Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 337

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cancer overdiagnosis: a biological challenge and clinical dilemma

Open access
Srivastava, Sudhir, Koay, Eugene J., Borowsky, Alexander D., De Marzo, Angelo M., Ghosh, Sharmistha, Wagner, Paul D., Kramer, Barnett S.·2019·Nature Reviews Cancer

Abstract

For cancer screening to be successful, it should primarily detect cancers with lethal potential or their precursors early, leading to therapy that reduces mortality and morbidity. Screening programmes have been successful for colon and cervical cancers, where subsequent surgical removal of precursor lesions has resulted in a reduction in cancer incidence and mortality. However, many types of cancer exhibit a range of heterogeneous behaviours and variable likelihoods of progression and death. Consequently, screening for some cancers may have minimal impact on mortality and may do more harm than good. Since the implementation of screening tests for certain cancers (for example, breast and prostate cancers), a spike in incidence of in situ and early-stage cancers has been observed, but a link to reduction in cancer-specific mortality has not been as clear. It is difficult to determine how many of these mortality reductions are due to screening and how many are due to improved treatments of tumours. In cancers with lower incidence but high mortality (for example, pancreatic cancer), screening has focused on high-risk populations, but challenges similar to those for general population screening remain, particularly with regard to finding lesions with difficult-to-characterize malignant potential (for example, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms). More sensitive screening methods are detecting smaller and smaller lesions, but this has not been accompanied by a comparable reduction in the incidence of invasive cancers. In this Opinion article, we focus on the contribution of screening in general and high-risk populations to overdiagnosis, the effects of overdiagnosis on patients and emerging strategies to reduce overdiagnosis of indolent cancers through an understanding of tumour heterogeneity, the biology of how cancers evolve and progress, the molecular and cellular features of early neoplasia and the dynamics of the interactions of early lesions with their surrounding tissue microenvironment. The implementation of screening tests for certain cancers has led to the phenomenon of overdiagnosis, whereby a cancer is diagnosed that would otherwise not go on to cause symptoms or death. This Opinion article discusses the effects of overdiagnosis and emerging strategies to reduce overdiagnosis of indolent cancers through an understanding of tumour biology and the tumour microenvironment.

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 · 10.1038/s41568-019-0142-8

Cites

20 of 20 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 20 references

Cited by

See all 337

Metadata

Authors
Srivastava, S., Koay, E. J., Borowsky, A. D., De Marzo, A. M., Ghosh, S., Wagner, P. D., & Kramer, B. S.
Venue
Nature Reviews Cancer
Published
2019-04-25
Volume
19
Issue
6
Pages
349-358
ISSN
  • 1474-175X (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-1768
OpenAlex
W2940469730
Cited by
337
References
20
FWCI
4.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Cancer overdiagnosis: a biological challenge and clinical dilemma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41568-019-0142-8
The paper
Srivastava, S., Koay, E. J., Borowsky, A. D., De Marzo, A. M., Ghosh, S., Wagner, P. D., & Kramer, B. S. (2019). Cancer overdiagnosis: a biological challenge and clinical dilemma. Nature Reviews Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-019-0142-8

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.