Cited by 191Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchPancreatitis Pathology and TreatmentGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening

Detecting Early Pancreatic Cancer: Problems and Prospects

Open access
Chari, Suresh T.·2007·Seminars in Oncology

Abstract

Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis. Improving survival will require diagnosis of early pancreatic cancer, which can be defined based on resectability, size, or curability. Pancreatic cancer progresses from noninvasive precursor lesions to invasive cancer over a variable time period. Retrospective review of computed tomography (CT) scans performed prior to diagnosis suggests that pancreatic cancer resectability may be significantly improved if detected as few as 6 months before clinical diagnosis. Since pancreatic cancer is relatively uncommon, to allow cost-effective screening the populations will have to be enriched for the disease using two "sieves." The first sieve would identify a population of subjects at higher than average risk of pancreatic cancer and the second sieve could be a characteristic phenotype among the members of the high-risk group, an abnormality seen on noninvasive imaging or a serologic marker of early pancreatic cancer. So far two high-risk groups have been targets of screening for pancreatic cancer: hereditary pancreatic cancer kindreds and new-onset diabetes. There is no serologic marker of early pancreatic cancer. Confirmation of diagnosis usually requires invasive procedures such as endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). Although much work still needs to be done, the developments in the field provide us with hope that screening for early pancreatic cancer could become a reality in the not-so-distant future.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2007.05.005

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Standard abdominal CT scans have sensitivity ranging between 76% and 92% for diagnosing pancreatic cancer even in late stages.

    “Standard abdominal CT scans (“the pancreas protocol”) have sensitivity ranging between 76% and 92% for diagnosing pancreatic cancer even in late stages of the disease.204,205”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 70 · Cited by 191

Authors
Chari, S. T.
Affiliations
Mayo Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Chari, Suresh T.
Venue
Seminars in Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-08
Volume
34
Issue
4
Pages
284-294
ISSN
0093-7754 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2014767306
Cited by
191
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 10
FWCI
3.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Seminars in Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R01CA100685)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
Keywords
early-stage pancreatic cancer, pancreatic cancer screening, resectability, precursor lesions, vulnerable populations, new-onset diabetes, serological markers, endoscopic ultrasound, computed tomography, cost-effective screening
MeSH terms
Diabetes Mellitus, Humans, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Precancerous Conditions, Risk Factors, Time Factors, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Endosonography, Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal, Early Diagnosis

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