Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26505642›Full record

ReviewJournal of cellular physiology2016

Research Needs for Understanding the Biology of Overdiagnosis in Cancer Screening.

Sudhir Srivastava, Brian J Reid, Sharmistha Ghosh, Barnett S Kramer

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cellular physiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Genomics, Endoscopy, and Control of Gastroesophageal Cancers: A Perspective.Cellular and molecular gastroenterology and hepatology · 2017
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Risk Stratification System for Oral Cancer Screening.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2016
    Article
  11. East Meets West: A Whole-Person Approach in Integrated Care.International journal of integrated care
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sudhir SrivastavaDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Brian J ReidDivisions of Human Biology and Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Departments of Genome Sciences and Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Sharmistha GhoshDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Barnett S KramerDivision of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.

Funding

PHYLOGENIES of Barrett's Esophagus LineagesP01CA091955 · NCI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI GRADY, WILLIAM MALLORY · 2002 to 2019
$35.9M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA091955
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many cancers offer an extended window of opportunity for early detection and therapeutic intervention that could lead to a reduction in cause-specific mortality. The pursuit of early detection in screening settings has resulted in decreased incidence and mortality for some cancers (e.g., colon and cervical cancers), and increased incidence with only modest or no effect on cause-specific mortality in others (e.g., breast and prostate). Whereas highly sensitive screening technologies are better at detecting a number of suspected "cancers" that are indolent and likely to remain clinically unimportant in the lifetime of a patient, defined as overdiagnosis, they often miss cancers that are aggressive and tend to present clinically between screenings, known as interval cancers. Unrecognized overdiagnosis leads to overtreatment with its attendant (often long-lasting) side effects, anxiety, and substantial financial harm. Existing methods often cannot differentiate indolent lesions from aggressive ones or understand the dynamics of neoplastic progression. To correctly identify the population that would benefit the most from screening and identify the lesions that would benefit most from treatment, the evolving genomic and molecular profiles of individual cancers during the clinical course of progression or indolence must be investigated, while taking into account an individual's genetic susceptibility, clinical and environmental risk factors, and the tumor microenvironment. Practical challenges lie not only in the lack of access to tissue specimens that are appropriate for the study of natural history, but also in the absence of targeted research strategies. This commentary summarizes the recommendations from a diverse group of scientists with expertise in basic biology, translational research, clinical research, statistics, and epidemiology and public health professionals convened to discuss research directions. J. Cell. Physiol. 231: 1870-1875, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerMass ScreeningAnimalsGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMedical OveruseNeoplasmsRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID26505642
PMCPMC5811189

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.