Skip Navigation

JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2003 95(3):178-179; doi:10.1093/jnci/95.3.178
© 2003 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vourlekis, J. S.
Right arrow Articles by Szabo, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vourlekis, J. S.
Right arrow Articles by Szabo, E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 95, No. 3, 178-179, February 5, 2003
© 2003 Oxford University Press

EDITORIAL

Predicting Success in Cancer Prevention Trials

Jason S. Vourlekis, Eva Szabo

Affiliation of authors: J. S. Vourlekis, E. Szabo, Lung and Upper Aerodigestive Cancer Research Group, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, MD.

Correspondence to: Eva Szabo, M.D., Lung and Upper Aerodigestive Cancer Research Group, Division of Cancer Prevention, 6130 Executive Blvd., Rm. 2132, Bethesda, MD 20892 (e-mail: szaboe@mail.nih.gov).

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

The tremendous public health burden resulting from more than 200 000 new diagnoses and 165 000 deaths each year that are attributable to tobacco-related cancers arising in the lung and upper aerodigestive tract requires new treatment and prevention strategies (1). One such approach is chemoprevention, which relies on interventions during early phases of carcinogenesis to reduce the incidence of invasive cancer and, ultimately, to reduce cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Definitive studies of investigational chemopreventive agents typically are carried out in phase III clinical trials, where cancer incidence or mortality serves as the primary end point. However, the high cost and lengthy duration of phase III studies limit their application to only the most promising agents. How can we improve our ability to perform clinically meaningful cancer prevention studies in a more cost-effective and time-efficient manner? This issue of the Journal reports two strategies that . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Stat Methods Med ResHome page
M. N Lassere
The Biomarker-Surrogacy Evaluation Schema: a review of the biomarker-surrogate literature and a proposal for a criterion-based, quantitative, multidimensional hierarchical levels of evidence schema for evaluating the status of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints
Statistical Methods in Medical Research, June 1, 2008; 17(3): 303 - 340.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 JCOHome page
F. R. Hirsch and S. M. Lippman
Advances in the Biology of Lung Cancer Chemoprevention
J. Clin. Oncol., May 10, 2005; 23(14): 3186 - 3197.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
A. L. Sabichi, M.-F. Demierre, E. T. Hawk, C. E. Lerman, and S. M. Lippman
Frontiers in Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Res., September 15, 2003; 63(18): 5649 - 5655.
[Full Text] [PDF]