Literature DB >> 18504245

Correcting for lead time and length bias in estimating the effect of screen detection on cancer survival.

Stephen W Duffy1, Iris D Nagtegaal, Matthew Wallis, Fay H Cafferty, Nehmat Houssami, Jane Warwick, Prue C Allgood, Olive Kearins, Nancy Tappenden, Emma O'Sullivan, Gill Lawrence.   

Abstract

Determination of survival time among persons with screen-detected cancer is subject to lead time and length biases. The authors propose a simple correction for lead time, assuming an exponential distribution of the preclinical screen-detectable period. Assuming two latent categories of tumors, one of which is more prone to screen detection and correspondingly less prone to death from the cancer in question, the authors have developed a strategy of sensitivity analysis for various magnitudes of length bias. Here they demonstrate these methods using a series of 25,962 breast cancer cases (1988-2004) from the West Midlands, United Kingdom.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18504245     DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwn120

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0002-9262            Impact factor:   4.897


  74 in total

1.  Surveillance for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Does the Place Where Ultrasound Is Performed Impact Its Effectiveness?

Authors:  Federico Piñero; Fernando Rubinstein; Sebastián Marciano; Nora Fernández; Jorge Silva; Yanina Zambelo; Margarita Anders; Alina Zerega; Ezequiel Ridruejo; Carlos Miguez; Beatriz Ameigeiras; Claudia D'Amico; Luis Gaite; Carla Bermúdez; Carlos Rosales; Gustavo Romero; Lucas McCormack; Virginia Reggiardo; Luis Colombato; Adrián Gadano; Marcelo Silva
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Misplaced criticism of breast screening research.

Authors:  Stephen Duffy
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 5.344

3.  Tests for stochastic ordering under biased sampling.

Authors:  Hsin-Wen Chang; Hammou El Barmi; Ian W McKeague
Journal:  J Nonparametr Stat       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 1.231

4.  Carotid intima-media thickness: can it close the "detection gap" for cardiovascular risk?

Authors:  Thomas C Gerber; Allen J Taylor
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 7.616

5.  No Association Between Screening for Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Reduced Cancer-Related Mortality in Patients With Cirrhosis.

Authors:  Andrew M Moon; Noel S Weiss; Lauren A Beste; Feng Su; Samuel B Ho; Ga-Young Jin; Elliott Lowy; Kristin Berry; George N Ioannou
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 22.682

6.  Effectiveness of surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma in clinical practice: A United States cohort.

Authors:  Sahil Mittal; Fasiha Kanwal; Jun Ying; Randy Chung; Yvonne H Sada; Sarah Temple; Jessica A Davila; Hashem B El-Serag
Journal:  J Hepatol       Date:  2016-07-29       Impact factor: 25.083

Review 7.  Follow-up strategies for women treated for early breast cancer.

Authors:  Ivan Moschetti; Michela Cinquini; Matteo Lambertini; Alessia Levaggi; Alessandro Liberati
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-05-27

8.  Estimating lead-time bias in lung cancer diagnosis of patients with previous cancers.

Authors:  Zhiyun Ge; Daniel F Heitjan; David E Gerber; Lei Xuan; Sandi L Pruitt
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2018-04-23       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Computational Model of Progression to Multiple Myeloma Identifies Optimum Screening Strategies.

Authors:  Philipp M Altrock; Jeremy Ferlic; Tobias Galla; Michael H Tomasson; Franziska Michor
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2018-12

10.  Cost of a 5-year lung cancer survivor.

Authors:  S W Duffy
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-09-15       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.