Skip Navigation


American Journal of Epidemiology Advance Access originally published online on May 25, 2008
American Journal of Epidemiology 2008 168(1):98-104; doi:10.1093/aje/kwn120
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
168/1/98    most recent
kwn120v1
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 ISI Web of Science
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 Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Duffy, S. W.
Right arrow Articles by Lawrence, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Duffy, S. W.
Right arrow Articles by Lawrence, G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology © The Author 2008. Published by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

PRACTICE OF EPIDEMIOLOGY

Correcting for Lead Time and Length Bias in Estimating the Effect of Screen Detection on Cancer Survival

Stephen W. Duffy1, Iris D. Nagtegaal2, Matthew Wallis3, Fay H. Cafferty1, Nehmat Houssami4, Jane Warwick1, Prue C. Allgood1, Olive Kearins5, Nancy Tappenden5, Emma O'Sullivan5 and Gill Lawrence5

1 Cancer Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, Mathematics and Statistics, Wolfson Institute for Preventive Medicine, London, United Kingdom
2 Department of Pathology, Dutch Cancer Society, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
3 Cambridge Breast Unit, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, United Kingdom
4 Screening and Test Evaluation Program, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
5 West Midlands Breast Screening Quality Assurance Reference Centre, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom

Correspondence to Dr. Prue Allgood, Cancer Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, Mathematics and Statistics, Wolfson Institute for Preventive Medicine, Charterhouse Square, London WC1M 6BQ, United Kingdom (e-mail: prue.allgood{at}cancer.org.uk).

Received for publication December 21, 2007. Accepted for publication April 8, 2008.

Determination of survival time among persons with screen-detected cancer is subject to lead time and length biases. The authors propose a simple correction for lead time, assuming an exponential distribution of the preclinical screen-detectable period. Assuming two latent categories of tumors, one of which is more prone to screen detection and correspondingly less prone to death from the cancer in question, the authors have developed a strategy of sensitivity analysis for various magnitudes of length bias. Here they demonstrate these methods using a series of 25,962 breast cancer cases (1988–2004) from the West Midlands, United Kingdom.

bias (epidemiology); breast neoplasms; mass screening; models, statistical; survival

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval


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
 Ann OncolHome page
N. Houssami, S. Ciatto, F. Martinelli, R. Bonardi, and S. W. Duffy
Early detection of second breast cancers improves prognosis in breast cancer survivors
Ann. Onc., September 1, 2009; 20(9): 1505 - 1510.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mayo Clin Proc.Home page
T. C. Gerber and A. J. Taylor
Carotid Intima-Media Thickness: Can It Close the "Detection Gap" for Cardiovascular Risk?
Mayo Clin. Proc., March 1, 2009; 84(3): 218 - 220.
[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.