Associations of County-Level Urbanicity With Overall Survival Across 19 Solid Tumor Groups, 2004–2023: A SEER Cohort Study of 5.5 Million Patients
- 1Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Liuzhou Municipal Liutie Central Hospital, Liuzhou, China
Abstract
Introduction: We evaluated whether county-level urbanicity at diagnosis was associated with overall survival (OS) across 19 solid tumor groups in SEER.
Methods: This retrospective, population-based cohort study included adults aged ≥18 years with first primary invasive solid tumors diagnosed during 2004–2023. County-level urbanicity at diagnosis was defined using the SEER-linked, year-specific Rural–Urban Continuum Code (RUCC) as nonmetropolitan (NM; RUCC 4–9), small/medium metropolitan (SMM; RUCC 2–3; metropolitan areas with <1 million residents), or large metropolitan (LM; RUCC 1; metropolitan areas with ≥1 million residents). Cancer-specific overlap-weighted Cox models estimated mortality hazard ratios (HRs), complemented by 36-month OS, restricted mean survival time (RMST), and sensitivity analyses.
Results: The cohort included 5,486,535 patients: 664,872 in NM, 1,571,092 in SMM, and 3,250,571 in LM areas. In the primary adjusted model, SMM and LM residence were associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality than NM residence in 13 and 14 of 19 tumor groups, respectively, after false discovery rate (FDR) correction. For lung cancer, the HRs were 0.97 (95% CI, 0.96–0.98) for SMM versus NM and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.92–0.95) for LM versus NM; neither contrast was significant for esophageal cancer. Direct SMM-versus-LM comparisons differed significantly in 8 tumor groups, all favoring LM. Absolute differences were modest; the largest 36-month OS difference was 3.59 percentage points (stomach cancer, LM vs NM), and the largest 36-month RMST difference was 1.26 months (other digestive system/peritoneal tumors, LM vs NM).
Conclusions: Compared with NM residence, SMM and LM residence were associated with more favorable OS in multiple solid tumor groups, with associations observed more broadly for LM residence. These observational findings do not establish causal effects of residence.
Related
- Body mass index and overall survival in patients with gastric cancer: stage-specific associations and prognostic implications
- Associations of obesity and visceral adiposity with overall survival and immune-related adverse events in patients with endometrial cancer treated with immunotherapy: a retrospective analysis
- Peripheral Lymphocyte Subsets Predict Efficacy and Overall Survival in Gastric Cancer Patients Receiving Preoperative Chemotherapy: A Retrospective Cohort Study
- Development and internal validation of a nomogram for predicting short- and long-term overall survival in patients with breast cancer liver metastasis: a SEER-based prognostic study
- AI-assisted 3D thoracic body composition analysis identifies candidate imaging markers associated with overall survival in older patients with lung cancer receiving radiotherapy
BibTeX
@article{liang2026associations,
title = {{Associations of County-Level Urbanicity With Overall Survival Across 19 Solid Tumor Groups, 2004–2023: A SEER Cohort Study of 5.5 Million Patients}},
author = {Lihui Liang and Jiancheng Huang and Qingbai Jiang},
journal = {Cancer Control: Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.1177/10732748261491675},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/10732748261491675},
note = {CC BY-NC 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Associations of County-Level Urbanicity With Overall Survival Across 19 Solid Tumor Groups, 2004–2023: A SEER Cohort Study of 5.5 Million Patients
AU - Lihui Liang
AU - Jiancheng Huang
AU - Qingbai Jiang
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/23
JO - Cancer Control: Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
DO - 10.1177/10732748261491675
UR - https://doi.org/10.1177/10732748261491675
AB - Introduction: We evaluated whether county-level urbanicity at diagnosis was associated with overall survival (OS) across 19 solid tumor groups in SEER. Methods: This retrospective, population-based cohort study included adults aged ≥18 years with first primary invasive solid tumors diagnosed during 2004–2023. County-level urbanicity at diagnosis was defined using the SEER-linked, year-specific Rural–Urban Continuum Code (RUCC) as nonmetropolitan (NM; RUCC 4–9), small/medium metropolitan (SMM; RUCC 2–3; metropolitan areas with <1 million residents), or large metropolitan (LM; RUCC 1; metropolitan areas with ≥1 million residents). Cancer-specific overlap-weighted Cox models estimated mortality hazard ratios (HRs), complemented by 36-month OS, restricted mean survival time (RMST), and sensitivity analyses. Results: The cohort included 5,486,535 patients: 664,872 in NM, 1,571,092 in SMM, and 3,250,571 in LM areas. In the primary adjusted model, SMM and LM residence were associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality than NM residence in 13 and 14 of 19 tumor groups, respectively, after false discovery rate (FDR) correction. For lung cancer, the HRs were 0.97 (95% CI, 0.96–0.98) for SMM versus NM and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.92–0.95) for LM versus NM; neither contrast was significant for esophageal cancer. Direct SMM-versus-LM comparisons differed significantly in 8 tumor groups, all favoring LM. Absolute differences were modest; the largest 36-month OS difference was 3.59 percentage points (stomach cancer, LM vs NM), and the largest 36-month RMST difference was 1.26 months (other digestive system/peritoneal tumors, LM vs NM). Conclusions: Compared with NM residence, SMM and LM residence were associated with more favorable OS in multiple solid tumor groups, with associations observed more broadly for LM residence. These observational findings do not establish causal effects of residence.
SN - 1073-2748
SN - 1526-2359
ER -