Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 505

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Neuroendocrine tumor epidemiology: Contrasting Norway and North America

Open access
Hauso, Oyvind, Gustafsson, Bjorn I., Kidd, Mark, Waldum, Helge L., Drozdov, Ignat, Chan, Anthony K. C., Modlin, Irvin M.·2008·Cancer

Abstract

BACKGROUND.: The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program has proven to be a significant resource in US neuroendocrine tumor (NET) epidemiology. Norway also holds a robust and detailed cancer registry: the Norwegian Registry of Cancer (NRC). METHODS.: SEER NET data were compared with corresponding NRC data in the time period 1993 to 2004 to determine whether there are differences in NET epidemiology between Norway and the United States. RESULTS.: The SEER and NRC reported 17,312 and 2030 NETs, respectively. The overall Caucasian SEER NET incidence was 4.44, compared with 3.24 in the NRC. In the SEER white subset, bronchopulmonary NETs were the most common (incidence = 1.42; 32% of all NETs), compared with small intestinal NETs in the NRC (0.81; 26%). A marked increase in SEER NET incidence (37%‐40%) was observed in the period 2000 to 2004, compared with 1993 to 1997; an even more pronounced increase (72%) was seen in the NRC. African Americans exhibited a remarkably high overall NET incidence of 6.50; furthermore, among African Americans, rectal NETs were most common (1.65; 27%). Small intestinal NET incidence was ∼30% higher in men compared with women in all populations. The highest 5‐year survival rates were for rectal NETs (74%‐88%) in both databases, whereas prostatic NETs had the worst outcome (0%‐23%). At diagnosis, NETs were localized in 27% to 46% of patients. CONCLUSIONS.: NET incidence in the US Caucasian population and in Norway is similar, but considerably higher (∼50%) among African Americans. NETs have been regarded as indolent tumors; however, the 5‐year survival is only ∼55%. Cancer 2008. © 2008 American Cancer Society.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncr.23883

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 505

Metadata

Authors
Hauso, O., Gustafsson, B. I., Kidd, M., Waldum, H. L., Drozdov, I., Chan, A. K. C., & Modlin, I. M.
Venue
Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-11-03
Volume
113
Issue
10
Pages
2655-2664
ISSN
  • 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0142
OpenAlex
W2062011075
Cited by
505
References
1
FWCI
11.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Neuroendocrine tumor epidemiology: Contrasting Norway and North America. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncr.23883
The paper
Hauso, O., Gustafsson, B. I., Kidd, M., Waldum, H. L., Drozdov, I., Chan, A. K. C., & Modlin, I. M. (2008). Neuroendocrine tumor epidemiology: Contrasting Norway and North America. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23883

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.