ArticleJAMA network open2024
Recovery From COVID-19-Related Disruptions in Cancer Detection.
Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cancer Diagnoses and Deaths in Hungary, 2011-2023: Nationwide Trends Before, During, and After the COVID-19 Pandemic.Cancers · 2026Article
- Colorectal cancer incidence before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a non-linear interrupted time-series analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Observational
- Bladder Cancer Incidence Trends in the United States From 2000 to 2020.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Assessment of Rebound in Cancer Diagnoses in California in 2022, by Stage, Sociodemographic Factors, and Rurality.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Cross-national inequalities and public health policy effects of the global retinoblastoma burden from 1990 to 2021 and projections to 2035.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- U.S. Colorectal Cancer Mortality, 1999-2023: A 25-Year National Analysis of Trends and Disparities.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2025Article
- Measuring the Association Between the COVID-19 Pandemic and Cancer Incidence by Sex Using a Quasi-Experimental Study Design.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Article
- Head and Neck Cancer Incidence in the United States Following the Onset of COVID-19 Pandemic.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- Breast Cancer Detection Patterns in Year 2 of the COVID-19 Pandemic Highlight Gains and Gaps in Breast Cancer Surveillance.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- The COVID-19 pandemic increased the incidence of newly diagnosed cancers: evidence from a large cohort study in Southern Italy.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Are More Young, Western Patients Also Developing Hepatocellular Carcinoma?Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Melanoma detection, treatment, survival, and mortality through year 2 of the pandemic.Archives of dermatological research · 2025Article
- Trends in colorectal cancer cases at a Mexican secondary-care hospital.Ecancermedicalscience · 2025Article
- Disruptions in Lung Cancer Detection During COVID-19.Cancers · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted the timely diagnosis of cancer, which persisted as the second leading cause of death in the US throughout the pandemic. Objective: To evaluate the disruption and potential recovery in cancer detection during the first (2020) and second (2021) years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study involved an epidemiologic analysis of nationally representative, population-based cancer incidence data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. Included patients were diagnosed with incident cancer from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2021. The analysis was conducted in May 2024 using the April 2024 SEER data release, which includes incidence data through December 31, 2021. Exposures: Diagnosis of cancer during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic (2020, 2021). Main Outcomes and Measures: Difference between the expected and observed cancer incidence in 2020 compared with 2021, with additional analyses by demographic subgroups (sex, race and ethnicity, and age group) and community (county-level) characteristics. Results: The analysis included 15 831 912 patients diagnosed with invasive cancer between 2000 and 2021, including 759 810 patients in 2020 and 825 645 in 2021. The median age was 65 years (IQR, 56-75 years), and 51.0% were male. The percentage difference between the expected and observed cancer incidence was -8.6% (95% CI, -9.1% to -8.1%) in 2020, with no significant difference in 2021 (-0.2%; 95% CI, -0.7% to 0.4%). These translated to a cumulative (2020-2021) deficit in observed vs expected cases of -127 931 (95% CI, -139 206 to -116 655). Subgroup analyses revealed that incidence rates remained substantially depressed from expected rates into 2021 for patients living in the most rural counties (-4.9%; 95% CI, -6.7% to -3.1%). The cancer sites with the largest cumulative deficit in observed vs expected cases included lung and bronchus (-24 940 cases; 95% CI, -28 936 to -20 944 cases), prostate (-14 104 cases; 95% CI, -27 472 to -736 cases), and melanoma (-10 274 cases; 95% CI, -12 825 to -7724 cases). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study of nationally representative registry data found that cancer incidence recovered meaningfully in 2021 following substantial disruptions in 2020. However, incidence rates need to recover further to address the substantial number of patients with undiagnosed cancer during the pandemic.
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.