In the United States, Medicaid insurance is associated with worse cancer outcomes than private insurance and with similar outcomes as being uninsured, even after adjusting for clinical factors and area-level socioeconomic status (SES). [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18] This raises questions about the possible need for Medicaid policy changes to improve access to quality care for Medicaid beneficiaries. In contrast, the expansion of Medicaid eligibility to more low-income individuals is associated with improved cancer outcomes. [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26] One possible explanation for this “Medicaid paradox” is that the previously reported Medicaid effects may better reflect income effects, [17] since a person’s Medicaid eligibility is determined by income, and SES is associated with cancer outcomes. Our objective was to assess whether disparities in survival by insurance status existed after accounting for individual-level income. However, data regarding cancer outcomes by both insurance status and individual-level SES are limited, and databases including both data types are also limited. Hence, we implemented a model trained on publicly available data from the Behavioral Risk Factors Surveillance Study using sociodemographic information to estimate individual-level income, with model estimates applied to cancer cases from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. We hypothesized that survival would not be associated with insurance status after accounting for model-based estimates of individual-level income.