<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJOG</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2160-8792</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojog.2017.74047</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJOG-75667</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Medicine&amp;Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Sociodemographic Factors Associated with Delays in Breast Cancer
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Mamour</surname><given-names>Gueye</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Serigne</surname><given-names>Modou Kane Gueye</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Moussa</surname><given-names>Diallo</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ousmane</surname><given-names>Thiam</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Aissatou</surname><given-names>Mbodji</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Aliou</surname><given-names>Diouf</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Khalifa</surname><given-names>Fall</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Youssou</surname><given-names>Toure</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hadja</surname><given-names>Maimouna Barro Daff</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jean</surname><given-names>Charles Moreau</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Gynaecologic and Obstetric Clinic, Aristide Le Dantec Teaching Hospital, Dakar, Senegal</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>mamourmb@gmail.com(MG)</email>;</corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>13</day><month>04</month><year>2017</year></pub-date><volume>07</volume><issue>04</issue><fpage>455</fpage><lpage>463</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>January</day>	<month>17,</month>	<year>2017</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>Accepted:</day>	<month>April</month>	<year>23,</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>April</day>	<month>26,</month>	<year>2017</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Objectives: The aim of our study was to investigate the relation of some sociodemographic factors and delays presentation in breast cancer. 
  Patients and method: This was an observational study in Breast Unit of Aristide Le Dantec Teaching Hospital in Dakar. Were included in the study all patients followed for breast cancer from January 2008 to December 2014. The following variables were selected and stratified: age, place of living, educational attainment, menopausal status, socioeconomic status and family history of breast cancer. For each variable, an association with the stage and presentation delay was assessed. 
  Results: Two hundred and fifty nine (259) patients met the inclusion criteria. No correlation was found between the studied socio-demographic factors and delay. Negative history of family breast cancer was associated with presentation delay. The only factor associated with locally advanced breast cancer after adjusting confounding factors was low level of income. 
  Conclusion: A significant percentage of women with breast cancer in Senegal are experiencing presentation delay. Coordinated efforts with public health department are needed to educate the focused groups and mitigate the barriers.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Breast Cancer</kwd><kwd> Presentation Delay</kwd><kwd> Stage</kwd><kwd> Survival</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Breast cancer is now the most common female cancer and the leading cause of death among female cancers in developed countries [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref1">1</xref>] . In Senegal, it ranks second after cervix cancer [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref2">2</xref>] .</p><p>In developing countries, breast cancer is often discovered at a late stage, which has a negative influence on prognosis [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref3">3</xref>] .</p><p>Observations during our routine clinical practice have led us to note that poverty, social culture and lack of awareness about the disease can be factors leading to misconceptions and beliefs resulting in late consultation.</p><p>The objective of our study was to investigate the relationship between certain socio-demographic factors and the time for presentation, breast cancer diagnosis and survival.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Patients and Method</title><p>This was an observational study at Breast Unit of Aristide Le Dantec Teaching Hospital in Dakar. All patients followed for histologically proven breast cancer from January 2008 to December 2014 (7 years), were included in the study. The following variables were selected and stratified: age, place of living, educational attainment, menopausal status, socio-economic status and family history of breast cancer.</p><p>Age referred to age at diagnosis. It was stratified into 2 categories: &lt;40 years and ≥40 years.</p><p>The place of living was that where the patient had lived for at least 6 months at the time of diagnosis. Three categories were selected: patients living in Dakar and those living in countryside. The third category included patients living outside Senegal. They were excluded from the study.</p><p>Educational attainment was the highest level achieved. It was subdivided into different classes: illiterate, primary, middle and higher for those with a bachelor's degree. Secondly, two categories were chosen: uneducated (illiterate) and educated for the others.</p><p>Socioeconomic status was determined on the basis of monthly income (low- income (monthly income in FCFA &lt;35,000) or medium-high income (monthly income ≥ 35,000).</p><p>For all these variables, an association with stage, time to presentation and survival was sought.</p><p>Patients were classified into two stage categories: early stage: T1 and T2 (TNM classification of breast cancer, 7<sup>th</sup> edition, 2010) and locally advanced stage (T3 and higher) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref4">4</xref>] .</p><p>The delay in diagnosis was defined as a time to presentation of 3 months or more since the onset of the first symptoms [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref6">6</xref>] .</p><p>Data were extracted from our database, transferred to Microsoft Excel software and analysed with SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science), version 21.0.</p><p>Chi-square test was used as a test of association between the variables. Survival curves were performed using Kaplan-Meier method.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><p>1) Frequency</p><p>Two hundred and fifty-nine (259) patients met the inclusion criteria out of 1891 patients followed for breast diseases leading to a frequency of 18.9%.</p><p>2) Socio-demographic characteristics</p><p>Our patients were relatively young: 60.6% of patients were under 40 years of age and 65.6% were premenopausal at diagnosis.</p><p>They were illiterated in almost half of cases (46.3%). More than half came from countryside (51.4%).</p><p>The income level was low in 79.2% of the cases.</p><p>The distribution of patients according to the socio-demographic level is reported in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>.</p><p>3) Clinical features</p><p>In almost all cases, patients consulted for a breast mass (91.5%) with delayed presentation (78.4%). The cancer was seen at a locally advanced stage in 80.7% of cases as shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>.</p><p>The negative family history of breast cancer was associated with delayed consultation.</p><p>There was no correlation between other socio-demographic factors such as age, place of residence, level of schooling and period of genital activity, and delay in consultation.</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of patients according to sociodemographic characteristics (N = 259)</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variables</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Age</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;40 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >157</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >60.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >≥40 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >102</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Level of schooling</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Illiterate</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >120</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Primary</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >58</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Intermediate</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >High</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Unknown</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Place of living</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Capital</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >126</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >48.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Countryside</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >133</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >51.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Income</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Low</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >205</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >79.2</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mid-High</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >54</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Menopausal status</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Postmenopausal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >89</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >34.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Premenopausal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >170</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >65.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Family history of breast cancer</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >224</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >86.5</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of patients according to clinical features</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variables</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Number</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Symptoms</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Breast mass</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >237</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >91.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Other symptoms</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Time to presentation</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;3 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >56</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >≥3 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >203</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >78.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Stage</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >T1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >T2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >T3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >111</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >T4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37.8</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Relation between sociodemographic characteristics, time to presentation and stage</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >Time of presentation</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >Stage</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Variable</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;3 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >≥3 months</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >p</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >ESBC</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >ABC</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >p</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="7"  >Age</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt; 40 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17 (30.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >85 (41.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >0.07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20 (19.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >82 (80.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >0.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >≥ 40 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39 (69.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >118 (58.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32 (20.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >125 (79.6)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="7"  >Income</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Low</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >43 (76.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >162 (79.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >0.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36 (17.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >169 (82.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >0.04</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mid-High</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13 (23.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >41 (20.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16 (29.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >38 (70.4)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="7"  >Schooling</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Educated</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31 (56.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100 (51)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >0.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32 (24.4)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99 (75.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >0.06</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Illiterate</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24 (43.6)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >96 (49)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18 (15)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >102 (85)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Menopausal</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21 (37.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68 (33.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >0.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16 (17.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73 (80.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >0.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Now</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35 (62.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >135 (66.5)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36 (21.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >134 (78.8)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="7"  >Family history of breast cancer</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13 (23.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22 (10.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >0.01</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9 (25.7)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26 (74.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >0.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >43 (76.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >181 (89.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >43 (19.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >181 (80.8)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="7"  >Place of living</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Capital</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33 (58.9)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >93 (45.8)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >0.05</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29 (23)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >97 (77)</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >0.2</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Countryside</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23 (41.1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >110 (54.2)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23 (17.3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >110 (82.7)</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>ESBC: Early Stage Breast Cancer; ABC: Advanced Breast Cancer.</p><p>The only factor associated with advanced breast cancer after adjustment for confounding factors was low income. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref> shows the correlation between socio-demographic factors and clinical and prognostic features.</p><p>4) Survival</p><p>The mean survival time was 13.4 months for patients seen at an early stage and 15.5 months for those seen at a locally advanced stage while median survival was 6.9 and 2.2 months, respectively.</p><p><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref> show the mean and medians of survival.</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>1) Delayed presentation</p><p>There is always an interval between first symptoms, diagnosis and the begin-</p><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Means and medians of survival times according to stage and time to presentation</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Mean</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Median</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mean</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Confidence interval</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Median</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Confidence interval</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Time of presentation</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="4"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >&lt;3 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.982</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11.136 - 22.828</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.694</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.670 - 26.990</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >&gt;+3 years</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.041</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.464 - 17.617</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.727</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.644 - 16.416</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Stage</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="4"  ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Early breast cancer</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.467</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.750 - 21.183</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.999</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.000 - 21.849</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Advanced breast cancer</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.599</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.113 - 18.085</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.288</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.545 - 17.515</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><fig-group id="fig1"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref></label><caption><title> Survival curves using Kaplan Meier method according to stage and time to presentation.</title></caption><fig id ="fig1_1"><label></label><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/7-1431352x2.png"/></fig></fig-group><fig-group id="fig2"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref></label><caption><title> Survival curves using Kaplan Meier method according to stage.</title></caption><fig id ="fig2_1"><label></label><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/7-1431352x3.png"/></fig></fig-group><p>ning of treatment in women with symptomatic breast cancer. This interval can be subdivided into three components: the time for presentation (first delay) and the time elapsed before starting treatment (third delay). The second delay is time elapsed between the moment the patient decides to consult and the meeting with the practitioner.</p><p>A systematic review of Richards et al. showed that delays of 3 to 6 months were clearly associated with a large tumour size at the time of diagnosis and a poor prognosis in the long term. Nevertheless, controversy persists as to the impact of the delay on survival. The contradictory results may be due to a difference in the characteristics of the sample, differences in the delay interval studied or variations in the delay definition [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref5">5</xref>] .</p><p>However, it should be mentioned that data were exclusively based on interviews and not on registries. Data obtained on interviews may not be relevant.</p><p>2) Factors associated to delayed presentation</p><p>A breast mass rapidly growing may suggest a cancer in both doctors and patients while a mass of slow evolution may be less evident in patients and reassure them falsely. Our results revealed that 78.4% of patients were seen late according to our definition (&gt;3 months). The negative family history of breast cancer was associated with delayed consultation. Education and socio-economic status proved to be two independent factors related to delayed consultation. Our conclusions are similar to some other already published on the subject. In other studies conducted by Brzozowska et al. and other authors worldwide, delays longer than 3 months at the consultation are observed in proportions of 14% to 73% (mean of 33.1% &#177; 19.5% DS) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref6">6</xref>] - [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref11">11</xref>] .</p><p>The most frequent reasons for delays reported by these studies were the painless nature of the breast mass, fear (abandonment by partner, cancer treatments, breast ablation), shyness, fatalism, therapeutics denial and inaccessibility to health services. Old age, a negative family history of breast cancer, low educational attainment and low socio-economic status were found to be the factors associated with a delayed consultation in these studies even though women with less financial resources are more likely not to seek health facilities [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref6">6</xref>] - [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref11">11</xref>] .</p><p>In a multicentre prospective cohort study in the United States for women of 40 years of age or younger with breast cancer, 17% reported a delay in consultation that was associated with poorer financial status [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref12">12</xref>] .</p><p>The level of schooling was not associated with delay in diagnosis or consultation beyond 3 months. These data are contradictory to other studies carried out in a similar context, such as Pace in Rwanda, where under-educated patients who consulted late had less information on breast disease, were not hampered by the manifestation of the disease or simply thought that the anomaly appeared would disappear spontaneously [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref13">13</xref>] .</p><p>It is necessary to emphasize the important role played by the media in raising awareness of breast cancer, its manifestations and the interest of consultation without delay as soon as an anomaly appears in the breast. However, the lack of a positive relationship between the consultation period and schooling hides high rates of late consultation in both groups, which exceed 78%.</p><p>A review by Freitas et al. aimed to analyse the main factors associated with delayed consultation. This review included 53 studies in developed countries (29 studies) and in development (24 studies). Three factors were found to explain the delay in consultation: non-attribution of symptoms to cancer, fear of illness and treatment, and low level of education. Age was not decisive in itself and depended mainly on the social and cultural context [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref14">14</xref>] .</p><p>3) Presentation delay and stage at diagnosis</p><p>The impact of delays between onset of symptoms and onset of treatment on survival is controversial and cannot be studied in randomized controlled trials for ethical reasons. A systematic review of 87 observational studies around the world (101,954 patients) found that delays of 3 - 6 months were associated with lower survival rates [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref5">5</xref>] .</p><p>81.7% of our patients were diagnosed in stages III and IV, higher but closer to those reported in other developing countries such as Brazil, Egypt, India, Libya, Nigeria, Peru and Thailand, between 31% and 75% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref15">15</xref>] .</p><p>In industrialized countries such as Canada, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom, only between 8% and 22% of patients are diagnosed with locally advanced breast cancer [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.75667-ref16">16</xref>] .</p><p>Early diagnosis would greatly reduce the cost of cancer care, given the difficulties patients face in meeting the treatment challenges.</p><p>This approach involves a combination of strategies involving the community, health workers, and the health system.</p><p>At a population level, strategies to improve the identification of symptoms of breast cancer are needed.</p><p>At a health system level, improved referral and admission procedures could facilitate the treatment of cancer.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>A significant percentage of women with breast cancer in Senegal experience a delay. Coordinated efforts with public health units are needed to educate these patients and reduce the overall burden of disease in the country over the long term.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Ethical Considerations</title><p>The Dakar Teaching Hospital Ethical Committee approved this study.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Gueye, M., Gueye, S.M.K., Diallo, M., Thiam, O., Mbodji, A., Diouf, A., Fall, K., Toure, Y., Daff, H.M.B. and Moreau, J.C. (2017) Sociodemographic Factors Associated with Delays in Breast Cancer. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 7, 455-463. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojog.2017.74047</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.75667-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Alleman, I., Couvert-Mullot, H., Béranger, C. and Gisserot, O. (2010) Therapeutic Options for Hormone Receptor Negative Breastcancers. Le Praticien Hospitalier, 45, 25-32.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dem, A., Traoré, B., Dieng, M.M., Diop, P.S., Ouajdi, T., Lalami, M.T., et al. (2008) Breast and Gynecologic Tract Cancers in Curie Institute of Dakar, Senegal. Carnets de Santé, 18, 25-29.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Guèye, M., Guèye, S.M.K., Mbaye, M., Dia, F.N., Diémé, M.E.F., Niang, M.M., et al. (2013) Clinical Features and Prognosis of Triple Negative Breast Cancer at the Senology Unit of Aristide-Le-Dantec Teaching Hospital. Journal Africain du Cancer, 5, 42-47.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Edge, S.B., Byrd, D.R., Compton, C.C., Fritz, A.G., Greene, F.L. and Trotti, A. (2010) AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 7th Edition, Springer, New York.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Richards, M.A., Westcombe, A.M. and Love, S.B. (1999) Influence of Delay on Survival in Patients with Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review. The Lancet, 353, 1119-1126. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)02143-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Brzozowska, A., Duma, D. and Mazurkiewicz, T. (2014) Reasons for Delay in Treatment of Breast Cancer Detected Due to Breast Self-Examination in Women from the Lubelskie Region. Ginekologia Polska, 85, 14-17.  
https://doi.org/10.17772/gp/1684</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Jones, C.E., Maben, J. and Jack, R.H. (2014) A Systematic Review of Barriers to Early Presentation and Diagnosis with Breast Cancer among Black Women. BMJ Open, 4, e004076. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004076</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Weinmann, S., Taplin, S.H., Gilbert, J., Weinmann, S., Taplin, S.H., Gilbert, J., et al. (2005) Characteristics of Women Refusing Follow-Up for Tests or Symptoms Suggestive of Breast Cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs, 35, 33-38. https://doi.org/10.1093/jncimonographs/lgi035</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Montazeri, A., Ebrahimi, M. and Mehrdad, N. (2003) Delayed Presentation in Breast Cancer: A Study in Iranian Women. BMC Women’s Health, 3, 4. 
https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-3-4</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ermiah, E., Abdalla, F. and Buhmeida, A. (2012) Diagnosis Delay in Libyan Female Breast Cancer. BMC Research Notes, 5, 452.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Norsa’adah, B., Rampal, K.G. and Rahmah, M.A. (2011) Diagnosis Delay of Breast Cancer and Its Associated Factors in Malaysian Women. BMC Cancer, 11, 141. 
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-11-141</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ruddy, K.J., Gelber, S., Tamimi, R.M., Ruddy, K.J., Gelber, S., Tamimi, RM., et al. (2014) Breast Cancer Presentation and Diagnostic Delays in Young Women. Cancer, 120, 20-25. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28287</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pace, L.E., Mpunga, T., Hategekimana, V., Dusengimana, J.M., Habineza, H., Bigirimana, J.B., et al. (2015) Delays in Breast Cancer Presentation and Diagnosis at Two Rural Cancer Referral Centers in Rwanda. Oncologist, 20, 780-788. 
https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2014-0493</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Freitas, A.G. and Weller, M. (2015) Patient Delays and System Delays in Breast Cancer Treatment in Developed and Developing Countries. Ciência &amp; Saúde Coletiva, 20, 3177-3189. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-812320152010.19692014</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Unger-Saldana, K. (2014) Challenges to the Early Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer in Developing Countries. World Journal of Clinical Oncology, 5, 465-477. https://doi.org/10.5306/wjco.v5.i3.465</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.75667-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Olivotto, I.A., Gomi, A., Bancej, C., et al. (2002) Influence of Delay to Diagnosis on Prognostic Indicators of Screen-Detected Breast Carcinoma. Cancer, 94, 2143-2150. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.10453</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>