Evidence mapPaperPMID 37509296Full record

ReviewCancers2023

Overview of Pancreatic Cancer Epidemiology in Europe and Recommendations for Screening in High-Risk Populations.

Olga Partyka, Monika Pajewska, Daria Kwaśniewska, Aleksandra Czerw, Andrzej Deptała, Michał Budzik, Elżbieta Cipora, Izabela Gąska, Lucyna Gazdowicz, Aneta Mielnik and 13 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Artificial Intelligence in Pancreatic Imaging: A Systematic Review.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Head to head comparison of [EJNMMI research · 2026
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

23 authors.

Olga PartykaDepartment of Health Economics and Medical Law, Medical University of Warsaw, 01-445 Warsaw, Poland.
Monika PajewskaDepartment of Health Economics and Medical Law, Medical University of Warsaw, 01-445 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-7735-5219
Daria KwaśniewskaDepartment of Oncology, The National Institute of Medicine of the Ministry of Interior and Administration, 02-507 Warsaw, Poland.
Aleksandra CzerwDepartment of Health Economics and Medical Law, Medical University of Warsaw, 01-445 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-6189-6678
Andrzej DeptałaDepartment of Oncology Propaedeutics, Medical University of Warsaw, 01-445 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-2640-2043
Michał BudzikDepartment of Oncology Propaedeutics, Medical University of Warsaw, 01-445 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-6222-9079
Elżbieta CiporaMedical Institute, Jan Grodek State University in Sanok, 38-500 Sanok, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-7794-550X
Izabela GąskaMedical Institute, Jan Grodek State University in Sanok, 38-500 Sanok, Poland.
Lucyna GazdowiczMedical Institute, Jan Grodek State University in Sanok, 38-500 Sanok, Poland.
Aneta MielnikMedical Institute, Jan Grodek State University in Sanok, 38-500 Sanok, Poland.
Katarzyna SygitFaculty of Health Sciences, Calisia University, 62-800 Kalisz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-7173-2266
Marian SygitFaculty of Health Sciences, Calisia University, 62-800 Kalisz, Poland.
Edyta Krzych-FałtaDepartment of Basic of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Medical University of Warsaw, 01-445 Warsaw, Poland.
Daria Schneider-MatykaDepartment of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland.
Szymon GrochansDepartment of Specialised Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland.
Anna M CybulskaDepartment of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-6912-287X
Jarosław DrobnikDepartment of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Wrocław Medical University, 51-141 Wrocław, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-5472-1485
Ewa BandurskaCenter for Competence Development, Integrated Care and e-Health, Medical University of Gdansk, 80-204 Gdansk, Poland.
Weronika CiećkoCenter for Competence Development, Integrated Care and e-Health, Medical University of Gdansk, 80-204 Gdansk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-1496-1924
Piotr RatajczakDepartment of Pharmacoeconomics and Social Pharmacy, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 60-806 Poznań, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-9118-2222
Karolina KameckaDepartment of Management and Logistics in Healthcare, Medical University of Lodz, 90-131 Lodz, Poland.
Michał MarczakCollegium Management, WSB Merito University in Warsaw, 03-204 Warszawa, Poland.
Remigiusz KozłowskiDepartment of Management and Logistics in Healthcare, Medical University of Lodz, 90-131 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-2781-5341

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pancreatic cancer is the seventh most common cause of death in the group of oncological diseases. Due to the asymptomatic course, early diagnosis is difficult. Currently, early detection methods are only used in high-risk groups. A literature review based on the available results of observational studies on patients with pancreatic cancer and people from high-risk groups was used to summarize the knowledge on risk factors. The GLOBOCAN 2020 data were used to assess the epidemiological situation in Europe. A summary of screening recommendations was prepared based on the available documents from medical organizations and associations. Pancreatic cancer risk factors are divided into two main groups: non-modifiable factors, e.g., hereditary factors and age, which increase the risk of developing this disease, and modifiable factors-BMI, smoking, and alcohol consumption. Hereditary factors account for 10% of pancreatic cancer cases. The highly specialized methods of early detection, (MRI, CT, or EUS) are used for screening high-risk populations. Of all the imaging methods, EUS is considered the most sensitive for pancreatic cancer and allows an accurate assessment of the size of even small lesions (<30 mm) and the extent of tumour infiltration into blood vessels. The available studies vary on the level of sensitivity and specificity of these methods for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. EUS, MRI, and CT are also expensive procedures and in some patients can be invasive, which is one of the arguments against the introduction of population screening programs based on imaging methods. Therefore, it is important to look for viable solutions that would improve early detection. This is important from the point of view of healthcare systems in Europe, where almost 29% of all global pancreatic cancer cases are reported.

Indexed as

epidemiologypancreatic cancerrisk factorsscreening

Identifiers

PMID37509296
PMCPMC10377815

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.