• 1
    US Renal Data System. Excerpts from the USRDS 2000 Annual Data Report: Atlas of end stage renal disease in the United States. Am J Kidney Dis 2000; 36: S1S239.
  • 2
    Kasiske BL, Vazquez MA, Harmon W et al. for the American Society of Transplantation. Recommendations for outpatient surveillance of renal transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol 2000; 10 (supplement 15): S1S86.
  • 3
    Chertow GM, Paltiel AD, Owen Jr WF, Lazarus JM. Cost-effectiveness of cancer screening in end-stage renal disease. Arch Intern Med 1996; 156: 1345350.
  • 4
    LeBrun CJ, Diehl LF, Abbott KC, Welch PG, Yuan CM. Life expectancy benefits of cancer screening in the end-stage renal disease population. Am J Kidney Dis 2000; 35: 23743.
  • 5
    US Renal Data System. USRDS 1997 Annual Report, National Institutes of Health, National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Bethesda, MD, 1997.
  • 6
    US Renal Data System. USRDS 2000 Annual Report, National Institutes of Health, National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Bethesda, MD, 2000.
  • 7
    Ries LAG, Eisner MP, Kosary CL et al. (eds). SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1973–1997. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute, 2000.
  • 8
    Beck JR, Pauker SG, Gottlieb JE, Klein K, Kassirer JP. A convenient approximation of life expectancy (the ‘DEALE’), II use in medical decision-making Am J Med 1982; 73: 889987.
  • 9
    Sheil AGR, Disney APS, Mathew TH, Amiss N. De novo malignancy emerges as a major cause of morbidity and late failure in renal transplantation. Transplantation Proc 1993; 25: 13831384.
  • 10
    Birkeland SA, Løkkegaard H, Storm HH. Cancer risk inpatients on dialysis and after renal transplantation. Lancet 2000; 355: 18861887.
  • 11
    Stewart T, Tsai S-CJ, Grayson H, Henderson R, Opelz G. Incidence of de novo breast cancer in women chronically immunosuppressed after organ transplantation. Lancet 1995; 346: 796798.
  • 12
    Stewart T, Henderson R, Grayson H, Opelz G. Reduced incidence of rectal, compared to gastric and colon cancer, in a population of 70,076 men and women chronically immunosuppressed. Clin Cancer Res 1997; 3: 5155.
  • 13
    Brunner FP, Landais P, Selwood NH on behalf of the EDTA-ERA Registry Committee. Malignancies after transplantation: the EDTA-ERA registry experience. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1995; 10 (Supplement 1): 7480.
  • 14
    Salzmann P, Kerlikowske K, Phillips K. Cost-effectiveness of extending screening mammography guidelines to include women 40-49 years of age. Ann Intern Med 1997; 127: 955965.
  • 15
    Coley CM, Barry MJ, Fleming C, Fahs MC, Mulley AG. Early detection of prostate cancer: estimating the risks, benefits and costs. Ann Intern Med 1997; 126: 468479.
  • 16
    Frazier AL, Colditz GA, Fuchs CS, Kuntz KM. Cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer in the general population. JAMA 2000; 284: 195461.
  • 17
    Screening for Breast Cancer. Recommendations and rationale. February 2002. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality:
  • 18
    US preventive Services Task Force. Screening for Colorectal Cancer: Recommendations and rationale. July 2002. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: http://www.ahrq. gov/clinic/3rduspstf/breastcancer/brcanrr.htm
  • 19
    Holmberg L, Bill-Axelson A, Helgesen F et al. A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 781789.
  • 20
    Krahn MD, Mahoney JE, Eckman MH, Trachtenberg J, Pauker SG, Detsky AS. Screening for prostate cancer: a decision analysis. JAMA 1994; 272: 773780.
  • 21
    Taplin SH, Barlow W, Urban N, Mandelson MT, Timlin DJ, Ichikawa L, Nefcy P. Stage, age comorbidity and direct costs of colon, prostate and breast cancer care. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995; 87: 417426.
  • 22
    Walter LC, Covinsky KE. Cancer screening in elderly patients; a framework for individualized decision making. JAMA 2001; 285: 2750256.
  • 23
    Stewart KJ, Reed SB. Consumer price index research series using current methods, 1978–1998. Monthly Labor Review 1999: 2938.
  • 24
    Whiting JF for the Transplant Outcomes Research Group. Standards for economic and quality of life studies in transplantation. Transplantation 2000; 70: 11151121.
  • 25
    Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH, Lohr KN, Mulrow CD, Teutsch SM, Atkins D for the Methods Work Group. Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force; a review of the process. Am J Prev Med 2001; 20 (3S): 2135.
  • 26
    Ransohoff DF, Harris RP. Lessons from the mammography screening controversey: can we improve the debate. Ann Intern Med 1997; 127: 10291034.
  • 27
    American College of Physicians. Screening for prostate cancer. Ann Intern Med 1997; 126: 480484.
  • 28
    Lawrence RS, McGinnis JM. Guide to Clinical Preventive Services, 2nd edn, 1996. Report of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: #screening
  • 29
    Sox Jr, HC. Preventive health services. N Engl J Med 1995; 330: 15891595.
  • 30
    Sackett DL. The arrogance of preventive medicine. CMAJ 2002; 167: 363364.