Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Current Clinical Oncology ((CCO))

  • 246 Accesses

Abstract

Self-awareness is a particularly human trait. When it evolved, proto-humans became aware that they were destined to die. When language evolved, they were able to share this understanding with others. When written languages were developed, their thoughts about mortality were recorded in permanent form. The documents that have survived to the present convincingly demonstrate that humans have sought to understand why they become ill and die for a very long time. Cancer, in its many forms, is featured in the earliest of these documents [1]. It is feared and many forms of treatment have been employed throughout the ages, almost all of which were unsuccessful. By the nineteenth century, with the introduction of effective anesthesia, relatively safe major surgery became feasible. As a result, for the first time in history some patients with cancer were cured [2]. This created a cohort of cancer survivors. Shortly thereafter, it became clear that this population is prone to recurrence of the index cancer and/or new primary cancers and/or adverse effects of therapy. Treatments often failed, however, and major medical texts in the early-twentieth century made no mention of second primary cancers [3,4] but adverse effects of therapy were well known. This soon led to the concept of postoperative surveillance. This was facilitated in the late nineteenth century by the development of diagnostic x-rays [5]. Cancer patients also benefited by the introduction of radiation as a powerful treatment. Its hazards soon were recognized and those who had received radiation therapy as the initial treatment were soon candidates for surveillance. Relapse often occurred, as for those treated with surgery. Effective systemic therapy (oophorectomy for metastatic breast cancer) had its start in the late nineteenth century also [6]. The complications of this operation were presumably infrequent and manageable, but surveillance was probably carried out to determine how useful this novel form of therapy would be—since the concept of “chemical messengers” (hormones) was unknown until secretin was discovered in 1906 [7,8]. By the time effective systemic cytotoxic therapy was introduced into practice in the mid-twentieth century, the idea that it might eventually be curative was imagined by the few medical oncologists of that time and became a reality shortly thereafter, providing another cohort of survivors. The use of cytotoxic chemotherapy was regulated by regimen-specific drug administration protocols and institutional review boards (both novel concepts at that time). The posttreatment course was carefully documented. Documentation of initial disease status and estimation of prognosis were improved by the introduction of systematic staging methods such as the Federation Internationale de Gynecologie et d’Obstetrique and American Joint Committee on Cancer-Union for International Cancer Control systems. These common descriptors improved data collection and analysis. Introduction of new diagnostic testing modalities (serologic tumor marker measurement, computer-assisted tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, monoclonal antibody-based cellular stains, and the like) found immediate application in surveillance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Breasted JH. The Edwin Smith surgical papyrus. Vol. 1. Hieroglyphic transliteration, translation, and commentary. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 1930. p. 324–7.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wangensteen OH, Wangensteen SD. The rise of surgery: from empiric craft to scientific discipline. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press; 1978. p. 567–72.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cecil RL, Loeb RF, Gutman AB, McDermott W, Wolf HG, editors. Textbook of medicine. 10th ed. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Company; 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bell ET. Tumors. In: Bell ET, editor. Textbook of pathology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Fabiger; 1938. p. 232–371.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Roentgen WC. On a new kind of rays (translation). Br J Radiol. 1931;4:32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Beatson GT. On the treatment of inoperable cases of carcinoma of the mamma: suggestions for a new method of treatment. Lancet. 1896;2:104–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bayliss WM, Starling EH. On the causation of the so-called ‘peripheral reflex secretion’ of the pancreas. Proc R Soc Lond [Biol]. 1902;69:352.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Yamada T, Alpers DH, Kaplowitz N, Laine L, Owyang C, Powell DW. Textbook of gastroenterology. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins; 2003. p. 67.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Field MJ, Lohr KN, editors. Clinical practice guidelines: directions for a new program. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Field MJ, Lohr KN, editors. Guidelines for clinical practice: from development to use. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Field MJ, Lohr KN, editors. Guidelines for clinical practice: from development to use. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 1992. p. 23.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Field MJ, Lohr KN, editors. Guidelines for clinical practice: from development to use. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 1992. p. 8–9.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Eddy D. Designing a practice policy—standards, guidelines, and options. JAMA. 1990;263:3077–84.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Wilson D. Conflicts on health guideline panels. The New York Times: B1, B6. 3 Nov 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Field MJ, Lohr KN, editors. Guidelines for clinical practice: from development to use. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 1992. p. 32–5.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bloom F. Science as a way of life: perplexities of a physician–scientist. Science. 2003;300:1680–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Eden J, Wheatley B, McNeil B, Sox H, editors. Knowing what works in health care. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2008. p. 19.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Eden J, Wheatley B, McNeil B, Sox H, editors. Knowing what works in health care. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2008. p. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hill J, Bullock I, Alderson P. A summary of the methods that the National Clinical Guideline Centre uses to produce clinical guidelines for The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:752–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Committee on standards for developing trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. Clinical practice guidelines we can trust. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011 (available in electronic form at www.iom.edu).

  21. O’Donnell RJ, Bruckner JD, Conrad EU. Soft tissue sarcoma. In: Johnson FE, Virgo KS, Edge SB, Pellegrini CA, Poston GJ, Schantz SP, Tsukamoto N, editors. Cancer patient follow-up. St. Louis: Mosby; 1995. p. 238–67.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Beitler AL, Virgo KS, Johnson FE, Gibbs J, Kraybill WG. Current follow-up strategies after potentially curative resection of extremity sarcomas: results of a survey of the members of the Society of Surgical Oncology. Cancer. 2000;88:777–85.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Wennberg J, Gittelson A. Small area variations in health care delivery. Science. 1973;182:1102–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Chassin MR, Galvin RW, The National Roundtable on Health Care Quality. The urgent need to improve health care quality: Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality. JAMA. 1998;280:1000–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Sakata K, Beitler AL, Gibbs JF, Kraybill WG, Virgo KS, Johnson FE. How surgeon age affects surveillance strategies for extremity soft tissue sarcoma patients after potentially curative treatment. J Surg Res. 2002;108:227–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sakata K, Johnson FE, Kraybill WG, Virgo KS. Extremity soft tissue sarcoma patient follow-up: tumor grade and size affect surveillance strategies after potentially curative surgery. Int J Oncol. 2003;22:1335–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Johnson FE, Sakata K, Sarkar S, Audisio RA, Kraybill WG, Gibbs JF, et al. Patient surveillance after treatment for soft-tissue sarcoma. Int J Oncol. 2011;38:233–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Johnson FE, Sakata K, Kraybill WG, Gibbs JF, Beitler AL, Sarkar S, et al. Long-term management of patients after potentially curative treatment of extremity soft tissue sarcoma: practice patterns of members of the Society of Surgical Oncology. Surg Oncol. 2005;14:33–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Virgo KS, Johnson FE. Costs of surveillance after potentially curative treatment for cancer. In: Cancer patient follow-up. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 1995. chapter 3.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Goel A, Christy MEL, Virgo KS, Kraybill WG, Johnson FE. Costs of follow-up after potentially curative treatment for extremity soft-tissue sarcoma. Int J Oncol. 2004;25:429–35.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Johnson FE. Overview. In: Johnson FE, Virgo KS, Edge SB, Pellegrini CA, Poston GJ, Schantz SP, Tsukomoto N, editors. Cancer patient follow-up. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 1995. chapter 1.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Siva S, Herschtal A, Thomas JM, Bernshaw DM, Gill S, Hicks R, et al. Impact of post-therapy positron emission tomography on prognostic stratification and surveillance after chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer. Cancer. 2011;117:3981–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Buchler T, Kubankova P, Boublikova L, Donatova Z, Foldyna M, Kanakova J, et al. Detection of second malignancies during long-term follow-up of testicular cancer survivors. Cancer. 2011;117:4212–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Virgo KS, Johnson FE. Costs of surveillance after potentially curative treatment for cancer. In: Johnson FE et al., editors. Cancer patient follow-up. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 1995. chapter 3.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Mausner JS, Kramer S. Epidemiology—an introductory text. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Company; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Feinstein AR. Clinical epidemiology: the architecture of clinical research. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Company; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Sox HC, Blatt MA, Higgins MC, Marton KI. Medical decision making. Boston, MA: Butterworths; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Warner KE, Luce BR. Cost–benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis in health care. Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press; 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Drummond MF, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford, UK: Oxford Medical Publications; 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Weinstein MC. Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. N Engl J Med. 1977;296:716–21.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Dasgupta AK, Pearce DW. Cost–benefit analysis: theory and practice. London, UK: Macmillan; 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Mishan EJ. Cost–benefit analysis. London, UK: George Allen and Unwin; 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Sugden R, Williams AH. The principles of practical cost–benefit analysis. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Eastaugh SR. Medical economics and health finance. Dover, MA: Auburn House Publishing Company; 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Jacobs P. The economics of health and medical care. Rockville, MD: Aspen Publishers, Inc.; 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Weinstein MC. Principles of cost-effective resource allocation in health care organizations. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1990;6:93–103.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Wonderling D, Sawyer L, Fenu E, Lovibond K, Laramée P. National Clinical Guideline Centre cost-effectiveness assessment for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:758–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Robinson R. Cost-effectiveness analysis. Br Med J. 1993;307(c):793–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Hewitt M, Greenfield S, Stovall E, editors. From cancer patient to cancer survivor—lost in transition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2006. p. 151–63.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Shalom MM, et al. Do survivorship care plans make a difference? A primary care provider perspective. J Oncol Pract. 2011;7:314–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Grunfeld E, Julian JA, Pond G, et al. Evaluating survivorship care plans: results of a randomized clinical trial of patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;36:4755–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. The GIVIO Investigators. Impact of follow-up testing on survival and health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 1994;271:1587–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Rosselli Del Turco M, Palli D, Cariddi A, et al. Intensive diagnostic follow-up after treatment of primary breast cancer: a randomized trial. JAMA. 1994;271:1593–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Phelps CE, Parente ST. Priority setting in medical technology and medical practice assessment. Medical Care. 1990;28:703–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. NCI Expands Office of Cancer Survivorship Website. http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/pressreleases/1999/survivorship [Accessed Jun 2012]

  56. Green LW, Glasgow RE. Evaluating the relevance, generalization, and applicability of research: issues in external validation and translation methodology. Eval Health Prof. 2006;29:126–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frank E. Johnson M.D., FACS .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Humana Press

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Johnson, D.Y., Johnson, F.E. (2013). Overview. In: Johnson, F., et al. Patient Surveillance After Cancer Treatment. Current Clinical Oncology. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60327-969-7_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60327-969-7_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, Totowa, NJ

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-60327-968-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-60327-969-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics