<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org">
<title>JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute - Advance Access</title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org</link>
<description>JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute - RSS feed of articles</description>
<prism:eIssn>1460-2105</prism:eIssn>
<prism:publicationName>JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>0027-8874</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn170v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn169v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn168v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn167v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn158v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn149v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn147v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn146v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn145v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn135v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn134v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn130v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn129v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn125v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn112v1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn102v1?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
</channel>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn170v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Lung Cancer Screening Trial Financed by Tobacco-Funded Foundation, Sparks Debate]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn170v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Twombly, R.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn170</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Lung Cancer Screening Trial Financed by Tobacco-Funded Foundation, Sparks Debate]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>NEWS</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn169v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Hedgehog Drugs Begin To Show Results]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn169v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Garber, K.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn169</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Hedgehog Drugs Begin To Show Results]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>NEWS</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn168v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Lapatinib Study Supports Cancer Stem Cell Hypothesis, Encourages Industry Research]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn168v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Schmidt, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn168</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Lapatinib Study Supports Cancer Stem Cell Hypothesis, Encourages Industry Research]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>NEWS</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn167v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Texas Prepares To Invest Billions In Cancer Research]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn167v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Finkelstein, J. B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn167</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Texas Prepares To Invest Billions In Cancer Research]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>NEWS</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn158v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[StatBite: Reported Cases of Acute Hepatitis Infection in the United States]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn158v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn158</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[StatBite: Reported Cases of Acute Hepatitis Infection in the United States]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>NEWS</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn149v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[FDG-PET Staging of Head and Neck Cancer--Can Improved Imaging Lead to Improved Treatment?]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn149v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Schwartz, D. L., Macapinlac, H. A., Weber, R. S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn149</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[FDG-PET Staging of Head and Neck Cancer--Can Improved Imaging Lead to Improved Treatment?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>EDITORIAL</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn147v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Erratum]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn147v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn147</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Erratum]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>CORRESPONDENCE</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn146v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Timing of Familial Breast Cancer in Sisters]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn146v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Background</st>
<p>Women who have had a first-degree relative diagnosed with breast cancer (ie, a positive family history) have a rate of breast cancer that is approximately twice that of all women their age, but it is unclear how they should perceive this risk at different ages or if they should be considered at higher risk for the remainder of their lifetime.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>We used Swedish population&ndash;based data to assess the risk of breast cancer in 23654 sisters of women diagnosed with breast cancer and in 1 732 775 sisters of unaffected women from 1958 through 2001. Poisson models were used to express the rate of breast cancer as a function of current age, whether a woman had an affected sister, time since the first diagnosis in the family, and family size (number of sisters). The effect of the age of the index case (the first sister diagnosed in the family) at diagnosis and whether her "at-risk" sisters had achieved this age were examined in stratified analyses. Incidence rate ratios of breast cancer in exposed compared with unexposed sisters were calculated with 95% confidence intervals. All estimates were adjusted for calendar time.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Sisters of breast cancer patients had higher breast cancer incidence than unexposed sisters at all ages. The association of exposure (ie, a diagnosis of breast cancer in a sister) with the risk of breast cancer was most pronounced in young women (age 20&ndash;39; incidence rate ratio = 6.64, 95% confidence interval = 4.66 to 9.48), and the relative risk decreased to approximately 2 in women older than 50 years. The risk associated with having a sister diagnosed with breast cancer was not modified substantially by the age of the index case at diagnosis (&le;45 years vs &gt;45 years). The risk was similar for women who were approaching the age at which the first sister was diagnosed in their family and those who had already attained it. The incidence rate ratio of breast cancer in exposed sisters compared with unexposed sisters was constant over time for all age categories of at-risk women.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusions</st>
<p>Women who have a sister diagnosed with breast cancer have an increased risk of breast cancer throughout much of their lifetimes.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rebora, P., Czene, K., Reilly, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn146</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Timing of Familial Breast Cancer in Sisters]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>ARTICLES</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn145v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Residual Treatment Disparities After Oncology Referral for Rectal Cancer]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn145v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Background</st>
<p>Black patients with rectal cancer are considerably less likely than white patients to receive adjuvant therapy. We examined the hypothesis that the lower treatment rate for blacks is due to underreferral to medical and radiation oncologists.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>We used 1992&ndash;1999 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results&ndash;Medicare data to identify elderly (&ge;66 years of age) patients who had been hospitalized for resection of stage II or III rectal cancer (n = 2716). We used <sup>2</sup> tests to examine associations between race and 1) consultation with an oncologist and 2) receipt of adjuvant therapy. We then used logistic regression to analyze the influence of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics (age at diagnosis, sex, marital status, median income and education in area of residence, comorbidity, and cancer stage) on black&ndash;white differences in the receipt of adjuvant therapy. All statistical tests were two-sided.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>There was no statistically significant difference between the 134 black patients and the 2582 white patients in the frequency of consultation with a medical oncologist (73.1% for blacks vs 74.9% for whites, difference = 1.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = &gt;5.9% to 9.5%, <I>P</I> = .64) or radiation oncologist (56.7% vs 64.8%, difference = 8.1%, 95% CI = &gt;0.5% to 16.7%, <I>P</I> = .06), but blacks were less likely than whites to consult with both a medical oncologist and a radiation oncologist (49.2% vs 58.8%, difference = 9.6%, 95% CI = 0.9% to 18.2%, <I>P</I> = .03). Among patients who saw an oncologist, black patients were less likely than white patients to receive chemotherapy (54.1% vs 70.2%, difference = 16.1%, 95% CI = 6.0% to 26.2%, <I>P</I> = .006), radiation therapy (73.7% vs 83.4%, difference = 9.7%, 95% CI = 0.4% to 19.8%, <I>P</I> = .06), or both (60.6% vs 76.9%, difference = 16.3%, 95% CI = 4.3% to 28.3%, <I>P</I> = .008). Patient and provider characteristics had minimal influence on the racial disparity in the use of adjuvant therapy.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p>Racial differences in oncologist consultation rates do not explain disparities in the use of adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer. A better understanding of patient preferences, patient&ndash;provider interactions, and potential influences on provider decision making is necessary to develop strategies to increase the use of adjuvant treatment for rectal cancer among black patients.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Morris, A. M., Billingsley, K. G., Hayanga, A. J., Matthews, B., Baldwin, L.-M., Birkmeyer, J. D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn145</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Residual Treatment Disparities After Oncology Referral for Rectal Cancer]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>ARTICLES</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn135v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[A Prospective Study of Age-Specific Physical Activity and Premenopausal Breast Cancer]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn135v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Background</st>
<p>Physical activity has been consistently associated with lower risk of postmenopausal breast cancer, but its relationship with premenopausal breast cancer is unclear. We investigated whether physical activity is associated with reduced incidence of premenopausal breast cancer, and, if so, what age period and intensity of activity are critical.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>A total of 64 777 premenopausal women in the Nurses&rsquo; Health Study II reported, starting on the 1997 questionnaire, their leisure-time physical activity from age 12 to current age. Cox regression models were used to examine the relationship between physical activity, categorized by age period (adolescence, adulthood, and lifetime) and intensity (strenuous, moderate, walking, and total), and risk of invasive premenopausal breast cancer.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>During 6 years of follow-up, 550 premenopausal women developed breast cancer. The strongest associations were for total leisure-time activity during participants&rsquo; lifetimes rather than for any one intensity or age period. Active women engaging in 39 or more metabolic equivalent hours per week (MET-h/wk) of total activity on average during their lifetime had a 23% lower risk of premenopausal breast cancer (relative risk = 0.77; 95% confidence interval = 0.64 to 0.93) than women reporting less activity. This level of total activity is equivalent to 3.25 h/wk of running or 13 h/wk of walking. The age-adjusted incidence rates of breast cancer for the highest (&ge;54 MET-h/wk) and lowest (&lt;21 MET-h/wk) total lifetime physical activity categories were 136 and 194 per 100 000 person-years, respectively. High levels of physical activity during ages 12&ndash;22 years contributed most strongly to the association.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusions</st>
<p>Leisure-time physical activity was associated with a reduced risk for premenopausal breast cancer in this cohort. Premenopausal women regularly engaging in high amounts of physical activity during both adolescence and adulthood may derive the most benefit.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Maruti, S. S., Willett, W. C., Feskanich, D., Rosner, B., Colditz, G. A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn135</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[A Prospective Study of Age-Specific Physical Activity and Premenopausal Breast Cancer]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>ARTICLES</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn134v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Design and Endpoints of Clinical Trials in Hepatocellular Carcinoma]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn134v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>The design of clinical trials in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is complex because many patients have concurrent liver disease, which can confound the assessment of clinical benefit. There is an urgent need for high-quality trials in this disease. An expert panel was convened by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases to develop guidelines that provide a common framework for designing trials to facilitate comparability of results. According to these guidelines, randomized phase 2 trials with a time-to-event primary endpoint, such as time to progression, are pivotal in clinical research on HCC. Survival remains the main endpoint to measure effectiveness in phase 3 studies, whereas time to recurrence is proposed as an appropriate endpoint in the adjuvant setting. Because progression-free survival and disease-free survival are composite endpoints, they are more vulnerable than others in HCC clinical studies and may not be able to capture clinical benefits. Selection of the target population should be based on the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system. New drugs should be tested in patients with well-preserved liver function (Child&ndash;Pugh A class). Patients assigned to the control arm should receive standard-of-care therapy, that is, chemoembolization for patients with intermediate-stage disease and sorafenib for patients with advanced-stage disease. Further research is needed to incorporate biomarkers and molecular imaging into clinical research in HCC. These surrogate markers may help to enrich study populations and maximize the cost&ndash;benefit ratio of trial execution. Design and conduct of phase 3 trials should be coordinated by centers with appropriate expertise in HCC.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Llovet, J. M., Di Bisceglie, A. M., Bruix, J., Kramer, B. S., Lencioni, R., Zhu, A. X., Sherman, M., Schwartz, M., Lotze, M., Talwalkar, J., Gores, G. J., for the Panel of Experts in HCC-Design Clinical Trials]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn134</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Design and Endpoints of Clinical Trials in Hepatocellular Carcinoma]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>COMMENTARY</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn130v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Response: Re: Molecular Basis for Estrogen Receptor {alpha} Deficiency in BRCA1-Linked Breast Cancer]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn130v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hosey, A. M., Gorski, J. J., Quinn, J. E., Chung, W. Y., Mccann, A., Harkin, D. P.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn130</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Response: Re: Molecular Basis for Estrogen Receptor {alpha} Deficiency in BRCA1-Linked Breast Cancer]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>CORRESPONDENCE</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn129v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Re: Molecular Basis for Estrogen Receptor {alpha} Deficiency in BRCA1-Linked Breast Cancer]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn129v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lusa, L., Peissel, B., Manoukian, S., Marchesi, E., Radice, P., Pierotti, M. A., Gariboldi, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn129</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Re: Molecular Basis for Estrogen Receptor {alpha} Deficiency in BRCA1-Linked Breast Cancer]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>CORRESPONDENCE</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn125v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography to Evaluate Cervical Node Metastases in Patients With Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Meta-analysis]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn125v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<sec><st>Background</st>
<p>Positron emission tomography using <sup>18</sup>F-fluorodeoxyglucose (<sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET) has been proposed to enhance preoperative assessment of cervical lymph node status in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Management is most controversial for patients with a clinically negative (cN0) neck. We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET in detecting lymph node metastases in patients with HNSCC.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Methods</st>
<p>We performed a meta-analysis of all available studies of the diagnostic performance of <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET in patients with HNSCC. We determined sensitivities and specificities across studies, calculated positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR&ndash;), and constructed summary receiver operating characteristic curves using hierarchical regression models. We also compared the performance of <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET with that of conventional diagnostic methods (ie, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration) by analyzing studies that had also used these diagnostic methods on the same patients.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Results</st>
<p>Across 32 studies (1236 patients), <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET sensitivity was 79% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 72% to 85%) and specificity was 86% (95% CI = 83% to 89%). For cN0 patients, sensitivity of <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET was only 50% (95% CI = 37% to 63%), whereas specificity was 87% (95% CI = 76% to 93%). Overall, LR+ was 5.84 (95% CI = 4.59 to 7.42) and LR&ndash; was 0.24 (95% CI = 0.17 to 0.33). In studies in which both <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET and conventional diagnostic tests were performed, sensitivity and specificity of <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET were 80% and 86%, respectively, and of conventional diagnostic tests were 75% and 79%, respectively.</p>
</sec>
<sec><st>Conclusion</st>
<p><sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET has good diagnostic performance in the overall pretreatment evaluation of patients with HNSCC but still does not detect disease in half of the patients with metastasis and cN0.</p>
</sec>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kyzas, P. A., Evangelou, E., Denaxa-Kyza, D., Ioannidis, J. P. A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn125</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography to Evaluate Cervical Node Metastases in Patients With Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Meta-analysis]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>ARTICLES</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn112v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Racial Differences in Breast Cancer Trends in the United States (2000-2004)]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn112v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pfeiffer, R. M., Mitani, A., Matsuno, R. K., Anderson, W. F.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn112</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Racial Differences in Breast Cancer Trends in the United States (2000-2004)]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>CORRESPONDENCE</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn102v1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Endoscopic Sphincterotomy and Long-Term Risk of Cholangiocarcinoma: A Population-Based Follow-up Study]]></title>
<link>http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/djn102v1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[
<p>Sphincterotomy of the ampulla of Vater&mdash;a common diagnostic and therapeutic procedure that is sometimes done during endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC)&mdash;allows reflux of intestinal content into the biliary tree. The resulting inflammation may contribute to malignant transformation of the biliary epithelium and therefore increase the risk of cholangiocarcinoma. We used data from population-based Danish health-care registries to examine the incidence of cholangiocarcinoma after ERC for 10 690 ERC patients who underwent sphincterotomy between 1977 and 2003 and 10 690 ERC patients who did not undergo sphincterotomy. Patients with sphincterotomy were matched to patients without sphincterotomy by sex and age at, calendar year of, and indication for ERC. The cholangiocarcinoma incidence rate for sphincterotomy patients was 404 per 100 000 person-years during the first year after ERC and decreased progressively at later times after ERC (79, 42, and 27 per 100 000 person-years during years 2, 3&ndash;5, and &gt;5, respectively). The corresponding rates for patients without sphincterotomy were 458, 12, 10, and 19 per 100 000 person-years, respectively. The gradual decrease in cholangiocarcinoma rate over time after ERC for sphincterotomy patients indicates that some of these patients had a cholangiocarcinoma that was present at the time of ERC but not diagnosed until 2&ndash;5 years later. The similar rates at the latest times after ERC suggest the lack of a causal association between sphincterotomy and cholangiocarcinoma.</p>
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mortensen, F. V., Jepsen, P., Tarone, R. E., Funch-Jensen, P., Jensen, L. S., Sorensen, H. T.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-13</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1093/jnci/djn102</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Endoscopic Sphincterotomy and Long-Term Risk of Cholangiocarcinoma: A Population-Based Follow-up Study]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>National Cancer Institute</dc:publisher>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-05-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>BRIEF COMMUNICATION</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>