Screening for cancer: Valuable or not?

Current Oncology Reports

Volumn 6, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 485-490

  Meyskens Jr , Frank L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

BREAST CANCER; BREAST EXAMINATION; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLON CANCER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; LUNG CANCER; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL PROFESSION; MORBIDITY; OCCULT BLOOD; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PROSTATE CANCER; REVIEW; SIGMOIDOSCOPY; SKIN CANCER; SPUTUM ANALYSIS; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

EID: 9744276795     PISSN: 15233790     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11912-004-0081-7     Document Type: Review

References (42)

1. Waterbor JW, Heimburger DC, Fish L, et al.: An interdisciplinary cancer prevention and control training program in public health. J Cancer Educ 2002, 17:85-91.
2. Meyskens FL Jr: Strategies for prevention of cancer in humans. Oncology (Huntingt) 1992, 6(Suppl): 15-24.
3. O'Shaughnessy JA, Kelloff GJ, Gordon GB, et al.: Treatment and prevention of intraepithelial neoplasia: an important target for accelerated new agent development. Clin Cancer Res 2002, 8:314-346.
4. Kramer BS, Brawley OW: Cancer screening. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2000, 14:831-848.
5. Black WC, Haggstrom D, Welch HG: All-cause mortality in randomized trials of cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002, 94:167-172.
6. Tannock IF, Juffis HG: Screening trials are even more difficult than we thought they were. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002, 94:156-157.
7. Eddy DM: Clinical decision making: from theory to practice anatomy of a decision. JAMA 1990, 263:441-443.
8. Ransohoff DF, Harris RP: Lessons from the mammography screening controversy. Ann Intern Med 1997, 127:1029-1034.
9. Meissner HI, Rimer BK, Davis WW, et al.: Another round in the mammography controversy. J Womens Health (Larchmt 2003, 12:261-276.
10. Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BKS: Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002, 137:347-360.
11. Mandelblatt J, Teutsch S, Hoerger T, et al.: The cost-effectiveness of screening mammography beyond age 65 years: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Taskforce. Ann Intern Med 2003, 139:835-842.
12. Pignone M, Rich M, Teutsch SM: Screening for colorectal cancer in adults at average risk: a summary of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002, 137: 32-141.
13. Screening for cervical cancer. In US Preventive Services Task Force Guide to Clinical Preventive Services:. Philadelphia: Williams & Wilkins; 1990: 853-857.
14. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: Counseling to prevent skin cancer: recommendations and rationale of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, MMWR 2003, 52:13-17.
15. Harris R, Lohr KN: Screening for prostate cancer: an update of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002, 137:917-929.
16. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: Lung cancer screening: recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2004, 140:738-739.
17. Mammographic screening in asymptomatic women aged 40 years and older. Council on Scientific Affairs. JAMA 1989, 261: 535-2542.
18. National Cancer Institute: Improvement in Breast Cancer Death Rate. Cancer Facts. Bethesda, MD: NCI Reports; 1998.
19. Anderson WF, Guyton KZ, Hiatt RA, et al.: Colorectal screening for persons at average cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002, 94:1126-1133.
20. Breen N, Wagener D, Brown ML, et al.: Progress in cancer screening over a decade: results of cancer screening from 1987, 1992, and 1995. National health interview surveys. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001, 93:1704-1713.
21. Hiatt RA, Klabunde C, Breen N, et al.: Cancer screening practices from national health interview surveys: past, present and future. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002, 94:1837-1846.
22. Church TR, Yeazel M, Jones RM, et al.: A randomized trial of direct mailing of fecal occult blood tests to increase colorectal cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004, 96: 70-780.
23. Winawer SJ, Flehinger BJ, Schottenfeld D, et al.: Screening for colorectal cancer with fecal occult blood testing and sigmoidoscopy. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993, 85:1311-1318.
24. Ransohoff DF, Lang CA: Screening for colorectal cancer with the fecal occult blood test: a background paper. American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med 1997, 126:811-822.
25. Newcomb PA, Norfleet RG, Storer BE, et al.: Screening sigmoidoscopy and colorectal cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992, 84:1572-1575.
26. Schlecht NF, Kulaga S, Robitaille J, et al.: Persistent human papillomavirus infection as a predictor of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. JAMA 2001, 286:3106-3114.
27. Koutsky LA, Ault KA, Wheeler CM, et al.: A controlled trial of a human papillomavirus type 16 vaccine. N Engl J Med 2002, 347:1645-665.
28. Goldie SJ, Kohli M, Grima D, et al.: Projected clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of a human papillomavirus 16/18 vaccine. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004, 96:604-615.
29. Wright TC Jr: Cervical cancer screening using visualization techniques. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2003, 31: 6-71.
30. Lindsey H: Improving cervical cancer screening in developing countries. Oncology Times 2004, 9:22-23.
31. Helfand M, Mahon SM, Eden KB, et al.: Screening for skin cancer. Am J Prev Med 2001, 20:47-58.
32. Ransohoff DF, Collins MM, Fowler FJ: Why is prostate cancer screening so common when the evidence is so uncertain? A system without negative feedback. Am J Med 2002, 113:663-667.
33. Yao SL, Lu-Yao G: Understanding and appreciating over diagnosis in the PSA era. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002, 94: 58-960.
34. Strauss GM: Measuring effectiveness of lung cancer screening: from consensus to controversy and back. Chest 1997, 112:216S-228S.
35. Mahaderia PJ, Fleisher LA, Frick KD: Lung cancer screening with helical computed tomography in older adult smokers: a discussion and cost-effectiveness analysis. JAMA 2003, 289:313-322.
36. Lippman SM, Bassford TL, Meyskens FL: Quantitative assessment of cancer risk. Tex Med 1988, 84:48-53.
37. Sweet KM, Bradley TL, Westman JA: Identification and referral of families at high risk for cancer susceptibility. J Clin Oncol 2002, 20:528-537.
38. Black WC, Welch HG: Advances in diagnostic imaging and overestimation of disease prevalence and the benefits of therapy. N Engl J Med 1993, 328:1237-1243.
39. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Fowler FJ, Welch HG: Enthusiasm for cancer screening in the United States. JAMA 2004, 291:1: 1-78.
40. Lee TH, Brennan TA: Direct-to-consumer marketing of hightechnology screening tests. N Eng J Med 2002, 346: 29-531.
41. Andrews BT, Bates T: Delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer: medico-legal implications. Breast 2000, 4:223-237.
42. Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Welch G: Risk charts: putting cancer in context. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002, 94:799-804.