ArticleInternational journal of cancer2021
Identifying key factors for the effectiveness of pancreatic cancer screening: A model-based analysis.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Small cyst size and lack of growth as negative predictors of malignant transformation in low-risk intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas: A systematic review and meta-analysis.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025Pooled it
- The impact of pancreatic cancer screening on life expectancy: A systematic review of modeling studies.International journal of cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Role of endoscopic ultrasonography or magnetic resonance imaging for screening of pancreatic cancer in low-risk individuals.World journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Local radiotherapy polarized tumor-associated macrophages enhance the efficacy of Claudin18.2-targeted CAR-T therapy in pancreatic cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Quantifying the potential benefits of early detection for pancreatic cancer through a counterfactual simulation modeling analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Stage Shift as an Endpoint in Cancer Screening Trials: Implications for Evaluating Multicancer Early Detection Tests.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022Article
- Prediction of Breast Cancer using Machine Learning Approaches.Journal of biomedical physics & engineering · 2022Article
- Identifying key factors for the effectiveness of pancreatic cancer screening: A model-based analysis.International journal of cancer · 2021Article
- Post-pancreatitis diabetes mellitus and excess intra-pancreatic fat deposition as harbingers of pancreatic cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pancreatic cancer (PC) survival is poor, as detection usually occurs late, when treatment options are limited. Screening of high-risk individuals may enable early detection and a more favorable prognosis. Knowledge gaps prohibit establishing the effectiveness of screening. We developed a Microsimulation Screening Analysis model to analyze the impact of relevant uncertainties on the effect of PC screening in high-risk individuals. The model simulates two base cases: one in which lesions always progress to PC and one in which indolent and faster progressive lesions coexist. For each base case, the effect of annual and 5-yearly screening with endoscopic ultrasonography/magnetic resonance imaging was evaluated. The impact of variance in PC risk, screening test characteristics and surgery-related mortality was evaluated using sensitivity analyses. Screening resulted in a reduction of PC mortality by at least 16% in all simulated scenarios. This reduction depended strongly on the natural disease course (annual screening: -57% for "Progressive-only" vs -41% for "Indolent Included"). The number of screen and surveillance tests needed to prevent one cancer death was impacted most by PC risk. A 10% increase in test sensitivity reduced mortality by 1.9% at most. Test specificity is important for the number of surveillance tests. In conclusion, screening reduces PC mortality in all modeled scenarios. The natural disease course and PC risk strongly determines the effectiveness of screening. Test sensitivity seems of lesser influence than specificity. Future research should gain more insight in PC pathobiology to establish the true value of PC screening in high-risk individuals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.