Literature DB >> 26071497

Overdiagnosis in lung cancer screening: why modelling is essential.

Kevin Ten Haaf1, Harry J de Koning1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  CANCER; Cancer epidemiology; SCREENING

Mesh：

Year:  2015        PMID： 26071497      PMCID： PMC4978857          DOI： 10.1136/jech-2014-204079

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health        ISSN： 0143-005X            Impact factor:   3.710


× No keyword cloud information.
  26 in total

1.  Analysis of lung cancer incidence in the Nurses' Health and the Health Professionals' Follow-Up Studies using a multistage carcinogenesis model.

Authors:  Rafael Meza; William D Hazelton; Graham A Colditz; Suresh H Moolgavkar
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2007-12-06       Impact factor: 2.506

Review 2.  Influence of study features and methods on overdiagnosis estimates in breast and prostate cancer screening.

Authors:  Ruth Etzioni; Roman Gulati; Leslie Mallinger; Jeanne Mandelblatt
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2013-06-04       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Clarifying differences in natural history between models of screening: the case of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Carolyn M Rutter; Amy B Knudsen; Ann G Zauber; James E Savarino; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Rob Boer; Eric J Feuer; J Dik F Habbema; Karen M Kuntz
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2011-06-14       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  Lung cancer detectability by test, histology, stage, and gender: estimates from the NLST and the PLCO trials.

Authors:  Kevin Ten Haaf; Joost van Rosmalen; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2014-10-13       Impact factor: 4.254

5.  Cost-effectiveness of CT screening in the National Lung Screening Trial.

Authors:  William C Black; Ilana F Gareen; Samir S Soneji; JoRean D Sicks; Emmett B Keeler; Denise R Aberle; Arash Naeim; Timothy R Church; Gerard A Silvestri; Jeremy Gorelick; Constantine Gatsonis
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-11-06       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Baseline characteristics of participants in the randomized national lung screening trial.

Authors:  Denise R Aberle; Amanda M Adams; Christine D Berg; Jonathan D Clapp; Kathy L Clingan; Ilana F Gareen; David A Lynch; Pamela M Marcus; Paul F Pinsky
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-11-22       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Comparative analysis of 5 lung cancer natural history and screening models that reproduce outcomes of the NLST and PLCO trials.

Authors:  Rafael Meza; Kevin ten Haaf; Chung Yin Kong; Ayca Erdogan; William C Black; Martin C Tammemagi; Sung Eun Choi; Jihyoun Jeon; Summer S Han; Vidit Munshi; Joost van Rosmalen; Paul Pinsky; Pamela M McMahon; Harry J de Koning; Eric J Feuer; William D Hazelton; Sylvia K Plevritis
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-02-27       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Chapter 3: Cohort life tables by smoking status, removing lung cancer as a cause of death.

Authors:  Marjorie A Rosenberg; Eric J Feuer; Binbing Yu; Jiafeng Sun; S Jane Henley; Thomas G Shanks; Christy M Anderson; Pamela M McMahon; Michael J Thun; David M Burns
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 4.000

9.  Targeting of low-dose CT screening according to the risk of lung-cancer death.

Authors:  Anil K Chaturvedi; Hormuzd A Katki; Stephanie A Kovalchik; Martin Tammemagi; Christine D Berg; Neil E Caporaso; Tom L Riley; Mary Korch; Gerard A Silvestri
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-07-18       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 10.  Interpreting overdiagnosis estimates in population-based mammography screening.

Authors:  Rianne de Gelder; Eveline A M Heijnsdijk; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Jacques Fracheboud; Gerrit Draisma; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  Epidemiol Rev       Date:  2011-06-27       Impact factor: 6.222
View more
  12 in total

1.  Identification of Candidates for Longer Lung Cancer Screening Intervals Following a Negative Low-Dose Computed Tomography Result.

Authors:  Hilary A Robbins; Christine D Berg; Li C Cheung; Anil K Chaturvedi; Hormuzd A Katki
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2019-09-01       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Overdiagnosis in lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Matthew E J Callister; Peter Sasieni; Hilary A Robbins
Journal:  Lancet Respir Med       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 30.700

3.  Clarifying Assumptions and Outcomes in Cost-effectiveness Analyses.

Authors:  Kevin ten Haaf; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 31.777

Review 4.  Screening for early stage lung cancer and its correlation with lung nodule detection.

Authors:  Fangfei Qian; Wenjia Yang; Qunhui Chen; Xueyan Zhang; Baohui Han
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 5.  Lung Cancer Screening with Low-Dose CT: a Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Richard M Hoffman; Rami P Atallah; Roger D Struble; Robert G Badgett
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Volume doubling time and radiomic features predict tumor behavior of screen-detected lung cancers.

Authors:  Jaileene Pérez-Morales; Hong Lu; Wei Mu; Ilke Tunali; Tugce Kutuk; Steven A Eschrich; Yoganand Balagurunathan; Robert J Gillies; Matthew B Schabath
Journal:  Cancer Biomark       Date:  2022       Impact factor: 3.828

7.  Performance and Cost-Effectiveness of Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening Scenarios in a Population-Based Setting: A Microsimulation Modeling Analysis in Ontario, Canada.

Authors:  Kevin Ten Haaf; Martin C Tammemägi; Susan J Bondy; Carlijn M van der Aalst; Sumei Gu; S Elizabeth McGregor; Garth Nicholas; Harry J de Koning; Lawrence F Paszat
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2017-02-07       Impact factor: 11.069

8.  Risk prediction models for selection of lung cancer screening candidates: A retrospective validation study.

Authors:  Kevin Ten Haaf; Jihyoun Jeon; Martin C Tammemägi; Summer S Han; Chung Yin Kong; Sylvia K Plevritis; Eric J Feuer; Harry J de Koning; Ewout W Steyerberg; Rafael Meza
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 11.069

9.  Peritumoral and intratumoral radiomic features predict survival outcomes among patients diagnosed in lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Jaileene Pérez-Morales; Ilke Tunali; Olya Stringfield; Steven A Eschrich; Yoganand Balagurunathan; Robert J Gillies; Matthew B Schabath
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Population impact of lung cancer screening in the United States: Projections from a microsimulation model.

Authors:  Steven D Criss; Deirdre F Sheehan; Lauren Palazzo; Chung Yin Kong
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 11.069
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.