Literature DB >> 15485619

Screening for cancer: valuable or not?

Frank L Meyskens1.   

Abstract

Screening for cancer has become extremely common. The evidence supporting screening for breast, colon, and cervix cancer is strong, but it is unclear for skin cancer, problematic for prostate cancer, and ineffective for lung cancer. Despite the problems associated with many screening approaches for cancer, enthusiasm by the medical profession and the public remains high. The objective analysis for the major tumor types is presented in this review, but the ultimate decision on whether to be screened lies in the personal and societal arena of values.

Entities:  

Mesh：

Year:  2004        PMID： 15485619     DOI： 10.1007/s11912-004-0081-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep        ISSN： 1523-3790            Impact factor:   5.075


  39 in total

1.  Progress in cancer screening over a decade: results of cancer screening from the 1987, 1992, and 1998 National Health Interview Surveys.

Authors:  N Breen; D K Wagener; M L Brown; W W Davis; R Ballard-Barbash
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2001-11-21       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Treatment and prevention of intraepithelial neoplasia: an important target for accelerated new agent development.

Authors:  Joyce A O'Shaughnessy; Gary J Kelloff; Gary B Gordon; Andrew J Dannenberg; Waun Ki Hong; Carol J Fabian; Caroline C Sigman; Monica M Bertagnolli; Steven P Stratton; Stephen Lam; William G Nelson; Frank L Meyskens; David S Alberts; Michele Follen; Anil K Rustgi; Vali Papadimitrakopoulou; Peter T Scardino; Adi F Gazdar; Lee W Wattenberg; Michael B Sporn; Wael A Sakr; Scott M Lippman; Daniel D Von Hoff
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 12.531

3.  Screening trials are even more difficult than we thought they were.

Authors:  Helen G Juffs; Ian F Tannock
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2002-02-06       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 4.  Screening for colorectal cancer with the fecal occult blood test: a background paper. American College of Physicians.

Authors:  D F Ransohoff; C A Lang
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1997-05-15       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 5.  Measuring effectiveness of lung cancer screening: from consensus to controversy and back.

Authors:  G M Strauss
Journal:  Chest       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 9.410

6.  All-cause mortality in randomized trials of cancer screening.

Authors:  William C Black; David A Haggstrom; H Gilbert Welch
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2002-02-06       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Linda L Humphrey; Mark Helfand; Benjamin K S Chan; Steven H Woolf
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2002-09-03       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Screening for colorectal cancer with fecal occult blood testing and sigmoidoscopy.

Authors:  S J Winawer; B J Flehinger; D Schottenfeld; D G Miller
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1993-08-18       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 9.  Screening for colorectal cancer in adults at average risk: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Michael Pignone; Melissa Rich; Steven M Teutsch; Alfred O Berg; Kathleen N Lohr
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2002-07-16       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Another round in the mammography controversy.

Authors:  Helen I Meissner; Barbara K Rimer; William W Davis; Ellen J Eisner; Ilene C Siegler
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.681
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.