Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T14:40:42.649Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Use of the Seer Cancer Registry for Technology Assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Sidney Klawansky ,
Elisabeth Burdick ,
Miriam Adams ,
Paola Bollini ,
Michele Orza  and
Jennifer Falotico-taylor
Sidney Klawansky
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health
Elisabeth Burdick
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health
Miriam Adams
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health
Paola Bollini
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health
Michele Orza
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health
Jennifer Falotico-taylor
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry contributed to technology assessment by providing population-based samples for detailed case-control studies, by serving as the control group in comparisons with various experimental groups, by allowing an assessment of selection bias in clinical trials, and by facilitating evaluations of classification and coding systems.

Type
Special Section: The Contribution Of Medical Registries To Technology Assessment
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , Spring 1991 , pp. 134 - 142
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Antczak-Bouckoms, A., Burdick, E., Klawansky, S., & Mosteller, F.Introduction: Using medical registries and data sets for technology assessment. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1991, 7, 123–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Bailar, J. C., & Smith, E. M.Progress against cancer? New England Journal of Medicine, 1986, 314, 1226–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Beard, C. M., Noller, K. L., O'Fallon, W. M., et al. Cancer after exposure to metronidazole. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 1988, 63, 147–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Cohen, H. J., & Bartollucci, A.Age and the treatment of multiple myeloma. Southeastern Cancer Study Group experience. American Journal of Medicine, 1985, 79, 316–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Cohen, M. E., Duffner, P. K., Kun, L. E., & D'Souza, B.The argument for a combined cancer consortium. Cancer, 1985, 56, 1897–901.3.0.CO;2-S>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Curtis, R. E., Hankey, B. F., Myers, M. H., & Young, J. L. Jr.Risk of leukemia associated with the first course of cancer treatment: An analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program experience. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1984, 72, 531–44.Google ScholarPubMed
7.Davis, S., Dahlberg, S., Myers, M. H., et al. Hodgkin's disease in the United States: A comparison of patient characteristics and survival in the Centralized Cancer Patient Data System and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1987, 78, 471–78.Google ScholarPubMed
8.Davis, S., Wright, P. W., Schulman, S. F., et al. Long term survival in small-cell carcinoma of the lung: A population experience. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1985, 3, 80–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Devesa, S. S., Pollack, E. S., & Young, J. L. Jr.Assessing the validity of observed cancer incidence trends. American Journal of Epidemiology, 1984, 119, 274–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Dick, F. R., VanLier, S. F., McKeen, K., et al. Nonconcurrence in abstracted diagnoses of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1987, 78, 675–78.Google ScholarPubMed
11.Duffner, P. K., & Cohen, M. E.Recent developments in pediatric neuro-oncology. Cancer, 1986, 58, 561–68.3.0.CO;2-P>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Fisher, B., Rockette, H., Fisher, E. R., et al. Leukemia in breast cancer patients following adjuvant chemotherapy or postoperative radiation: the NSABP Experience. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 1985, 3, 1640–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Gambrell, R. D.Proposal to decrease the risk and improve the prognosis of breast cancer. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1984, 150, 119–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Gambrell, R. D. Jr., Maier, R. C, & Sanders, B. I.Decreased incidence of breast cancer in postmenopausal estrogen-progestogen users. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1983,62,435–43.Google ScholarPubMed
15.Henson, D. E.The histological grading of neoplasms. Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, 1988, 112, 1091–96.Google ScholarPubMed
16.Hiatt, R. A., & Fireman, B. H.Serum uric acid unrelated to cancer incidence in humans. Cancer Research, 1988, 48, 2916–18.Google ScholarPubMed
17.Horm, J. W., Asire, J. A., Young, J. L., & Pollack, E. S. Editors. SEER Program: Cancer incidence and mortality in the United States 1973–81, National Institutes of Health Publication No. 85–1837, Revised 11 1984.Google Scholar
18.Levine, P. H., Steinhorn, S. C, Ries, L. G., & Aron, J. L.Inflammatory breast cancer: The experience of the surveillance epidemiology and end results (SEER) program. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1985, 74, 291–97.Google ScholarPubMed
19.Liskow, A. S., Neugut, A. I., Mitchell, B., et al. Multiple primary neoplasms in association with prostate cancer in black and white patients. Cancer, 1987, 59, 380–84.3.0.CO;2-E>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Mettlin, C.End results, interhospital differences, and trends in patterns of care for gynecological cancer. Cancer, 1987, 60, 1965–69.3.0.CO;2-B>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Morrison, A. S., Brisson, J., & Khalid, N.Breast cancer incidence and mortality in the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1988, 80, 1540–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22.Moss, A. R., Osmond, D., Bacchetti, P., et al. Hormonal risk factors in testicular cancer. American Journal of Epidemiology, 1986, 124, 39–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.National Cancer Institute. New SEER data on cancer survival. Connecticut Medicine, 1984, 48, 469–70.Google Scholar
24.Percy, C, O'Conor, G., Reis, L. G., & Jaffe, E. S.Non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. Application of the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology (IDC-O) to the working formulation. Cancer, 1984, 54, 1435–38.3.0.CO;2-O>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Ries, L. G., Pollack, E. S., & Young, J. L.Cancer patient survival: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, 1973–1979. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1983, 70, 693–707.Google Scholar
26.Ryan, R. F., Eisenstadt, S., & Shambaugh, E. M.Osteogenic sarcoma of the mandible: A plea for radical initial surgery. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 1986, 78, 41–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27.Seidman, H., Gelb, S. K., Silverberg, E., et al. Survival experience in the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project. Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 1987, 37, 258–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28.Smith, E. M., & Anderson, B.Symptomatology, delay, and stage of disease in endometrial cancer. Cancer Detection and Prevention, 1987, 10, 247–54.Google ScholarPubMed
29.Smith, E. M., & Burns, T. L.The effects of breast self-examination in a population-based cancer registry. A report of differences in extent of disease. Cancer, 1985, 55, 432–37.3.0.CO;2-9>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Steinhorn, S. C.Improved survival among children with acute leukemia diagnosed in the 1970's. Cancer Treatment Reports, 1984, 68, 953–58.Google Scholar
31.Steinhorn, S. C., Kopecky, K. J., Myers, M. H., & Ball, C.Characteristics of colon cancer patients reported in population-based tumor registries and comprehensive cancer centers. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1983, 70, 629–34.Google ScholarPubMed
32.Wingo, P. A., Ory, H. W., Layde, P. M., Lee, N. C., & the Cancer and Steroid Hormone Study Group. The evaluation of the data collection process for a multicenter, population based, case-control design. American Journal of Epidemiology, 1988, 128, 206–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33.Wyshak, G., Burdick, E., & Mosteller, F.Technology assessment in the Connecticut Tumor Registry. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1991, 7,129–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34.Yancik, R., Ries, L. G., & Yates, J. W.Ovarian cancer in the elderly: An analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program data. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1986, 154, 639–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
35.Yeu-Tsu, N., & Lee, M.Subsequent mammary and other malignant neoplasms in participants of the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project. Advances in Cancer Control: Epidemiology and Research. New York: Alan R. Liss, 1984, 97–106.Google Scholar
36.Young, J. L., Percy, C. L., Asire, A. J., et al. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. National Cancer Institute Monograph, 1981, 57, 1–1082.Google Scholar