Discussion
In this national study of patients with non-familial Rb diagnosed over a 6-year period to 2011 in the UK, there was no evidence of an association of ethnicity or SES and the risk of presenting with advanced disease.
A key strength of our study is that data were extracted from a prospective Rb database with no selection bias. In addition, we collected information on SES directly from the patients’ parents to increase granularity of the data. For example, education is different from income and might help us with further interventions.
Also, during this period of data collection enucleation rates were over 70% and we had information regarding high-risk histopathological features. As globe salvage has increased due to new treatments (intra-arterial chemotherapy and intravitreal chemotherapy) such information is more difficult to acquire. However, the number of eyes that fall in the more advanced groups D and E remains valid parameters to study.
In the USA, it has recently been shown that there was a trend for Hispanics and those with unfavourable socioeconomic factors to have more advanced disease at presentation (more high-risk adverse histopathology on local review). However, central review of histopathology slides did not provide evidence that this was statistically significant.11 This suggests that there may have been bias at local review particularly if the name of the child was not masked from the histopathologist. From 2000 to 2010, the data from 830 children were analysed and an association between requirement for enucleation and being Hispanic and/or low SES existed.15 A retrospective analysis of the presentation of disease according to IIRC (particularly groups D and E) may have been difficult to perform and the decision to enucleate was not standardised according to classification, thus bias on the part of the surgeon may have played a part. In addition, statistical significance was noted in mortality: 2 of 262 white children died (99% 5-year survival) compared with 6 of 89 black children (93% 5-year survival). The causes of mortality from Rb are again complex ranging from associated pinealoblastoma to treatment strategies and poor follow-up. Unfortunately, such details were not provided in that study. From 2000 to 2014, it was found that more patients from low SES and Hispanic patients were enucleated in the USA.16 However, there was no difference in the advanced nature of disease. This reflects variation in treatment approaches between centres in America and probably cost implications where it is cheaper to perform an enucleation than undergo other treatments. We present a study from the UK where there are only two centres and no cost implications to families. It is reassuring that no statistical difference was noted in enucleation rate for low SES and non-white patients.
Human Development Index for different countries correlates with survival for Rb.17 In Mexico, lower maternal education and poor prenatal housing conditions were significantly predictive of overall survival in unilateral disease, and more advanced IIRC grouping in bilateral disease, independent of diagnostic delay.18 In Brazil, maternal education carried a significant difference with outcomes (advanced stage at diagnosis, enucleation and survival).19 Interestingly, low SES per se was not associated with poorer outcomes.
We have previously shown that in the UK high-risk Rb (requiring adjuvant chemotherapy) is not associated with delayed lag time (time to diagnosis).9 This is counterintuitive but is found in all other paediatric cancers in high-resource countries.20 Whereas low SES may be associated with more advanced disease at presentation in low-resource countries or countries with unequal healthcare access, we wanted to understand if there were any vulnerable groups in a healthcare system that was free at point of access such as the UK. We have found no evidence of an association to suggest SES or a certain ethnic group is disadvantaged. It is also difficult to argue that any particular ethnic group (present in the UK) is biologically more susceptible to advanced disease.
Our study draws on a national sample representative of the UK population of children with non-familial Rb. Nevertheless, power to detect true differences in risk of presentation with advanced disease may have been limited by the size of the sample. An inherent limitation to studying Rb is the rarity of the disease. As we hypothesised that ethnicity and SES may be risk factors, we undertook primary data collection on person/individual-level SES factors, in order to allow deeper understanding of pathways. Unfortunately, we had only a moderate response to the questionnaire survey which limited our sample size further. There were some differences that failed to reach statistical significance. For example, there was some indication that Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi ethnicity, and being in the lowest IMD quintile were associated with higher likelihood of D/E IIRC grade, but this was not statistically significant. This may be due to the small study population size leading to inadequate power. However, the results are similar to the findings of another high-resource country (USA) that has looked at this study question.11
In summary, we report the largest cohort of patients with Rb in the UK with prospective data on ethnicity and SES. Although there is a trend between low SES and certain ethnic groups with advanced Rb, we have found no evidence of an association. This may reflect equality in access in primary healthcare. As a result, awareness campaigns highlighting the white reflex and strabismus should continue in their present format.