Limits...
Cancer imaging - the significance of the findings.

Reznek RH - Cancer Imaging (2000)

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Academic Department of Radiology, St Bartholomews Hospital, London, UK.

AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED EXCERPT
Please rate it.

In other words, it is the ability of the test to recognize disease. \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \begin{document}$${\rm{Sensitivity}} = {{{\rm{TP}}} \over {{\rm{TP}} + {\rm{FN}}}}$$\end{document} The specificity of a test is the proportion of patients without disease who have a negative test result... In other words, it is the ability of the test to recognize normality or the absence of a particular disease. \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} Altman (see further reading) describes well how to measure interobserver agreement, using as data the assessments of 85 xeromammograms by two radiologists (A and B) where the xeromammogram reports are given as one of four results: normal; benign disease; suspected cancer; cancer... The maximum agreement is 1.00 and the kappa statistic gives the radiologists’ agreement as a proportion of the possible scope for performing better than chance, which is 1.00 2− 0.31. \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} An important impact of the use of sophisticated techniques to stage patients with cancer is the apparent continuous improvement in cancer survival rates reported over the last 25 years... Although this is quickly and easily attributable to earlier diagnosis and new and more effective treatments, the effect of more accurate staging may to some extent explain these improved results... Feinstein et al. found that a 1977 cohort of patients who had undergone lung cancer treatment survived significantly longer in each of three TNM subcategories than a cohort managed in the 1950s and 1960s; a finding which is not surprising... Better staging leads to benefit to all; in the lower stages, patients with occult metastases would be removed with benefit to those stages; in the higher stages, those patients with a lower tumour burden would be added to those with a higher burden, with improvement in survival rates... Thus while individual prognosis did not change overall, survival in each stage improved... As regards therapeutic impact there are several studies showing that imaging substantially alters the patient’s management... The effect on patient outcome is a great deal more difficult to evaluate than any of these other factors... In the short term, it has a very obvious impact by reducing the number of invasive test, by reducing the time in hospital and by avoiding surgery.

No MeSH data available.


© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4554686&req=5


Cancer imaging - the significance of the findings.

Reznek RH - Cancer Imaging (2000)

© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4554686&req=5

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Academic Department of Radiology, St Bartholomews Hospital, London, UK.

AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED EXCERPT
Please rate it.

In other words, it is the ability of the test to recognize disease. \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \begin{document}$${\rm{Sensitivity}} = {{{\rm{TP}}} \over {{\rm{TP}} + {\rm{FN}}}}$$\end{document} The specificity of a test is the proportion of patients without disease who have a negative test result... In other words, it is the ability of the test to recognize normality or the absence of a particular disease. \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} Altman (see further reading) describes well how to measure interobserver agreement, using as data the assessments of 85 xeromammograms by two radiologists (A and B) where the xeromammogram reports are given as one of four results: normal; benign disease; suspected cancer; cancer... The maximum agreement is 1.00 and the kappa statistic gives the radiologists’ agreement as a proportion of the possible scope for performing better than chance, which is 1.00 2− 0.31. \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} An important impact of the use of sophisticated techniques to stage patients with cancer is the apparent continuous improvement in cancer survival rates reported over the last 25 years... Although this is quickly and easily attributable to earlier diagnosis and new and more effective treatments, the effect of more accurate staging may to some extent explain these improved results... Feinstein et al. found that a 1977 cohort of patients who had undergone lung cancer treatment survived significantly longer in each of three TNM subcategories than a cohort managed in the 1950s and 1960s; a finding which is not surprising... Better staging leads to benefit to all; in the lower stages, patients with occult metastases would be removed with benefit to those stages; in the higher stages, those patients with a lower tumour burden would be added to those with a higher burden, with improvement in survival rates... Thus while individual prognosis did not change overall, survival in each stage improved... As regards therapeutic impact there are several studies showing that imaging substantially alters the patient’s management... The effect on patient outcome is a great deal more difficult to evaluate than any of these other factors... In the short term, it has a very obvious impact by reducing the number of invasive test, by reducing the time in hospital and by avoiding surgery.

No MeSH data available.