Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,712

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Effect of Advances in Lung-Cancer Treatment on Population Mortality

Open access
Howlader, Nadia, Forjaz, Gonçalo, Mooradian, Meghan J., Meza, Rafael, Kong, Chung Yin, Cronin, Kathleen A., Mariotto, Angela B., Lowy, Douglas R., Feuer, Eric J.·2020·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is made up of distinct subtypes, including non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Although overall mortality from lung cancer has been declining in the United States, little is known about mortality trends according to cancer subtype at the population level because death certificates do not record subtype information. METHODS: Using data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) areas, we assessed lung-cancer mortality and linked deaths from lung cancer to incident cases in SEER cancer registries. This allowed us to evaluate population-level mortality trends attributed to specific subtypes (incidence-based mortality). We also evaluated lung-cancer incidence and survival according to cancer subtype, sex, and calendar year. Joinpoint software was used to assess changes in incidence and trends in incidence-based mortality. RESULTS: Mortality from NSCLC decreased even faster than the incidence of this subtype, and this decrease was associated with a substantial improvement in survival over time that corresponded to the timing of approval of targeted therapy. Among men, incidence-based mortality from NSCLC decreased 6.3% annually from 2013 through 2016, whereas the incidence decreased 3.1% annually from 2008 through 2016. Corresponding lung cancer-specific survival improved from 26% among men with NSCLC that was diagnosed in 2001 to 35% among those in whom it was diagnosed in 2014. This improvement in survival was found across all races and ethnic groups. Similar patterns were found among women with NSCLC. In contrast, mortality from SCLC declined almost entirely as a result of declining incidence, with no improvement in survival. This result correlates with limited treatment advances for SCLC in the time frame we examined. CONCLUSIONS: Population-level mortality from NSCLC in the United States fell sharply from 2013 to 2016, and survival after diagnosis improved substantially. Our analysis suggests that a reduction in incidence along with treatment advances - particularly approvals for and use of targeted therapies - is likely to explain the reduction in mortality observed during this period.

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 · 10.1056/nejmoa1916623

Cites

8 of 8 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 8 references

Cited by

See all 1,712

Metadata

Authors
Howlader, N., Forjaz, G., Mooradian, M. J., Meza, R., Kong, C. Y., Cronin, K. A., Mariotto, A. B., Lowy, D. R., & Feuer, E. J.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2020-08-13
Volume
383
Issue
7
Pages
640-649
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W3048896255
Cited by
1,712
References
8
FWCI
75.63
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: The Effect of Advances in Lung-Cancer Treatment on Population Mortality. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1916623
The paper
Howlader, N., Forjaz, G., Mooradian, M. J., Meza, R., Kong, C. Y., Cronin, K. A., Mariotto, A. B., Lowy, D. R., & Feuer, E. J. (2020). The Effect of Advances in Lung-Cancer Treatment on Population Mortality. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1916623

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.