A recent Cancer Research UK (CRUK, 2025) report found that cancer death rates are nearly 60% higher for people living in the most deprived areas of the UK compared with the least deprived. 28,400 cancer deaths each year are linked to socioeconomic inequalities, accounting for more than 3 in 20 of all deaths from cancer. The report highlighted both higher prevalence of modifiable risk factors in more deprived area and inequality in access to healthcare systems as plausible explanations for this disparity. This blog is a short overview on the CRUK report and complementary CSP report (with contributions from ACPOPC)- it does not substitute for reading the actual articles itself, which go into more detail and allows for better analysis.
Findings from the CRUK report
A discussion point from the CRUK report was a higher proportion of more deprived communities engaging in activities that increased the risk of developing cancer. While it is easy to blame the communities for engaging in these harmful activities “despite advice”, we should remember that deprivation can have wide-ranging and differing effects on a person. These effects can interconnect with each other and create a complex matrix, rather than a linear relationship. This creates more barriers to modifying lifestyle risk factors in more deprived communities. For more about health inequality, please start with the King Fund’s publication on this topic.
The CRUK report also discussed differences in screening, diagnosis, services and treatment. In areas of higher depravation, there is lower screening participation, less recognition of potential cancer symptoms and more barriers to seeking help. Following from this, people in more deprived areas are more likely to present with later stages of cancer, and there is higher likelihood this is diagnosed following an emergency presentation to hospital. Further exacerbating this is the inequality of cancer service provision. Patients in more deprived areas experience delayed access to treatment compared to less deprived areas, being more likely to wait over 104 days to starting treatment.
Inequality in Cancer Rehabilitation
One aspect not covered in the CRUK report was access to supportive care, i.e. rehabilitation during the cancer pathway. The CSP published a complementary report to highlight this. The CSP was clear in highlighting that these inequalities in health further extend to rehabilitation within the cancer pathway. This is due to the inconsistent approach to cancer rehabilitation pathways and services, resulting in a postcode lottery for cancer and palliative rehabilitation services. ACPOPC’s chair, Natasha Richardson, stated:
ACPOPC members see every day the impact of health inequalities and the disparity in services for individuals dealing with cancer and palliative care conditions. We know this causes huge frustration. This report really highlights the need to act now and improve the access to services and high-quality specialist care for cancer and palliative care patients with the aim of reducing these inequalities.
ACPOPC has been involved in submitting evidence, alongside the CSP, to the government’s consultation on the NHS 10 year plan and NHS Cancer Strategy, calling for a more consistent national approach to cancer care and rehabilitation services. A piece regarding this submission will follow when this gets published.