A blueprint for cancer screening and early detection: Advancing screening’s contribution to cancer control

CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Volumn 69, Issue 1, 2019, Pages 50-79

  Wender, Richard C ^a   Brawley, Otis W ^a   Fedewa, Stacey A ^a   Gansler, Ted ^a   Smith, Robert A ^a  

^a AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY   (United States)

Author keywords

breast neoplasms; cervical neoplasms; colorectal neoplasms; lung neoplasms; mass screening; prostate neoplasms

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER CONTROL; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; COLORECTAL CANCER; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; LUNG CANCER; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; SCREENING TEST; SHARED DECISION MAKING; TREND STUDY; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; ADVERSE EVENT; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); FEMALE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; INCIDENCE; INVENTION; MALE; NEOPLASM; NON PROFIT ORGANIZATION; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROCEDURES; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; INVENTIONS; MALE; NEOPLASMS; OUTCOME AND PROCESS ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; RISK ASSESSMENT; TRANSLATIONAL MEDICAL RESEARCH; UNITED STATES;

EID: 85056782350     PISSN: 00079235     EISSN: 15424863     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3322/caac.21550     Document Type: Article

References (229)

1. Wilson JMG, Jungner G. Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease. World Health Organization Public Health Papers. Volume 34. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1968.
2. Eddy D. ACS report on the cancer-related health checkup. CA Cancer J Clin. 1980;30:193-240.
3. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:7-30.
4. Noone AM, Howlader N, Krapcho M, et al, eds. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2015. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2018.
5. Laara E, Day NE, Hakama M. Trends in mortality from cervical cancer in the Nordic countries: association with organised screening programmes. Lancet. 1987;1:1247-1249.
6. Atkin WS, Edwards R, Kralj-Hans I, et al. Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;375:1624-1633.
7. Dominitz JA, Robertson DJ, Ahnen DJ, et al. Colonoscopy vs fecal immunochemical test in reducing mortality from colorectal cancer (CONFIRM): rationale for study design. Am J Gastroenterol. 2017;112:1736-1746.
8. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network Cancer Research Group. Digital Tomosynthesis Mammography and Digital Mammography in Screening Patients for Breast Cancer (NCT03233191). Philadelphia, PA: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network Cancer Research Group; 2017. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03233191. Accessed December 18, 2017.
9. Njor S, Nystrom L, Moss S, et al. Breast cancer mortality in mammographic screening in Europe: a review of incidence-based mortality studies. J Med Screen. 2012;19(suppl 1):33-41.
10. Broeders M, Moss S, Nystrom L, et al. The impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality in Europe: a review of observational studies. J Med Screen. 2012;19(suppl 1):14-25.
11. Nelson HD, Tyne K, Naik A, et al. Screening for Breast Cancer: Systematic Evidence Review Update for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Report 10-05142-EF-1. US Preventive Services Task Force Evidence Syntheses, formerly Systematic Evidence Reviews. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Research and Quality; 2009.
12. Mandelblatt J, Schechter C, Levy D, Zauber A, Chang Y, Etzioni R. Building better models: if we build them, will policy makers use them? Toward integrating modeling into health care decisions. Med Decis Making. 2012;32:656-659.
13. Miles A, Cockburn J, Smith RA, Wardle J. A perspective from countries using organized screening programs. Cancer. 2004;101:1201-1213.
14. Adegoke O, Kulasingam S, Virnig B. Cervical cancer trends in the United States: a 35-year population-based analysis. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2012;21:1031-1037.
15. Siegel RL, Fedewa SA, Anderson WF, et al. Colorectal cancer incidence patterns in the United States, 1974–2013 [serial online]. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017;109:dwj322.
16. Tsodikov A, Gulati R, Heijnsdijk EAM, et al. Reconciling the effects of screening on prostate cancer mortality in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167:449-455.
17. Swedish Organized Service Screening Evaluation Group. Reduction in breast cancer mortality from organized service screening with mammography: 1. Further confirmation with extended data. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006;15:45-51.
18. Plevritis SK, Munoz D, Kurian AW, et al. Association of screening and treatment with breast cancer mortality by molecular subtype in US women, 2000–2012. JAMA. 2018;319:154-164.
19. Jemal A, Fedewa SA. Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography in the United States—2010 to 2015. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3:1278-1281.
20. Croswell JM, Kramer BS, Kreimer AR, et al. Cumulative incidence of false-positive results in repeated, multimodal cancer screening. Ann Fam Med. 2009;7:212-222.
21. Austoker J, Ong G. Written information needs of women who are recalled for further investigation of breast screening: results of a multicentre study. J Med Screen. 1994;1:238-244.
22. Lindfors KK, O'Connor J, Parker RA. False-positive screening mammograms: effect of immediate versus later work-up on patient stress. Radiology. 2001;218:247-253.
23. Barton MB, Morley DS, Moore S, et al. Decreasing women's anxieties after abnormal mammograms: a controlled trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:529-538.
24. Braithwaite D, Walter LC, Izano M, Kerlikowske K. Benefits and harms of screening mammography by comorbidity and age: a qualitative synthesis of observational studies and decision analyses. J Gen Intern Med. 2016;31:561-572.
25. Breslau ES, Gorin SS, Edwards HM, Schonberg MA, Saiontz N, Walter LC. An individualized approach to cancer screening decisions in older adults: a multilevel framework. J Gen Intern Med. 2016;31:539-547.
26. Smith RA, Andrews KS, Brooks D, et al. Cancer screening in the United States, 2018: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:297-316.
27. US Preventive Services Task Force. Recommendations for Primary Care Practice. Rockland, MD: US Preventive Services Task Force; 2017. uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Name/recommendations. Accessed August 20, 2018.
28. Puliti D, Duffy SW, Miccinesi G, et al. Overdiagnosis in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Europe: a literature review. J Med Screen. 2012;19(suppl 1):42-56.
29. Draisma G, Etzioni R, Tsodikov A, et al. Lead time and overdiagnosis in prostate-specific antigen screening: importance of methods and context. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:374-383.
30. Etzioni R, Gulati R, Cooperberg MR, Penson DM, Weiss NS, Thompson IM. Limitations of basing screening policies on screening trials: the US Preventive Services Task Force and prostate cancer screening. Med Care. 2013;51:295-300.
31. Michalopoulos D, Duffy SW. Estimation of overdiagnosis using short-term trends and lead time estimates uncontaminated by overdiagnosed cases: results from the Norwegian Breast Screening Programme. J Med Screen. 2016;23:192-202.
32. Patz EF Jr, Pinsky P, Gatsonis C, et al. Overdiagnosis in low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:269-274.
33. Henschke CI, Yip R, Yankelevitz DF, Smith JP. International Early Lung Cancer Action Program Investigators. Definition of a positive test result in computed tomography screening for lung cancer: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158:246-252.
34. American College of Radiology. Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS). Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2014. acr.org/Quality-Safety/Resources/LungRADS. Accessed October 15, 2014.
35. Ten Haaf K, van der Aalst CM, de Koning HJ. Clinically detected non-aggressive lung cancers: implications for overdiagnosis and overtreatment in lung cancer screening. Thorax. 2018;73:407-408.
36. Vaccarella S, Franceschi S, Bray F, Wild CP, Plummer M, Dal Maso L. Worldwide thyroid-cancer epidemic? The increasing impact of overdiagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:614-617.
37. Welch HG, Doherty GM. Saving thyroids—overtreatment of small papillary cancers. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:310-312.
38. Znaor A, Laversanne M, Bray F. Less overdiagnosis of kidney cancer? An age-period-cohort analysis of incidence trends in 16 populations worldwide. Int J Cancer. 2017;141:925-932.
39. Institute of Medicine. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011.
40. Stockton D, Davies T, Day N, McCann J. Retrospective study of reasons for improved survival in patients with breast cancer in east Anglia: earlier diagnosis or better treatment [published erratum appears in BMJ 1997;314:721] [see comments]. BMJ. 1997;314:472-475.
41. Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen HH, et al. The Swedish Two-County Trial twenty years later. Updated mortality results and new insights from long-term follow-up. Radiol Clin North Am. 2000;38:625-651.
42. Dodd GD. American Cancer Society guidelines on screening for breast cancer. An overview. Cancer. 1992;69:1885-1887.
43. Oeffinger KC, Fontham ET, Etzioni R, et al. Breast cancer screening for women at average risk: 2015 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. JAMA. 2015;314:1599-1614.
44. Siu AL, US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164:279-296.
45. Monticciolo DL, Newell MS, Hendrick RE, et al. Breast cancer screening for average-risk women: recommendations from the ACR Commission on Breast Imaging. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017;14:1137-1143.
46. Wilt TJ, Harris RP, Qaseem A; High Value Care Task Force of the American College of Physicians. Screening for cancer: advice for high-value care from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162:718-725.
47. National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Health Interview Surveys 2000 and 2015. Public use data files 2001, 2016. August 5, 2018.
48. Rauscher GH, Johnson TP, Cho YI, Walk JA. Accuracy of self-reported cancer-screening histories: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008;17:748-757.
49. Cronin KA, Miglioretti DL, Krapcho M, et al. Bias associated with self-report of prior screening mammography. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009;18:1699-1705.
50. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Working Group on the Evaluation of Cancer-Preventive Strategies. Breast Cancer Screening. IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention. Volume 15. Lyon, France: IARC Press; 2016.
51. Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet. 2012;380:1778-1786.
52. Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, Tonelli M, Connor Gorber S, et al. Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in average-risk women aged 40–74 years. Can Med Assoc J. 2011;183:1991-2001.
53. Coldman A, Phillips N, Wilson C, et al. Pan-Canadian study of mammography screening and mortality from breast cancer [serial online]. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106:dju261.
54. Tabar L, Yen MF, Vitak B, Chen HH, Smith RA, Duffy SW. Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. Lancet. 2003;361:1405-1410.
55. Marmot MG, Altman DG, Cameron DA, Dewar JA, Thompson SG, Wilcox M. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Br J Cancer. 2013;108:2205-2240.
56. Tabar L, Yen AM, Wu WY, et al. Insights from the breast cancer screening trials: how screening affects the natural history of breast cancer and implications for evaluating service screening programs. Breast J. 2015;21:13-20.
57. Chen TH, Yen AM, Fann JC, et al. Clarifying the debate on population-based screening for breast cancer with mammography: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials on mammography with Bayesian meta-analysis and causal model [serial online]. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96:e5684.
58. Hackshaw A. The benefits and harms of mammographic screening for breast cancer: building the evidence base using service screening programmes. J Med Screen. 2012;19(suppl 1):1-2.
59. Hofvind S, Ursin G, Tretli S, Sebuodegard S, Moller B. Breast cancer mortality in participants of the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program. Cancer. 2013;119:3106-3112.
60. Lehman CD, Arao RF, Sprague BL, et al. National performance benchmarks for modern screening digital mammography: update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Radiology. 2017;283:49-58.
61. Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:227-236.
62. Rauscher GH, Conant EF, Khan JA, Berbaum ML. Mammogram image quality as a potential contributor to disparities in breast cancer stage at diagnosis: an observational study [serial online]. BMC Cancer 2013;13:208.
63. Institute of Medicine. Assessing and Improving Imaging Interpretation in Breast Cancer Screening. Presented at: National Cancer Policy Forum Meeting; May 12–13, 2015; Washington, DC. iom.nationalacademies.org/Activities/Disease/NCPF/2015-MAY-12.aspx#sthash.BiDFaY5P.dpuf. Accessed August 10, 2015.
64. Tosteson AN, Fryback DG, Hammond CS, et al. Consequences of false-positive screening mammograms. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:954-961.
65. Yaffe MJ, Mainprize JG. Risk of radiation-induced breast cancer from mammographic screening. Radiology. 2011;258:98-105.
66. Dinnes J, Moss S, Melia J, Blanks R, Song F, Kleijnen J. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of double reading of mammograms in breast cancer screening: findings of a systematic review. Breast. 2001;10:455-463.
67. Gromet M. Comparison of computer-aided detection to double reading of screening mammograms: review of 231,221 mammograms. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190:854-859.
68. Gilbert FJ, Astley SM, Gillan MG, et al. Single reading with computer-aided detection for screening mammography. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1675-1684.
69. Fenton JJ, Taplin SH, Carney PA, et al. Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:1399-1409.
70. Buist DS, Anderson ML, Smith RA, et al. Effect of radiologists' diagnostic work-up volume on interpretive performance. Radiology. 2014;273:351-364.
71. Hayward JH, Ray KM, Wisner DJ, et al. Improving screening mammography outcomes through comparison with multiple prior mammograms. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;207:918-924.
72. Hakim CM, Catullo VJ, Chough DM, et al. Effect of the availability of prior full-field digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis images on the interpretation of mammograms. Radiology. 2015;276:65-72.
73. US Food and Drug Administration. MQSA National Statistics. Silver Spring, MD: US Food and Drug Administration; 2018. https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emittingproducts/mammographyqualitystandardsactandprogram/facilityscorecard/ucm113858.htm. Accessed August 17, 2018.
74. Kerlikowske K, Hubbard RA, Miglioretti DL, et al. Comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in community practice in the United States: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:493-502.
75. Vedantham S, Karellas A, Vijayaraghavan GR, Kopans DB. Digital breast tomosynthesis: state of the art. Radiology. 2015;277:663-684.
76. Phi XA, Tagliafico A, Houssami N, Greuter MJW, de Bock GH. Digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening and diagnosis in women with dense breasts—a systematic review and meta-analysis [serial online]. BMC Cancer. 2018;18:380.
77. Yaghjyan L, Colditz GA, Rosner B, Tamimi RM. Mammographic breast density and breast cancer risk: interactions of percent density, absolute dense, and non-dense areas with breast cancer risk factors. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015;150:181-189.
78. Haberle L, Fasching PA, Brehm B, et al. Mammographic density is the main correlate of tumors detected on ultrasound but not on mammography. Int J Cancer. 2016;139:1967-1974.
79. Destounis S, Johnston L, Highnam R, Arieno A, Morgan R, Chan A. Using volumetric breast density to quantify the potential masking risk of mammographic density. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;208:222-227.
80. Chiu SY, Duffy S, Yen AM, Tabar L, Smith RA, Chen HH. Effect of baseline breast density on breast cancer incidence, stage, mortality, and screening parameters: 25-year follow-up of a Swedish mammographic screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010;19:1219-1228.
81. Hooley RJ. Breast density legislation and clinical evidence. Radiol Clin North Am. 2017;55:513-526.
82. Melnikow J, Fenton JJ, Whitlock EP, et al. Supplemental Screening for Breast Cancer in Women With Dense Breasts: A Systematic Review for the US Preventive Service Task Force. Report 14–05201-EF-3. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2016.
83. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Strobel K, Schild HH, Hilgers RD, Bieling HB. Abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): first postcontrast subtracted images and maximum-intensity projection-a novel approach to breast cancer screening with MRI. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:2304-2310.
84. Gunn CM, Kressin NR, Cooper K, Marturano C, Freund KM, Battaglia TA. Primary care provider experience with breast density legislation in Massachusetts. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2018;27:615-622.
85. Nayak L, Miyake KK, Leung JW, et al. Impact of breast density legislation on breast cancer risk assessment and supplemental screening: a survey of 110 radiology facilities. Breast J. 2016;22:493-500.
86. Destounis S, Arieno A, Morgan R. Initial experience with the New York State breast density inform law at a community-based breast center. J Ultrasound Med. 2015;34:993-1000.
87. Trinh L, Ikeda DM, Miyake KK, et al. Patient awareness of breast density and interest in supplemental screening tests: comparison of an academic facility and a county hospital. J Am Coll Radiol. 2015;12:249-255.
88. Maimone S, McDonough MD, Hines SL. Breast density reporting laws and supplemental screening—a survey of referring providers' experiences and understanding. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2017;46:105-109.
89. Rauscher GH, Khan JA, Berbaum ML, Conant EF. Potentially missed detection with screening mammography: does the quality of radiologist's interpretation vary by patient socioeconomic advantage/disadvantage? Ann Epidemiol. 2013;23:210-214.
90. Rauscher GH, Murphy AM, Orsi JM, Dupuy DM, Grabler PM, Weldon CB. Beyond the mammography quality standards act: measuring the quality of breast cancer screening programs. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202:145-151.
91. Edwards BK, Ward E, Kohler BA, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2006, featuring colorectal cancer trends and impact of interventions (risk factors, screening, and treatment) to reduce future rates. Cancer. 2010;116:544-573.
92. Siegel RL, Ward EM, Jemal A. Trends in colorectal cancer incidence rates in the United States by tumor location and stage, 1992–2008. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2012;21:411-416.
93. Cress RD, Morris C, Ellison GL, Goodman MT. Secular changes in colorectal cancer incidence by subsite, stage at diagnosis, and race/ethnicity, 1992–2001. Cancer. 2006;107:1142-1152.
94. Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program. SEER*Stat Database: Incidence-SEER 9 Regs Research Data with Delay-Adjustment, Malignant Only, Nov. 2016 Submission (1975–2014) -Linked To County Attributes-Total US, 1969–2015 Counties. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch; 2017.
95. Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program. SEER*Stat Database: Mortality-All COD, Aggregated With State, Total US (1969–2014) (underlying mortality data provided by the National Vital Statistics System, 2016). Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch; 2016.
96. American Cancer Society. American Cancer Society Facts & Figures 2018. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2018.
97. Wolf AMD, Fontham ETH, Church TR, et al. Colorectal cancer screening for average-risk adults: 2018 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:250-281.
98. Bibbins-Domingo K, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, et al. Screening for colorectal cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2016;315:2564-2575.
99. Rex DK, Boland CR, Dominitz JA, et al. Colorectal cancer screening: recommendations for physicians and patients from the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2017;153:307-323.
100. Mandel JS, Bond JH, Church TR, et al. Reducing mortality from colorectal cancer by screening for fecal occult blood. Minnesota Colon Cancer Control Study. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:1365-1371.
101. Mandel JS, Church TR, Bond JH, et al. The effect of fecal occult-blood screening on the incidence of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:1603-1607.
102. Lin JS, Piper MA, Perdue LA, et al. Screening for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Evidence Synthesis No. 135. Report 14–05203-EF-1. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2016.
103. Lauby-Secretan B, Vilahur N, Bianchini F, Guha N, Straif K; International Agency for Research on Cancer Handbook Working Group. The IARC Perspective on Colorectal Cancer Screening. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1734-1740.
104. Knudsen AB, Zauber AG, Rutter CM, et al. Estimation of benefits, burden, and harms of colorectal cancer screening strategies: modeling study for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. 2016;315:2595-2609.
105. Peterse EFP, Meester RGS, Siegel RL, et al. The impact of the rising colorectal cancer incidence in young adults on the optimal age to start screening: microsimulation analysis I to inform the American Cancer Society colorectal cancer screening guideline. Cancer. 2018;124:2964-2973.
106. Meester RGS, Peterse EFP, Knudsen AB, et al. Optimizing colorectal cancer screening by race and sex: microsimulation analysis II to inform the American Cancer Society colorectal cancer screening guideline. Cancer. 2018;124:2974-2985.
107. Levin TR, Zhao W, Conell C, et al. Complications of colonoscopy in an integrated health care delivery system. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145:880-886.
108. Garcia-Albeniz X, Hsu J, Bretthauer M, Hernan MA. Effectiveness of screening colonoscopy to prevent colorectal cancer among Medicare beneficiaries aged 70 to 79 years: a prospective observational study. Ann Intern Med. 2017;166:18-26.
109. Warren JL, Klabunde CN, Mariotto AB, et al. Adverse events after outpatient colonoscopy in the Medicare population. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150;849-857, W152.
110. Ko CW, Riffle S, Michaels L, et al. Serious complications within 30 days of screening and surveillance colonoscopy are uncommon. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;8:166-173.
111. Laing SS, Bogart A, Chubak J, Fuller S, Green BB. Psychological distress after a positive fecal occult blood test result among members of an integrated healthcare delivery system. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2014;23:154-159.
112. Cotter TG, Burger KN, Devens ME, et al. Long-term follow-up of patients having false-positive multitarget stool DNA tests after negative screening colonoscopy: the LONG-HAUL cohort study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2017;26:614-621.
113. Cooper GS, Markowitz SD, Chen Z, et al. Evaluation of patients with an apparent false positive stool DNA test: the role of repeat stool DNA testing. Dig Dis Sci. 2018;63:1449-1453.
114. Nagata K, Fujiwara M, Kanazawa H, et al. Evaluation of dose reduction and image quality in CT colonography: comparison of low-dose CT with iterative reconstruction and routine-dose CT with filtered back projection. Eur Radiol. 2015;25:221-229.
115. National Research Council (US). Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Level of Ionizing Radiation. Health Risks From Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2006.
116. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Kim KP, Knudsen AB, et al. Radiation-related cancer risks from CT colonography screening: a risk-benefit analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196:816-823.
117. Hall IJ, Tangka FKL, Sabatino SA, Thompson TD, Graubard BI, Breen N. Patterns and trends in cancer screening in the United States [serial online]. Prev Chronic Dis. 2018;15:E97.
118. Jones RM, Devers KJ, Kuzel AJ, Woolf SH. Patient-reported barriers to colorectal cancer screening: a mixed-methods analysis. Am J Prev Med. 2010;38:508-516.
119. Community Preventive Services Task Force. Cancer Screening: Multicomponent Interventions—Colorectal Cancer. Atlanta, GA: Community Guide Branch, Division of Public Health Information Dissemination, Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services, Office of Public Health Scientific Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2017. thecommunityguide.org/findings/cancer-screening-multicomponent-interventions-colorectal-cancer. Accessed August 21, 2018.
120. Health Resources and Services Administration. HRSA Health Center Program–2017 National Health Center Data. Rockville, MD: Health Resources and Services Administration; 2017. bphc.hrsa.gov/datareporting/index.html. Accessed August 21, 2018.
121. Selby K, Baumgartner C, Levin TR, et al. Interventions to improve follow-up of positive results on fecal blood tests: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167:565-575.
122. Khatami S, Xuan L, Roman R, et al. Modestly increased use of colonoscopy when copayments are waived. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;10:761-766, e761.
123. McCarthy AM, Kim JJ, Beaber EF, et al. Follow-up of abnormal breast and colorectal cancer screening by race/ethnicity. Am J Prev Med. 2016;51:507-512.
124. de Moor JS, Cohen RA, Shapiro JA, et al. Colorectal cancer screening in the United States: trends from 2008 to 2015 and variation by health insurance coverage. Prev Med. 2018;112:199-206.
125. Devesa SS, Silverman DT, Young JL Jr, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality trends among whites in the United States, 1947–84. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1987;79:701-770.
126. Beavis AL, Gravitt PE, Rositch AF. Hysterectomy-corrected cervical cancer mortality rates reveal a larger racial disparity in the United States. Cancer. 2017;123:1044-1050.
127. Watson M, Soman A, Flagg EW, et al. Surveillance of high-grade cervical cancer precursors (CIN III/AIS) in four population-based cancer registries, United States, 2009–2012. Prev Med. 2017;103:60-65.
128. Saslow D, Solomon D, Lawson HW, et al. American Cancer Society, American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology, and American Society for Clinical Pathology screening guidelines for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62:147-172.
129. Smith RA, Manassaram-Baptiste D, Brooks D, et al. Cancer screening in the United States, 2015: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:30-54.
130. Massad LS, Einstein MH, Huh WK, et al. 2012 Updated consensus guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2013;17(5 suppl 1):S1-S27.
131. US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for cervical cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2018;320:674-686.
132. Moyer VA. Screening for cervical cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156:880-891, W312.
133. US Preventive Services Task Force. Draft Recommendation Statement: Cervical Cancer: Screening. Rockville, MD: US Preventive Services Task Force; 2017. https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/draft-recommendation-statement/cervical-cancer-screening2. Accessed December 18, 2017.
134. Huh WK, Ault KA, Chelmow D, et al. Use of primary high-risk human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening: interim clinical guidance. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;136:178-182.
135. Whitlock EP, Vesco KK, Eder M, Lin JS, Senger CA, Burda BU. Liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus testing to screen for cervical cancer: a systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:687-697, W214-W215.
136. Fahey MT, Irwig L, Macaskill P. Meta-analysis of Pap test accuracy. Am J Epidemiol. 1995;141:680-689.
137. Sung HY, Kearney KA, Miller M, Kinney W, Sawaya GF, Hiatt RA. Papanicolaou smear history and diagnosis of invasive cervical carcinoma among members of a large prepaid health plan. Cancer. 2000;88:2283-2289.
138. Schiffman M, Castle PE, Jeronimo J, Rodriguez AC, Wacholder S. Human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. Lancet. 2007;370:890-907.
139. Melnikow J, Henderson JT, Burda BU, Senger CA, Durbin S, Soulsby MA. Screening for Cervical Cancer With High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Testing: A Systematic Evidence Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Report 17-05231-EF-1. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2017.
140. Watson M, Benard V, King J, Crawford A, Saraiya M. National assessment of HPV and Pap tests: changes in cervical cancer screening, National Health Interview Survey. Prev Med. 2017;100:243-247.
141. Haas JS, Sprague BL, Klabunde CN, et al. Provider attitudes and screening practices following changes in breast and cervical cancer screening guidelines. J Gen Intern Med. 2016;31:52-59.
142. Stamey TA, Yang N, Hay AR, McNeal JE, Freiha FS, Redwine E. Prostate-specific antigen as a serum marker for adenocarcinoma of the prostate. N Engl J Med. 1987;317:909-916.
143. Moyer VA. Screening for prostate cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157:120-134.
144. Wolf AM, Wender RC, Etzioni RB, et al. American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of prostate cancer: update 2010. CA Cancer J Clin. 2010;60:70-98.
145. US Preventive Services Task Force, Grossman DC, Curry SJ, et al. Screening for prostate cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2018;319:1901-1913.
146. Carter HB, Albertsen PC, Barry MJ, et al. Early detection of prostate cancer: AUA guideline. J Urol. 2013;190:419-426.
147. Carter HB. American Urological Association (AUA) guideline on prostate cancer detection: process and rationale. BJU Int. 2013;112:543-547.
148. Jemal A, Fedewa SA, Ma J, et al. Prostate cancer incidence and PSA testing patterns in relation to USPSTF screening recommendations. JAMA. 2015;314:2054-2061.
149. Fedewa SA, Gansler T, Smith R, et al. Recent patterns in shared decision making for prostate-specific antigen testing in the United States. Ann Fam Med. 2018;16:139-144.
150. Fedewa SA, Ward EM, Brawley O, Jemal A. Recent patterns of prostate-specific antigen testing for prostate cancer screening in the United States. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177:1040-1042.
151. Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL 3rd, et al. Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1310-1319.
152. Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1320-1328.
153. Martin RM, Donovan JL, Turner EL, et al. Effect of a low-intensity PSA-based screening intervention on prostate cancer mortality: the CAP randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2018;319:883-895.
154. Gulati R, Tsodikov A, Wever EM, et al. The impact of PLCO control arm contamination on perceived PSA screening efficacy. Cancer Causes Control. 2012;23:827-835.
155. Young GJ, Harrison S, Turner EL, et al. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing of men in UK general practice: a 10-year longitudinal cohort study [serial online]. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e017729.
156. Tsodikov A, Gulati R, Etzioni R. Reconciling the effects of screening on prostate cancer mortality in the ERSPC and PLCO trials. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168:608-609.
157. Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C, et al. Operating characteristics of prostate-specific antigen in men with an initial PSA level of 3.0 ng/mL or lower. JAMA. 2005;294:66-70.
158. Vickers AJ, Cronin AM, Bjork T, et al. Prostate specific antigen concentration at age 60 and death or metastasis from prostate cancer: case-control study [serial online]. BMJ. 2010;341:c4521.
159. Vickers AJ, Lilja H. We need a better marker for prostate cancer. How about renaming PSA? Urology. 2012;79:254-255.
160. Fenton JJ, Weyrich MS, Durbin S, Liu Y, Bang H, Melnikow J. Prostate-specific antigen-based screening for prostate cancer: evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. 2018;319:1914-1931.
161. Pinsky PF, Parnes HL, Andriole G. Mortality and complications after prostate biopsy in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening (PLCO) trial. BJU Int. 2014;113:254-259.
162. Gulati R, Cheng HH, Lange PH, Nelson PS, Etzioni R. Screening men at increased risk for prostate cancer diagnosis: model estimates of benefits and harms. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2017;26:222-227.
163. Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:203-213.
164. American Cancer Society. Testing for Prostate Cancer. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2017. cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/cancer-control/en/booklets-flyers/testing-for-prostate-cancer-handout.pdf. Accessed August 8, 2018
165. Thompson IM, Ankerst DP, Chi C, et al. Assessing prostate cancer risk: results from the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:529-534.
166. Ankerst DP, Hoefler J, Bock S, et al. Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator 2.0 for the prediction of low- vs high-grade prostate cancer. Urology. 2014;83:1362-1367.
167. Thompson IM Jr, Leach RJ, Ankerst DP. Focusing PSA testing on detection of high-risk prostate cancers by incorporating patient preferences into decision making. JAMA. 2014;312:995-996.
168. Vickers AJ, Eastham JA, Scardino PT, Lilja H. The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center recommendations for prostate cancer screening. Urology. 2016;91:12-18.
169. Epstein JI, Egevad L, Amin MB, et al. The 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma: definition of grading patterns and proposal for a new grading system. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40:244-252.
170. Epstein JI, Allsbrook WC Jr, Amin MB, Egevad LL, ISUP Grading Committee. The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on Gleason grading of prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29:1228-1242.
171. Buyyounouski MK, Choyke PL, McKenney JK, et al. Prostate cancer—major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67:245-253.
172. Amin MB, Edge SB, Greene FL, et al, eds. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 8th ed. New York: Springer; 2017.
173. Pierorazio PM, Walsh PC, Partin AW, Epstein JI. Prognostic Gleason grade grouping: data based on the modified Gleason scoring system. BJU Int. 2013;111:753-760.
174. Mohler JL, Lee RJ, Antonarakis ES, et al. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Prostate Cancer, Version 3.2018. Fort Washington, PA: National Comprehensive Clinical Trials Network; 2018. nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/prostate.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2018.
175. Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR. Trends in management for patients with localized prostate cancer, 1990–2013. JAMA. 2015;314:80-82.
176. Morash C, Tey R, Agbassi C, et al. Active surveillance for the management of localized prostate cancer: guideline recommendations. Can Urol Assoc J. 2015;9:171-178.
177. Wender R, Fontham ET, Barrera E, et al. American Cancer Society lung cancer screening guidelines. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63:107-117.
178. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, Aberle DR, Adams AM, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:395-409.
179. Moyer VA, US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for lung cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:330-338.
180. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Decision Memo for Screening for Lung Cancer with Low Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) (CAG-00439N). Baltimore, MD: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; 2014. https://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/nca-decision-memo.aspx?NCAId=274. Accessed October 15, 2014.
181. Wood DE, Kazerooni EA, Baum SL, et al. Lung Cancer Screening, Version 32018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2018;16:412-441.
182. Strauss G, Dominioni L. Varese meeting report. Lung Cancer. 1999;23:171-172.
183. Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening [see comments]. Lancet. 1999;354:99-105.
184. Aberle DR, Berg CD, Black WC, et al. The National Lung Screening Trial: overview and study design. Radiology. 2011;258:243-253.
185. Black WC, Gareen IF, Soneji SS, et al. Cost-effectiveness of CT screening in the National Lung Screening Trial. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1793-1802.
186. Pyenson BS, Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, Yip R, Dec E. Offering lung cancer screening to high-risk Medicare beneficiaries saves lives and is cost-effective: an actuarial analysis. Am Health Drug Benefits. 2014;7:272-282.
187. Tammemagi MC, Church TR, Hocking WG, et al. Evaluation of the lung cancer risks at which to screen ever- and never-smokers: screening rules applied to the PLCO and NLST cohorts [serial online]. PLoS Med. 2014;11:e1001764.
188. Cheung LC, Katki HA, Chaturvedi AK, Jemal A, Berg CD. Preventing lung cancer mortality by computed tomography screening: the effect of risk-based versus US Preventive Services Task Force eligibility criteria, 2005–2015. Ann Intern Med. 2018;168:229-232.
189. Ru Zhao Y, Xie X, de Koning HJ, Mali WP, Vliegenthart R, Oudkerk M. NELSON lung cancer screening study. Cancer Imaging. 2011;11(Spec No. A):S79-S84.
190. Bach PB, Mirkin JN, Oliver TK, et al. Benefits and harms of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review. JAMA. 2012;307:2418-2429.
191. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Kim KP, Berg CD. Low-dose lung computed tomography screening before age 55: estimates of the mortality reduction required to outweigh the radiation-induced cancer risk. J Med Screen. 2008;15:153-158.
192. de Koning HJ, Meza R, Plevritis SK, et al. Benefits and harms of computed tomography lung cancer screening strategies: a comparative modeling study for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:311-320.
193. MacMahon H, Naidich DP, Goo JM, et al. Guidelines for management of incidental pulmonary nodules detected on CT images: from the Fleischner Society 2017. Radiology. 2017;284:228-243.
194. McKee BJ, Regis SM, McKee AB, Flacke S, Wald C. Performance of ACR Lung-RADS in a clinical CT lung screening program. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016;13(2 suppl):R25-R29.
195. Heerink WJ, de Bock GH, de Jonge GJ, Groen HJ, Vliegenthart R, Oudkerk M. Complication rates of CT-guided transthoracic lung biopsy: meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2017;27:138-148.
196. Couraud S, Greillier L, Milleron B; IFCT Lung Cancer Screening Group. Estimating overdiagnosis in lung cancer screening [comment]. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:1197.
197. Gelbman BD, Libby DM. Estimating overdiagnosis in lung cancer screening. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:1197-1198.
198. Marcus PM. Estimating overdiagnosis in lung cancer screening [comment]. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:1198.
199. White A, Thompson TD, White MC, et al. Cancer screening test use—United States, 2015. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017;66:201-206.
200. Damiani G, Basso D, Acampora A, et al. The impact of level of education on adherence to breast and cervical cancer screening: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis. Prev Med. 2015;81:281-289.
201. Carney PA, O'Malley J, Buckley DI, et al. Influence of health insurance coverage on breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening in rural primary care settings. Cancer. 2012;118:6217-6225.
202. Azami-Aghdash S, Ghojazadeh M, Sheyklo SG, et al. Breast cancer screening barriers from the woman’s perspective: a meta-synthesis. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015;16:3463-3471.
203. Shelton RC, Jandorf L, Ellison J, Villagra C, DuHamel KN. The influence of sociocultural factors on colonoscopy and FOBT screening adherence among low-income Hispanics. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2011;22:925-944.
204. Sabatino SA, Lawrence B, Elder R, et al. Effectiveness of interventions to increase screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers: nine updated systematic reviews for the guide to community preventive services. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43:97-118.
205. Stange KC, Breslau ES, Dietrich AJ, Glasgow RE. State-of-the-art and future directions in multilevel interventions across the cancer control continuum. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2012;2012:20-31.
206. Taplin SH, Anhang Price R, Edwards HM, et al. Introduction: understanding and influencing multilevel factors across the cancer care continuum. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2012;2012:2-10.
207. Gross CP, Andersen MS, Krumholz HM, McAvay GJ, Proctor D, Tinetti ME. Relation between Medicare screening reimbursement and stage at diagnosis for older patients with colon cancer. JAMA. 2006;296:2815-2822.
208. Goldman AL, McCormick D, Haas JS, Sommers BD. Effects of the ACA's health insurance marketplaces on the previously uninsured: a quasi-experimental analysis. Health Aff (Millwood). 2018;37:591-599.
209. Jemal A, Lin CC, Davidoff AJ, Han X. Changes in insurance coverage and stage at diagnosis among nonelderly patients with cancer after the Affordable Care Act. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:3906-3915.
210. Fedewa SA, Goodman M, Flanders WD, et al. Elimination of cost-sharing and receipt of screening for colorectal and breast cancer. Cancer. 2015;121:3272-3280.
211. Agarwal R, Mazurenko O, Menachemi N. High-deductible health plans reduce health care cost and utilization, including use of needed preventive services. Health Aff (Millwood). 2017;36:1762-1768.
212. Trivedi AN, Rakowski W, Ayanian JZ. Effect of cost sharing on screening mammography in Medicare health plans. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:375-383.
213. Meeker D, Joyce GF, Malkin J, Teutsch SM, Haddix AC, Goldman DP. Coverage and preventive screening. Health Serv Res. 2011;46:173-184.
214. Goodwin SM, Anderson GF. Effect of cost-sharing reductions on preventive service use among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries [serial online]. Medicare Medicaid Res Rev. 2012;2:002.01.a03.
215. Green BB, Coronado GD, Devoe JE, Allison J. Navigating the murky waters of colorectal cancer screening and health reform. Am J Public Health. 2014;104:982-986.
216. Cardarelli R, Kurian AK, Pandya V. Having a personal healthcare provider and receipt of adequate cervical and breast cancer screening. J Am Board Fam Med. 2010;23:75-81.
217. Taubert KA, Clark NG, Smith RA. Patient-centered prevention strategies for cardiovascular disease, cancer and diabetes. Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2007;4:656-666.
218. Guerra CE, Schwartz JS, Armstrong K, Brown JS, Halbert CH, Shea JA. Barriers of and facilitators to physician recommendation of colorectal cancer screening. J Gen Intern Med. 2007;22:1681-1688.
219. Lerman C, Rimer B, Trock B, Balshem A, Engstrom PF. Factors associated with repeat adherence to breast cancer screening. Prev Med. 1990;19:279-290.
220. Ruffin MT, Gorenflo DW, Woodman B. Predictors of screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and prostatic cancer among community-based primary care practices. J Am Board Fam Pract. 2000;13:1-10.
221. Fenton JJ, Cai Y, Weiss NS, et al. Delivery of cancer screening: how important is the preventive health examination? Arch Intern Med. 2007;167:580-585.
222. Sarfaty M, Doroshenk M, Hotz J, et al. Strategies for expanding colorectal cancer screening at community health centers. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63:221-231.
223. Donaldson EA, Holtgrave DR, Duffin RA, Feltner F, Funderburk W, Freeman HP. Patient navigation for breast and colorectal cancer in 3 community hospital settings: an economic evaluation. Cancer. 2012;118:4851-4859.
224. European Commission Against Cancer. Cancer Screening in the European Union. Report on the Implementation of the Council Recommendation on Cancer Screening. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2017. https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/major_chronic_diseases/docs/2017_cancerscreening_2ndreportimplementation_en.pdf. Accessed August 1, 2018
225. Brandzel SD, Bowles EJA, Wieneke A, et al. Cancer screening reminders: addressing the spectrum of patient preferences. Perm J. 2017;21:17-051.
226. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network Cancer Research Group. Abbreviated Breast MRI and Digital Tomosynthesis Mammography in Screening Women With Dense Breasts (NCT02933489). Philadelphia, PA: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network Cancer Research Group; 2017. clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02933489. Accessed December 18, 2017.
227. Berg WA. Nuclear breast imaging: clinical results and future directions. J Nucl Med. 2016;57(suppl 1):46S-52S.
228. Bardelli A, Pantel K. Liquid biopsies, what we do not know (yet). Cancer Cell. 2017;31:172-179.
229. Rahib L, Smith BD, Aizenberg R, Rosenzweig AB, Fleshman JM, Matrisian LM. Projecting cancer incidence and deaths to 2030: the unexpected burden of thyroid, liver, and pancreas cancers in the United States. Cancer Res. 2014;74:2913-2921.