Literature DB >> 17032897

A stochastic model for predicting the mortality of breast cancer.

Sandra Lee1, Marvin Zelen.   

Abstract

Consider a cohort of women, identified by year of birth, some of whom will eventually be diagnosed with breast cancer. A stochastic model is developed for predicting the U.S. breast cancer mortality that depends on advances in therapy and dissemination of mammographic screening. The predicted mortality can be compared with the same cohort having usual care with no screening program and absence of modern therapy, or a cohort in which only a proportion participate in a screening program and have modern therapy. The model envisions that a woman may be in four health states: i.e., 1) no disease or breast cancer that cannot be diagnosed (S0), 2) preclinical state (Sp), 3) clinical state (Sc), and 4) disease-specific death (Sd). The preclinical disease refers to breast cancer that is asymptomatic but that may be diagnosed with a special exam. The clinical state refers to symptomatic disease diagnosed under usual care. One of the basic assumptions of the model is that the disease is progressive; i.e., the transitions for the first three states are S0-->Sp-->Sc. The other basic assumption is that any reduction in mortality associated with earlier diagnosis is due to a stage shift in diagnosis; i.e., early diagnosis results in a larger proportion of earlier stage patients. The model is used to predict changes in female breast cancer mortality in the U.S. women for 1975-2000. The model is general and may predict mortality for other chronic diseases that satisfy the two basic assumptions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17032897     DOI: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgj011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr        ISSN: 1052-6773


  26 in total

1.  Collaborative Modeling of the Benefits and Harms Associated With Different U.S. Breast Cancer Screening Strategies.

Authors:  Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Natasha K Stout; Clyde B Schechter; Jeroen J van den Broek; Diana L Miglioretti; Martin Krapcho; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Diego Munoz; Sandra J Lee; Donald A Berry; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Oguzhan Alagoz; Karla Kerlikowske; Anna N A Tosteson; Aimee M Near; Amanda Hoeffken; Yaojen Chang; Eveline A Heijnsdijk; Gary Chisholm; Xuelin Huang; Hui Huang; Mehmet Ali Ergun; Ronald Gangnon; Brian L Sprague; Sylvia Plevritis; Eric Feuer; Harry J de Koning; Kathleen A Cronin
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  Modeling the impact of population screening on breast cancer mortality in the United States.

Authors:  Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Kathleen A Cronin; Donald A Berry; Yaojen Chang; Harry J de Koning; Sandra J Lee; Sylvia K Plevritis; Clyde B Schechter; Natasha K Stout; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Marvin Zelen; Eric J Feuer
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 4.380

Review 3.  Calibration methods used in cancer simulation models and suggested reporting guidelines.

Authors:  Natasha K Stout; Amy B Knudsen; Chung Yin Kong; Pamela M McMahon; G Scott Gazelle
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  To screen or not to screen for breast cancer? How do modelling studies answer the question?

Authors:  R G Koleva-Kolarova; Z Zhan; M J W Greuter; T L Feenstra; G H De Bock
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.677

5.  Outcomes of Active Surveillance for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: A Computational Risk Analysis.

Authors:  Marc D Ryser; Mathias Worni; Elizabeth L Turner; Jeffrey R Marks; Rick Durrett; E Shelley Hwang
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  The Dana-Farber CISNET Model for Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: An Update.

Authors:  Sandra J Lee; Xiaoxue Li; Hui Huang; Marvin Zelen
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Breast cancer incidence and overdiagnosis in Catalonia (Spain).

Authors:  Montserrat Martinez-Alonso; Ester Vilaprinyo; Rafael Marcos-Gragera; Montserrat Rue
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2010-08-03       Impact factor: 6.466

8.  Effects of mammography screening under different screening schedules: model estimates of potential benefits and harms.

Authors:  Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Kathleen A Cronin; Stephanie Bailey; Donald A Berry; Harry J de Koning; Gerrit Draisma; Hui Huang; Sandra J Lee; Mark Munsell; Sylvia K Plevritis; Peter Ravdin; Clyde B Schechter; Bronislava Sigal; Michael A Stoto; Natasha K Stout; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; John Venier; Marvin Zelen; Eric J Feuer
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Benefits, harms, and costs for breast cancer screening after US implementation of digital mammography.

Authors:  Natasha K Stout; Sandra J Lee; Clyde B Schechter; Karla Kerlikowske; Oguzhan Alagoz; Donald Berry; Diana S M Buist; Mucahit Cevik; Gary Chisholm; Harry J de Koning; Hui Huang; Rebecca A Hubbard; Diana L Miglioretti; Mark F Munsell; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Anna N A Tosteson; Jeanne S Mandelblatt
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-05-28       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Effectiveness of early detection on breast cancer mortality reduction in Catalonia (Spain).

Authors:  Montserrat Rue; Ester Vilaprinyo; Sandra Lee; Montserrat Martinez-Alonso; Misericor-Dia Carles; Rafael Marcos-Gragera; Roger Pla; Josep-Alfons Espinas
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2009-09-15       Impact factor: 4.430

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.