ArticleCancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)2025
Cancer Incidence and Survival after Emergency Department Care in the U.S. Midwest: An Opportunity for Cancer Interception.
Article in Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Mortality after emergency presentation: evidence from a cohort of 929 378 Medicare beneficiaries with common cancers diagnosed 2008-2017.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Historically, cancers diagnosed via the emergency department (ED) portend a poor prognosis. Recent data from the United States are sparse, and analyses of cancers detected in the years following ED visits are lacking. Thus, we analyzed data from nine rural U.S. Midwest counties included within the population-based Rochester Epidemiology Project (2015-2021). Participants without a history of cancer (N = 42,074) who did not receive ED care were matched 1:1 to ED participants on the date of ED visit, age, sex, race, ethnicity, and county of residence. Analyses were restricted to participants with records ≤2 years prior to ED or index visit and ≥30 days after. HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) comparing cancer incidence and deaths among ED and non-ED participants were estimated from Cox proportional hazards regression models, either unadjusted or adjusted for covariates. Cumulative cancer incidence curves accounting for competing risks of death and survival (all cause and cancer-specific) were estimated. The median follow-up was 6.3 years, with 2,719 (6.46%) cancers diagnosed among ED participants and 3,139 (7.46%) among non-ED participants. ED participants experienced lower cancer risk overall (HRAdjusted = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.66-0.74; P = 8.89 × 10-31), specifically for breast cancer, prostate cancer, melanoma, and secondary cancers. Cancer-specific mortality was higher among ED participants (HRAdjusted = 1.76; 95% CI, 1.49-2.08; P = 3.62 × 10-11). Compared with non-ED participants, ED participants experienced a lower incidence of cancer but higher overall cancer-specific mortality, suggesting that subsets of ED patients may benefit from postvisit preventive interventions. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: This cohort analysis shows that cancer incidence over 6 years was lower among participants after an ED visit than among matched non-ED participants, whereas cancer-specific mortality was higher in the ED group (HRAdjusted = 1.76; 95% CI, 1.49-2.08; P = 3.62 × 10-11), suggesting the potential benefit of preventive interventions.
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.