You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 284 No. 15, October 18, 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Controversies
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (19)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Oncology
 •Lung Cancer
 •Pulmonary Diseases
 •Pulmonary Diseases, Other
 •Radiologic Imaging
 •Radiography
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Routine Screening for Lung Cancer?

Maybe Someday, but Not Yet

Paul S. Frame, MD

JAMA. 2000;284:1980-1983.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide and accounts for 28% of all cancer deaths in the United States.1 It is largely a preventable disease. In the United States, more than 90% of lung cancer cases are related to cigarette smoking. Treatment of lung cancer is not very effective and has changed little in the past 40 years. Surgical resection of localized tumors is the only potentially curative treatment, and many tumors are not resectable at the time of diagnosis. Overall current 5-year survival rates are 8% to 14% for whites and 5% to 11% for blacks.2

In view of the large burden of suffering and the poor prognosis for persons with the disease, it is not surprising that screening for the early detection of lung cancer at a curable stage has been a research priority for many years. Indeed, 8 prospective studies . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Historical Perspective

Author Affiliations: Tri-County Family Medicine, Cohocton, NY, and University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Screening Strategies for Early Detection of Lung Cancer: The Time Is Now
Thomas L. Petty
JAMA. 2000;284(15):1977-1980.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Enthusiasm for Cancer Screening in the United States
Schwartz et al.
JAMA 2004;291:71-78.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Liability of Performing CT Screening for Coronary Artery Disease and Lung Cancer
Berlin
Am. J. Roentgenol. 2002;179:837-842.
FULL TEXT  

Lung Cancer Screening, Once Again
Marcus
Chest 2002;122:3-4.
FULL TEXT  

Improved Survival and Higher Mortality* : The Conundrum of Lung Cancer Screening
Reich
Chest 2002;122:329-337.
FULL TEXT  

The Mayo Lung Cohort: A Regression Analysis Focusing on Lung Cancer Incidence and Mortality
Strauss
JCO 2002;20:1973-1983.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The 21st Century: The Age of Screening
Friedenberg
Radiology 2002;223:1-4.
FULL TEXT  

Marketing Medicine to the Public: A Reader's Guide
Schwartz and Woloshin
JAMA 2002;287:774-775.
FULL TEXT  

Dot Size, Lead Time, Fallibility, and Impact on Survival: Continuing Controversies in Mammography
Berlin
Am. J. Roentgenol. 2001;176:1123-1130.
FULL TEXT  

Lung Cancer Screening
Granat et al.
JAMA 2001;285:163-164.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2000 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.