Reading path
Reading Cancer Evidence, From Screening to Survival
This path walks you through how oncology evidence is made and judged, moving from the promise and peril of screening to how tumors are staged, how response is measured, and how survival is reported. It is for readers who want to interpret cancer studies and headlines without being misled by early detection or biomarker hype.
The path, step by step
Start with the central tension of oncology, that finding cancer earlier can help some people and harm others through overdiagnosis.
Next, learn the general criteria a screening program must meet, which turns the screening debate into a checklist you can apply.
3 Lead-Time Bias: Why Earlier Detection Can Make Survival Look Longer Without Saving Anyone
6 min readBefore trusting any survival gain from earlier detection, see why lead-time bias can make screening look effective even when it changes nothing.
Once a cancer is found, staging is the language that predicts outcome, so it grounds everything that follows.
5 How to Read a Cancer Survival Statistic
5 min readWith staging understood, learn how survival statistics are defined and where five-year figures can quietly mislead.
Building on survival numbers, see why overall survival remains the benchmark endpoint against which other measures are judged.
Since many trials report tumor shrinkage rather than survival, learn how response is measured with RECIST and where it breaks down.
Modern oncology is biomarker-driven, so distinguish a marker that predicts treatment benefit from one that only forecasts outcome.
Apply that biomarker thinking to a major therapy class whose uneven response makes patient selection the whole game.
Close with an emerging blood-based monitoring tool, testing your judgment on evidence that is promising but still maturing.
Each step is a full article on the Reading the Evidence blog.