Areas of England with highest cancer death risk revealed as major study reveals patients living in poorest parts of country are 70% more likely to die… so how does YOUR area fare?

A large-scale study shows that people living in parts of the country are up to 70 percent more likely to die from cancer than others.

Northern cities – including Liverpool, Manchester, Hull and Newcastle – and some coastal areas have the highest death tolls, while affluent parts of London had the lowest.

Experts say lifestyle factors are a major cause, with the biggest differences seen in cancers linked to smoking, alcohol and obesity.

While death rates for most cancers have fallen, death rates for liver and pancreatic cancer are rising – with drinking and high-sugar diets likely to blame.

Poor screening, delays in diagnosis and access to treatment were also behind the disparities, they said.

The findings come on the same day as a report from Macmillan Cancer Support found that more than 60,000 people with cancer would live six months or more if key diagnosis and treatment targets were met.

The charity is urging ministers to prioritize cancer, improve outcomes and give patients more time with loved ones.

Researchers analyzed death data from the ten deadliest cancers among men and women in 314 regions in England between 2002 and 2019.

They used the data to estimate the risk of dying from any cancer before age 80, based on gender and where a person lived.

The overall risk fell from one in six to one in eight for women and from one in five to one in six for men during this period, they found.

But these improvements are not being felt uniformly: cancer still kills one in six women in Manchester, compared to one in ten in Westminster.

Meanwhile, one in five men in Manchester still die from the disease, more than one in eight in the London borough of Harrow.

Lead author Professor Majid Ezzati from Imperial College London said: 'While our study brings the good news that the overall risk of dying from cancer has fallen across all English districts over the past 20 years, it also highlights the astonishing inequality in cancer deaths. in several districts in England.'

The risk of dying from cancer was higher for both men and women in counties with higher levels of poverty, largely due to higher rates of lung cancer.

Women in Knowsley, Merseyside, and men in Manchester had three times the risk of death from lung cancer than those in Waverley and Guildford, Surrey, respectively.

Yet those in poor areas of London had a lower chance of dying from lung, colorectal and oesophageal cancer than in similarly poor areas elsewhere.

Researchers speculate that this is likely due to the capital's diverse ethnic populations and better access to specialist treatments in the capital's hospitals.

For women, the largest district-level reduction in the risk of dying from cancer was almost five times greater than the smallest, with a fall of 30.1 percent in Camden, London, compared to 6.6 percent in Tendring, Essex.

Meanwhile, the largest decline among men was three times as large as the smallest: 36.7 percent in Tower Hamlets compared to 12.8 percent in Blackpool. Overall, London districts saw the biggest falls, according to the findings published in the Lancet.

NHS figures on cancer waiting times, meanwhile, showed every national target was missed again in September. Fewer than six in ten cancer patients (59.3 percent) were seen within the two-month target in September

Pancreatic cancer deaths increased for men and women in all but one district, and the risk of dying from liver cancer among men and endometrial cancer among women increased across the board.

Today a report from Macmillan Cancer Support warns that tens of thousands of people are missing out on 'precious extra months with loved ones' because they are not meeting cancer targets.

The charity found that the number of people waiting too long to start treatment is now increasing faster than the number of people starting treatment.

More than one in four (29 percent) of those diagnosed in the past two years who have experienced delays said they believe this has caused their cancer to worsen.

Steven McIntosh from Macmillan Cancer Support said: 'The situation for people with cancer is absolutely heartbreaking.'

He added: 'This is categorically unacceptable and completely avoidable; it doesn't have to be this way.

'Today's data suggests that if politicians across the UK acted and waiting times were met, more than 60,000 people with cancer would survive for six months or more, freeing up more precious time with friends and family. If this doesn't strike a chord with our governments, what will?'