Follow-up for patients with colorectal cancer after curative-intent primary treatment

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 22, Issue 8, 2004, Pages 1363-1365

  Johnson, Frank E ^a   Virgo, Katherine S ^a   Fossati, Roldano ^b  

^a SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MARIO NEGRI INSTITUTE FOR PHARMACOLOGICAL RESEARCH   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CARCINOEMBRYONIC ANTIGEN;

ABDOMINAL CANCER; BREAST CANCER; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER RELAPSE; CANCER SURGERY; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EDITORIAL; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HUMAN; LAPAROTOMY; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PATIENT CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SALVAGE THERAPY; UNITED STATES; BLOOD; COLORECTAL TUMOR; ECONOMICS; METHODOLOGY; NOTE; PATHOLOGY; SECOND CANCER; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TUMOR RECURRENCE;

CARCINOEMBRYONIC ANTIGEN; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; NEOPLASMS, SECOND PRIMARY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; RESEARCH DESIGN; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 2342483081     PISSN: 0732183X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2004.01.948     Document Type: Editorial

References (16)

1. Gilbertsen VA, Wangensteen OH: A summary of thirteen years' experience with the second look program. Surg Gynecol Obstet 114:438-442, 1962
2. Ault A: Clinical research. Climbing a medical Everest. Science 300: 2024-2025, 2003
3. Virgo KS, Vernava AM, Longo WE, et al: Cost of patient follow-up after potentially curative colon cancer treatment. JAMA 273:1837-1841, 1995
4. Jemal A, Tiwari RC, Murray T, et al: Cancer Statistics, 2004. CA Cancer J Clin 54:8-29, 2004
5. Lohr K: Guidelines for clinical practice: What they are and why they count. J Law Med Ethics 23:49-56, 1995
6. Vernava AM 3rd, Longo WE, Virgo KS, et al: Current follow-up strategies after resection of colon cancer: Results of a survey of ASCRS members. Dis Colon Rectum 37:573-583, 1994
7. Chassin MR, Galvin RW: The urgent need to improve health care quality: Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality. JAMA 280:1000-1005, 1998
8. Chau I, Allen MJ, Cunningham D, et al: The Value of Routine Serum Carcino-Embryonic Antigen Measurement and Computed Tomography in the Surveillance of Patients After Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Colorectal Cancer. J Clin Oncol 22:1420-1429, 2004
9. Earle CC, Chapman RH, Baker CS, et al: Systematic overview of cost-utility assessments in oncology. J Clin Oncol 18:3302-3317, 2000
10. Johnson FE, Longo WE, Vernava AM, et al: How tumor stage affects surgeons' surveillance strategies after colon cancer surgery. Cancer 76: 1325-1329, 1995
11. Green RJ, Metlay JP, Propert K, et al: Surveillance for second primary colorectal cancer after adjuvant chemotherapy: An analysis of Intergroup 0089. Ann Intern Med 136:261-269, 2002
12. Johnson FE, Virgo KS, Clemente MF, et al: How tumor stage affects surgeons' surveillance strategies after surgery for carcinoma of the upper aerodigestive tract. Cancer 82:1932-1937, 1998
13. Impact of follow-up testing on survival and health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients: A multicenter randomized controlled trial. The GIVIO Investigators. JAMA 271:1587-1592, 1994
14. Rosselli Del Turco M, Palli D, Cariddi A, et al: Intensive diagnostic follow-up after treatment of primary breast cancer. A randomized trial. National Research Council Project on Breast Cancer follow-up. JAMA 271:1593-1597, 1994
15. Johnson FE, Virgo KS, Longo WE, et al: Colorectal cancer patient follow-up after curative-intent surgery. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 22:297, 2003 (abstr 1194)
16. Phelps CE, Parente ST: Priority setting in medical technology and medical practice assessment. Med Care 28:703-723, 1990