Less is more: Not "going the distance" and why

Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Volumn 103, Issue 23, 2011, Pages 1726-1728

  Harris, Russell ^a   Kinsinger, Linda S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b IL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; EDITORIAL; FECAL IMMUNOCHEMICAL TEST; HEALTH CARE COST; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; IMMUNOCHEMISTRY; INTESTINE PREPARATION; MEDICAL LITERATURE; OCCULT BLOOD TEST; PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; POLYP; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCTIVITY; SIGMOIDOSCOPY;

COLONOGRAPHY, COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; DIRECT SERVICE COSTS; FEMALE; GUAIAC; HUMANS; IMMUNOCHEMISTRY; MALE; MASS SCREENING; NEOPLASMS; OCCULT BLOOD; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 83255189550     PISSN: 00278874     EISSN: 14602105     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djr446     Document Type: Editorial

References (26)

1. Podolsky DK. Going the distance-the case for true colorectal cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2000;343(3):207-208. (Pubitemid 30489220)
2. Whitlock EP, Lin JS, Liles E, Bell TL, Fu R. Screening for colorectal cancer: a targeted, updated systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149(9):627-638.
3. Baxter NN, Goldwasser MA, Paszat LF, Saskin R, Urbach DR, Rabeneck L. Association of colonoscopy and death from colorectal cancer: a population-based case-control study. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150(1):1-8.
4. Brenner H, Hoffmeister M, Arndt V, Stegmaier C, Altenhofen L, Haug U. Protection from right-and left-sided colorectal neoplasms after colonoscopy: population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(2):89-95.
5. Baxter NN, Rabeneck L. Is the effectiveness of colonoscopy "good enough" for population-based screening? J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(2):70-71.
6. Neugut AI, Lebwohl B. Colonoscopy vs sigmoidoscopy screening: getting it right. JAMA. 2010;304(4):461-462.
7. Harris R, Sawaya GF, Moyer VA, Calonge N. Reconsidering the criteria for evaluating proposed screening programs: reflections from 4 current and former members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Epidemiol Rev. 2011;33:20-35.
8. Holden DJ, Harris R, Porterfield DS, et al. Enhancing the use and quality of colorectal cancer screening. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 190. (Prepared by the RTI International-University of North Carolina Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2007-10056-I). AHRQ Publication No. 10-E-002. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2010.
9. Rex DK, Johnson DA, Anderson JC, Schoenfeld PS, Burke CA, Inadomi JM. American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for colorectal cancer screening 2009. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104(3):739-750.
10. Burt RW, Barthel JS, Dunn KB, et al. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Colorectal cancer screening, Version 2.2011. http://www.nccn.org/ professionals/physician-gls/pdf/colorectal-screening.pdf. Accessed Oct 18, 2011.
11. Levin TR, Jamieson L, Burley DA, Reyes J, Oehrli M, Caldwell C. Organized colorectal cancer screening in integrated health care systems. Epid Rev. 2011;33:101-110.
12. Rim SH, Joseph DA, Steele LB, Thompson TD, Seeff LC. Colorectal cancer screening-United States 2002, 2004, 2006, and 2008. MMWR Surveli Summ. 2011;60(01 suppl):42-46.
13. Kanavos P, Schurer W. The dynamics of colorectal cancer management in 17 countries. Int J Health Econ. 2010;10(suppl 1):S115-S129.
14. Wilschut JA, Habbema JDF, van Leerdam ME, et al. Fecal occult blood testing when colonoscopy capacity is limited. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(23):1741-1751.
15. Pignone M, Ransohoff DF. Cross-model comparisons to improve the value of modeling: the case of colorectal cancer screening. Med Decis Making. 2011;31(4):524-526.
16. Ko CW, Riffle S, Shapiro JA, et al. Incidence of minor complications and time lost from normal activities after screening or surveillance colonoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;65(4):648-656. (Pubitemid 46454273)
17. Jonas DE, Russell LB, Sandler RS, Chou J, Pignone M. Value of patient time invested in the colonoscopy screening process: time requirements for colonoscopy study. Med Decis Making. 2008;28(2):56-65.
18. Warren JL, Klabunde CN, Mariotto AB, et al. Adverse events after outpatient colonoscopy in the Medicare population. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150(12):849-857.
19. Levin TR, Zhao W, Cornell C, et al. Complications of colonoscopy in an integrated health care delivery system. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145(12):880-886. (Pubitemid 351639963)
20. Harris R. Speaking for the evidence: colonoscopy vs computed tomographic colonography. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;102(16):1212-1214.
21. Welch HG, Black W. Overdiagnosis in cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(9):605-613.
22. Ferlitsch M, Reinhart K, Pramhas S, et al. Sex-specific prevalence of adenomas, advanved adenomas, and colorectal cancer in individuals undergoing screening colonoscopy. JAMA. 2011;306(12):1352-1358.
23. Aronowitz RA. Decision making and fear in the midst of life. Lancet. 2010;375(9724):1430-1431.
24. Aronowitz RA. The converged experience of risk and disease. Milbank Q. 2009;87(2):417-442.
25. Harris R. Overview of screening: where we are and where we may be headed. Epidemiol Rev. 2011;33:1-6.
26. Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Knudsen AB, Brenner H. Cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening. Epidemiol Rev. 2011;33:88-100.