Skip Navigation

JNCI Monographs 2006 2006(36):47-55; doi:10.1093/jncimonographs/lgj008
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mandelblatt, J.
Right arrow Articles by Cullen, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mandelblatt, J.
Right arrow Articles by Cullen, J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Chapter 8: The SPECTRUM Population Model of the Impact of Screening and Treatment on U.S. Breast Cancer Trends From 1975 to 2000: Principles and Practice of the Model Methods

Jeanne Mandelblatt, Clyde B. Schechter, William Lawrence, Bin Yi, Jennifer Cullen

Affiliations of authors: Departments of Oncology (JM, WL, BY, JC) and Medicine (JM), and Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center (JM, WL, BY, JC), Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC; Department of Family and Social Medicine, Albert Einstein School of Medicine, Bronx, New York (CBS)

Correspondence to: Jeanne Mandelblatt, MD, MPH, 2233 Wisconsin Ave., Ste. 317, Washington, DC 20007 (e-mail: mandelbj{at}georgetown.edu).

Objective: This stochastic simulation model was developed to estimate the impact of screening and treatment diffusion on U.S. breast cancer mortality between 1975 and 2000. Modeling Approach: We use an event-driven continuous-time state transition model. Women who are destined to develop breast cancer may be screen detected, present with symptoms, or die of other causes before cancer is diagnosed. At presentation, the cancer has a stage assigned on the basis of mode of detection. Cancers are assumed to be estrogen receptor (ER) positive or negative. Data on screening and treatment diffusion are based on national datasets; other parameters are based on a synthesis of the evidence available in the literature. Model Methods: The model is calibrated to predict incidence and stage distribution (in situ, local, regional, and distant). Other than screening or treatment, background events that affect mortality are not explicitly modeled but are captured in the deviation between model projections of mortality trends and actual trends. We assume that: 1) tumors progress more slowly in older age groups, 2) screen- and clinically detected disease have the same survival conditional on age and stage, 3) women do not die of breast cancer within the "lead time" period, 4) screening benefits are captured by shifts in stage at diagnosis, 4) tamoxifen benefits only ER-positive women, and 5) preclinical sojourn time and dwell times in each of the clinical stages are stochastically independent. Model Results: Dissemination of screening and therapeutic advances had a substantial impact on mortality trends. We estimate that, by the year 2000, diffusion of screening lowered mortality by 12.4% and treatment improvements and dissemination lowered mortality by 14.6%. Conclusions: Models such as this one can be useful to translate clinical trial findings to general populations. This model can also be used inform policy debates about how to best achieve targeted reductions in breast cancer morbidity and mortality.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Natl Cancer Inst MonogrHome page
E. J. Feuer
Chapter 1: Modeling the Impact of Adjuvant Therapy and Screening Mammography on U.S. Breast Cancer Mortality Between 1975 and 2000: Introduction to the Problem
J Natl Cancer Inst Monographs, October 1, 2006; 2006(36): 2 - 6.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Natl Cancer Inst MonogrHome page
L. D. Clarke, S. K. Plevritis, R. Boer, K. A. Cronin, and E. J. Feuer
Chapter 13: A Comparative Review of CISNET Breast Models Used To Analyze U.S. Breast Cancer Incidence and Mortality Trends
J Natl Cancer Inst Monographs, October 1, 2006; 2006(36): 96 - 105.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Natl Cancer Inst MonogrHome page
J. D. F. Habbema, S. Y. G. L. Tan, and K. A. Cronin
Chapter 14: Impact of Mammography on U.S. Breast Cancer Mortality, 1975-2000: Are Intermediate Outcome Measures Informative?
J Natl Cancer Inst Monographs, October 1, 2006; 2006(36): 105 - 111.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Natl Cancer Inst MonogrHome page
K. A. Cronin, E. J. Feuer, L. D. Clarke, and S. K. Plevritis
Chapter 15: Impact of Adjuvant Therapy and Mammography on U.S. Mortality From 1975 to 2000: Comparison of Mortality Results From the CISNET Breast Cancer Base Case Analysis
J Natl Cancer Inst Monographs, October 1, 2006; 2006(36): 112 - 121.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.