, 39.7% of cases are diagnosed late, and statistical significance was found between late care and the incidence of the disease with inequality and the presence of specialized professionals. The “Discussion” section, on the other hand, analyzes the spatial inequalities observed in different regions of the country, putting in perspective the inequality in the offer of services (concentrated in large centers), added to the problem of deficiency in the public health service, responsible for attending 80% of the population. These two sections analyzed the results satisfactorily, in addition to highlighting the importance of the study, so there is no indication of correction in these sections.

The article is of great quality and contributes to the studies on breast cancer. I strongly suggest publication, after minor corrections.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: SHEILA CRISTINA ROCHA BRISCHILIARI

Reviewer #2: Yes: Járvis Campos - Professor of Demography and Acturial Sciences (UFRN) and the Demography Graduate Program (PPGDem/UFRN)

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Feb 3;16(2):e0246333. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246333.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


13 Jan 2021

All the suggestions made by the editor and reviewers were followed, aiming to further increase the quality of the paper.

The images were exported at higher resolution (600 dpi) for individually uploaded images. When converted to the PDF format, quality is lost. The resolutions of all images have been verified and edited to enhance the visualization of maps.

The maps displayed in the manuscript were elaborated by the authors, from territorial geographic mesh (shape files), publicly available from the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Biostatistics (IBGE), and therefore free from copyright. The geographic meshes are made available without any epidemiological associated data. The maps related to late-stage diagnosis and breast cancer mortality per Brazilian IRUA were also elaborated by the authors.

Website of the territorial meshes https://www.ibge.gov.br/geociencias/organizacao-do-territorio/malhas-territoriais.html

REVIEWER #1

Introduction

The requested information has been added, with emphasis on incidence data for breast cancer in first-world countries and survival rates, adding relevance to the study.

Methods

1- The title of the section was changed, following your suggestion.

2- The representation of IRUA for data collection has been better explained in the paper. The IRUA correspond to an intermediate territorial scale between Federation Units (FU) and Immediate Geographic Regions of Urban Articulation. Following the federation principles, each FU must contain at least two IRUA. This territorial design describes the regions of influence of the main urban centers. In the study, all variables were collected per municipality and then grouped per IRUA. The socioeconomic population indicators were collected per municipality and then grouped per IRUA, using the weighted average of the population.

3- All indicators analyzed in the study were presented in Table 1, as suggested.

4- The mortality data presented in the study were gathered based on the place of residence and detailed age group, for the period 2011-2015. The malignant breast neoplasm cases were collected for the age rage 18-99 years old, also following the detailed age group logic. The addition of elderly women aimed to verify an association between late-stage diagnosis and mortality with oncology assistance provided by the Brazilian network of healthcare. The study aims to evidence gaps in the offer of healthcare to older women, regarding breast cancer. It was possible to observe that 4.21% of the studied population belonged to the age group 80-89 years old and 0.46% to the group 90-99 year old .

Discussion

1- The negative results related to the territorial clusters of the high mortality rates located for the South and Southeast Brazilian IRUA are presented and discussed starting at page 15,line 313. The discussion was divided into two parts: an initial section related to the findings associated with late-stage diagnosis of breast cancer, and the second section focuses on the discussions of mortality results. The negative results found for the South and Southeast regions of the country are discussed based on the Reverse Causality Theory and Inverse Care Law.

Minor concerns:

1 -3- The information suggested has been added to the new, revised version of the manuscript, considering the potentialities and fragilities of the study.

REVIEWER #2

Methods

1- The first subsection of “Methods” was changed to “Study Design”, as suggested by the reviewer. Justification of the use of IRUA with emphasis on data quality is presented in the methodology and then in the discussion of results, evidencing the potentialities of the study.

2- A Table containing the dependent and independent variables of the study was added to the paper (Table 1).

The reference “Preston et al (2001): Demography, Measuring and Modeling Population Processes” was added (Ref 19).

Regarding the population estimations, IBGE data was utilized as it is a widely accepted and employed database, being the primary data source. The suggestion of the reviewer to use the estimations of the Department of Demographics and Actuarial Sciences has been noted for futures studies.

3- The limitations regarding the data sources of the study are presented in the discussion section (Page 17, Line 359).

4- The images were exported at higher resolution (600 dpi) for individually uploaded images. When converted to the PDF format, quality is lost. The resolutions of all images have been verified and edited to enhance the visualization of maps.

5- We thank the reviewer for the information, and the cluster maps have not been changed.

6- We appreciate your comments.

7- Thank you for the time dedicated to the review of our paper.

Attachment

Submitted filename: response_to_reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Bernardo Lanza Queiroz

19 Jan 2021

SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF ADVANCED STAGE DIAGNOSIS AND MORTALITY OF BREAST CANCER: SOCIOECONOMIC AND HEALTH SERVICE OFFER INEQUALITIES IN BRAZIL

PONE-D-20-34094R1

Dear Dr. de Souza,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Bernardo Lanza Queiroz, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Thank you for considering and incorporating the comments and suggestions made during the review process. We all agree the paper is a relevant and important contribution. 

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Bernardo Lanza Queiroz

22 Jan 2021

PONE-D-20-34094R1

SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF ADVANCED STAGE DIAGNOSIS AND MORTALITY OF BREAST CANCER: SOCIOECONOMIC AND HEALTH SERVICE OFFER INEQUALITIES IN BRAZIL

Dear Dr. de Souza:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Bernardo Lanza Queiroz

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Analysis of residues for the Spatial Error Model.

    (TIF)

    S1 Table. Comparative data between the spatial regressions of the proportion of late stage diagnosis and adjusted mortality rates for breast cancer.

    (DOCX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: response_to_reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES