CHILDREN from deprived backgrounds are less likely to survive following treatment for leukaemia, according to a report from scientists at University of York.

The latest study shows that once responsibility for administering life-saving drugs passed from hospitals to parents, a gap began to appear in survival rates between children from poorer and more affluent families.

Dr Tracy Lightfoot, of the Department of Health Sciences at the University of York, who led the research, said the findings from the study provide the “first clear evidence in the UK that social disparities exist in relation to childhood leukaemia survival”.

The research, which was funded by the charity Leukaemia & Lymphoma Research, found that children from less-well-off backgrounds in the UK were 30 per cent more likely to die than those from richer families.

The report puts the disparity down to a possible “lack of adherence to complex treatment regimens” among poorer families. The majority of the first nine months of treatment, which is designed to put the child’s disease into remission, is administered in hospital. Crucially, during this period the researchers found no evidence of a difference in survival by social group.

The disparity seemed to begin six-to-nine months after diagnosis and widened after treatment changed from being predominantly hospital administered to being largely the responsibility of parents or carers.

Scientists suggest there may be problems in complying with the complicated home-based maintenance treatment regimens.

Dr David Grant, scientific director at Leukaemia & Lymphoma Research, said: “We know every parent wants to do their best for their children. Managing the precise regimen of drugs in the home is stressful for any family caring for a child with leukaemia, especially as the child already appears to be completely cured.

“We need to do more work to find out what support parents or carers need during the two to three years after their child leaves hospital.”

The same study previously demonstrated there were no differences between social groups with respect to the likelihood of whether or not a child would develop acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (the commonest cancer in children) in the first place.