卵巢癌症普通人群筛查的死亡率影响、风险和益处:UKCTOCS随机对照试验。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Usha Menon, Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj, Matthew Burnell, Andy Ryan, Jatinderpal K Kalsi, Naveena Singh, Anne Dawnay, Lesley Fallowfield, Alistair J McGuire, Stuart Campbell, Steven J Skates, Mahesh Parmar, Ian J Jacobs
{"title":"卵巢癌症普通人群筛查的死亡率影响、风险和益处:UKCTOCS随机对照试验。","authors":"Usha Menon, Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj, Matthew Burnell, Andy Ryan, Jatinderpal K Kalsi, Naveena Singh, Anne Dawnay, Lesley Fallowfield, Alistair J McGuire, Stuart Campbell, Steven J Skates, Mahesh Parmar, Ian J Jacobs","doi":"10.3310/BHBR5832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ovarian and tubal cancers are lethal gynaecological cancers, with over 50% of the patients diagnosed at advanced stage.</p><p><strong>Trial design: </strong>Randomised controlled trial involving 27 primary care trusts adjacent to 13 trial centres based at NHS Trusts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Postmenopausal average-risk women, aged 50-74, with intact ovaries and no previous ovarian or current non-ovarian cancer.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>One of two annual screening strategies: (1) multimodal screening (MMS) using a longitudinal CA125 algorithm with repeat CA125 testing and transvaginal scan (TVS) as second line test (2) ultrasound screening (USS) using TVS alone with repeat scan to confirm any abnormality. The control (C) group had no screening. Follow-up was through linkage to national registries, postal follow-up questionnaires and direct communication with trial centres and participants.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess comprehensively risks and benefits of ovarian cancer screening in the general population.</p><p><strong>Outcome: </strong>Primary outcome was death due to ovarian or tubal cancer as assigned by an independent outcomes review committee. Secondary outcomes included incidence and stage at diagnosis of ovarian and tubal cancer, compliance, performance characteristics, harms and cost-effectiveness of the two screening strategies and a bioresource for future research.</p><p><strong>Randomisation: </strong>The trial management system confirmed eligibility and randomly allocated participants using computer-generated random numbers to MMS, USS and C groups in a 1:1:2 ratio.</p><p><strong>Blinding: </strong>Investigators and participants were unblinded and outcomes review committee was masked to randomisation group.</p><p><strong>Analyses: </strong>Primary analyses were by intention to screen, comparing separately MMS and USS with C using the Versatile test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1,243,282 women were invited and 205,090 attended for recruitment between April 2001 and September 2005.</p><p><strong>Randomised: </strong>202,638 women: 50,640 MMS, 50,639 USS and 101,359 C group.</p><p><strong>Numbers analysed for primary outcome: </strong>202,562 (>99.9%): 50,625 (>99.9%) MMS, 50,623 (>99.9%) USS, and 101,314 (>99.9%) C group.</p><p><strong>Outcome: </strong>Women in MMS and USS groups underwent 345,570 and 327,775 annual screens between randomisation and 31 December 2011. At median follow-up of 16.3 (IQR 15.1-17.3) years, 2055 women developed ovarian or tubal cancer: 522 (1.0% of 50,625) MMS, 517 (1.0% of 50,623) USS, and 1016 (1.0% of 101314) in C group. Compared to the C group, in the MMS group, the incidence of Stage I/II disease was 39.2% (95% CI 16.1 to 66.9) higher and stage III/IV 10.2% (95% CI -21.3 to 2.4) lower. There was no difference in stage in the USS group. 1206 women died of the disease: 296 (0.6%) MMS, 291 (0.6%) USS, and 619 (0.6%) C group. There was no significant reduction in ovarian and tubal cancer deaths in either MMS (p = 0.580) or USS (p = 0.360) groups compared to the C group. Overall compliance with annual screening episode was 80.8% (345,570/420,047) in the MMS and 78.0% (327,775/420,047) in the USS group. For ovarian and tubal cancers diagnosed within one year of the last test in a screening episode, in the MMS group, the sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values were 83.8% (95% CI 78.7 to 88.1), 99.8% (95% CI 99.8 to 99.9), and 28.8% (95% CI 25.5 to 32.2) and in the USS group, 72.2% (95% CI 65.9 to 78.0), 99.5% (95% CI 99.5 to 99.5), and 9.1% (95% CI 7.8 to 10.5) respectively. The final within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was not undertaken as there was no mortality reduction. A bioresource (UKCTOCS Longitudinal Women's Cohort) of longitudinal outcome data and over 0.5 million serum samples including serial annual samples in women in the MMS group was established and to date has been used in many new studies, mainly focused on early detection of cancer.</p><p><strong>Harms: </strong>Both screening tests (venepuncture and TVS) were associated with minor complications with low (8.6/100,000 screens MMS; 18.6/100,000 screens USS) complication rates. Screening itself did not cause anxiety unless more intense repeat testing was required following abnormal screens. In the MMS group, for each screen-detected ovarian or tubal cancer, an additional 2.3 (489 false positives; 212 cancers) women in the MMS group had unnecessary false-positive (benign adnexal pathology or normal adnexa) surgery. Overall, 14 (489/345,572 annual screens) underwent unnecessary surgery per 10,000 screens. In the USS group, for each screen-detected ovarian or tubal cancer, an additional 10 (1630 false positives; 164 cancers) underwent unnecessary false-positive surgery. Overall, 50 (1630/327,775 annual screens) women underwent unnecessary surgery per 10,000 screens.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Population screening for ovarian and tubal cancer for average-risk women using these strategies should not be undertaken. Decreased incidence of Stage III/IV cancers during multimodal screening did not translate to mortality reduction. Researchers should be cautious about using early stage as a surrogate outcome in screening trials. Meanwhile the bioresource provides a unique opportunity to evaluate early cancer detection tests.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>Long-term follow-up UKCTOCS (2015-2020) - National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR HTA grant 16/46/01), Cancer Research UK, and The Eve Appeal. UKCTOCS (2001-2014) - Medical Research Council (MRC) (G9901012/G0801228), Cancer Research UK (C1479/A2884), and the UK Department of Health, with additional support from The Eve Appeal. Researchers at UCL were supported by the NIHR UCL Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre and by MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL core funding (MR_UU_12023).</p>","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1-93"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10542866/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mortality impact, risks, and benefits of general population screening for ovarian cancer: the UKCTOCS randomised controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Usha Menon, Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj, Matthew Burnell, Andy Ryan, Jatinderpal K Kalsi, Naveena Singh, Anne Dawnay, Lesley Fallowfield, Alistair J McGuire, Stuart Campbell, Steven J Skates, Mahesh Parmar, Ian J Jacobs\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/BHBR5832\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ovarian and tubal cancers are lethal gynaecological cancers, with over 50% of the patients diagnosed at advanced stage.</p><p><strong>Trial design: </strong>Randomised controlled trial involving 27 primary care trusts adjacent to 13 trial centres based at NHS Trusts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Postmenopausal average-risk women, aged 50-74, with intact ovaries and no previous ovarian or current non-ovarian cancer.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>One of two annual screening strategies: (1) multimodal screening (MMS) using a longitudinal CA125 algorithm with repeat CA125 testing and transvaginal scan (TVS) as second line test (2) ultrasound screening (USS) using TVS alone with repeat scan to confirm any abnormality. The control (C) group had no screening. Follow-up was through linkage to national registries, postal follow-up questionnaires and direct communication with trial centres and participants.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess comprehensively risks and benefits of ovarian cancer screening in the general population.</p><p><strong>Outcome: </strong>Primary outcome was death due to ovarian or tubal cancer as assigned by an independent outcomes review committee. Secondary outcomes included incidence and stage at diagnosis of ovarian and tubal cancer, compliance, performance characteristics, harms and cost-effectiveness of the two screening strategies and a bioresource for future research.</p><p><strong>Randomisation: </strong>The trial management system confirmed eligibility and randomly allocated participants using computer-generated random numbers to MMS, USS and C groups in a 1:1:2 ratio.</p><p><strong>Blinding: </strong>Investigators and participants were unblinded and outcomes review committee was masked to randomisation group.</p><p><strong>Analyses: </strong>Primary analyses were by intention to screen, comparing separately MMS and USS with C using the Versatile test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1,243,282 women were invited and 205,090 attended for recruitment between April 2001 and September 2005.</p><p><strong>Randomised: </strong>202,638 women: 50,640 MMS, 50,639 USS and 101,359 C group.</p><p><strong>Numbers analysed for primary outcome: </strong>202,562 (>99.9%): 50,625 (>99.9%) MMS, 50,623 (>99.9%) USS, and 101,314 (>99.9%) C group.</p><p><strong>Outcome: </strong>Women in MMS and USS groups underwent 345,570 and 327,775 annual screens between randomisation and 31 December 2011. At median follow-up of 16.3 (IQR 15.1-17.3) years, 2055 women developed ovarian or tubal cancer: 522 (1.0% of 50,625) MMS, 517 (1.0% of 50,623) USS, and 1016 (1.0% of 101314) in C group. Compared to the C group, in the MMS group, the incidence of Stage I/II disease was 39.2% (95% CI 16.1 to 66.9) higher and stage III/IV 10.2% (95% CI -21.3 to 2.4) lower. There was no difference in stage in the USS group. 1206 women died of the disease: 296 (0.6%) MMS, 291 (0.6%) USS, and 619 (0.6%) C group. There was no significant reduction in ovarian and tubal cancer deaths in either MMS (p = 0.580) or USS (p = 0.360) groups compared to the C group. Overall compliance with annual screening episode was 80.8% (345,570/420,047) in the MMS and 78.0% (327,775/420,047) in the USS group. For ovarian and tubal cancers diagnosed within one year of the last test in a screening episode, in the MMS group, the sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values were 83.8% (95% CI 78.7 to 88.1), 99.8% (95% CI 99.8 to 99.9), and 28.8% (95% CI 25.5 to 32.2) and in the USS group, 72.2% (95% CI 65.9 to 78.0), 99.5% (95% CI 99.5 to 99.5), and 9.1% (95% CI 7.8 to 10.5) respectively. The final within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was not undertaken as there was no mortality reduction. A bioresource (UKCTOCS Longitudinal Women's Cohort) of longitudinal outcome data and over 0.5 million serum samples including serial annual samples in women in the MMS group was established and to date has been used in many new studies, mainly focused on early detection of cancer.</p><p><strong>Harms: </strong>Both screening tests (venepuncture and TVS) were associated with minor complications with low (8.6/100,000 screens MMS; 18.6/100,000 screens USS) complication rates. Screening itself did not cause anxiety unless more intense repeat testing was required following abnormal screens. In the MMS group, for each screen-detected ovarian or tubal cancer, an additional 2.3 (489 false positives; 212 cancers) women in the MMS group had unnecessary false-positive (benign adnexal pathology or normal adnexa) surgery. Overall, 14 (489/345,572 annual screens) underwent unnecessary surgery per 10,000 screens. In the USS group, for each screen-detected ovarian or tubal cancer, an additional 10 (1630 false positives; 164 cancers) underwent unnecessary false-positive surgery. Overall, 50 (1630/327,775 annual screens) women underwent unnecessary surgery per 10,000 screens.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Population screening for ovarian and tubal cancer for average-risk women using these strategies should not be undertaken. Decreased incidence of Stage III/IV cancers during multimodal screening did not translate to mortality reduction. Researchers should be cautious about using early stage as a surrogate outcome in screening trials. Meanwhile the bioresource provides a unique opportunity to evaluate early cancer detection tests.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>Long-term follow-up UKCTOCS (2015-2020) - National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR HTA grant 16/46/01), Cancer Research UK, and The Eve Appeal. UKCTOCS (2001-2014) - Medical Research Council (MRC) (G9901012/G0801228), Cancer Research UK (C1479/A2884), and the UK Department of Health, with additional support from The Eve Appeal. Researchers at UCL were supported by the NIHR UCL Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre and by MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL core funding (MR_UU_12023).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12898,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health technology assessment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-93\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10542866/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health technology assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/BHBR5832\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/BHBR5832","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:卵巢癌和输卵管癌是致命的妇科癌症,超过50%的患者被诊断为晚期。试验设计:随机对照试验,涉及27个初级保健信托基金,毗邻英格兰、威尔士和北爱尔兰NHS信托基金的13个试验中心。方法:绝经后平均风险女性,年龄50-74岁,卵巢完整,既往无卵巢癌或非卵巢癌症。干预措施:两种年度筛查策略之一:(1)使用纵向CA125算法进行多模式筛查(MMS),重复CA125检测和经阴道扫描(TVS)作为二线检测(2)单独使用TVS进行超声筛查(USS),重复扫描以确认任何异常。对照组(C)未进行筛查。后续行动是通过与国家登记处的联系、邮寄后续调查问卷以及与试验中心和参与者的直接沟通进行的。目的:全面评估癌症筛查在普通人群中的风险和益处。结果:主要结果是由独立结果审查委员会指定的卵巢或输卵管癌症死亡。次要结果包括卵巢和输卵管癌症的发病率和诊断阶段、两种筛查策略的依从性、性能特征、危害和成本效益以及未来研究的生物源。随机:试验管理系统确认了参与者的资格,并使用计算机生成的随机数以1:1:2的比例将参与者随机分配给MMS、USS和C组。盲法:研究者和参与者被揭盲,结果审查委员会被随机分组。分析:初步分析是通过意向筛选,使用多功能测试分别比较MMS和USS与C。结果:2001年4月至2005年9月,1243282名女性受邀参加招募,205090人参加招募。随机抽取:202638名女性:50640名MMS、50639名USS和101359名C组。主要结果分析的数字:202562(>99.9%):50625(>99.9%。结果:从随机分组到2011年12月31日,MMS和USS组的女性分别接受了345570和327775次年度筛查。在中位随访16.3年(IQR 15.1-17.3)时,2055名女性患上了卵巢或输卵管癌症:C组有522例(占50625例的1.0%)MMS,517例(占50523例的1.0%,)USS,1016例(占101314例的1.0%。与C组相比,MMS组I/II期疾病的发病率高39.2%(95%CI 16.1至66.9),III/IV期疾病的发生率低10.2%(95%CI 21.3至2.4)。USS组在阶段上没有差异。1206名女性死于该疾病:296名(0.6%)MMS,291名(0.6%的)USS,619名(0.6%的)C组。与C组相比,MMS组(p=0.580)或USS组(p=0.360)的卵巢和输卵管癌症死亡率均无显著降低。MMS组对年度筛查事件的总体依从性为80.8%(345570/4420047),USS组为78.0%(327775/44200047)。对于在筛查期最后一次检测后一年内诊断出的卵巢癌和输卵管癌,MMS组的敏感性、特异性和阳性预测值分别为83.8%(95%CI 78.7-88.1)、99.8%(95%CI99.8-99.9)和28.8%(95%CI25.5-32.2),USS组分别为72.2%(95%CI65.9-78.0)、99.5%(95%CI99.5-99.5)和9.1%(95%CI7.8-10.5)。由于没有降低死亡率,因此没有进行最后的试验内成本效益分析。建立了一个纵向结果数据和超过50万份血清样本的生物源(UKCTOCS纵向女性队列),包括MMS组女性的连续年度样本,迄今已用于许多新的研究,主要集中在癌症的早期检测。危害:两种筛查测试(静脉穿刺和TVS)都与轻微并发症有关,并发症发生率较低(8.6/10万次MMS筛查;18.6/10万次USS筛查)。筛查本身不会引起焦虑,除非在异常筛查后需要更严格的重复检测。在MMS组中,对于每一种筛查出的卵巢或输卵管癌症,MMS组中又有2.3名女性(489例假阳性;212例癌症)进行了不必要的假阳性(良性附件病理或正常附件)手术。总的来说,每10000个筛查中有14个(489/345572个年度筛查)接受了不必要的手术。在USS组中,对于每一个筛查出的卵巢或输卵管癌症,另外10个(1630个假阳性;164个癌症)接受了不必要的假阳性手术。总的来说,每10000次筛查中有50名女性(1630/3327775次年度筛查)接受了不必要的手术。结论:不应使用这些策略对平均风险女性进行卵巢和输卵管癌症的人群筛查。多模式筛查期间III/IV期癌症发病率的降低并不能转化为死亡率的降低。研究人员应谨慎使用早期阶段作为筛选试验的替代结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mortality impact, risks, and benefits of general population screening for ovarian cancer: the UKCTOCS randomised controlled trial.

Background: Ovarian and tubal cancers are lethal gynaecological cancers, with over 50% of the patients diagnosed at advanced stage.

Trial design: Randomised controlled trial involving 27 primary care trusts adjacent to 13 trial centres based at NHS Trusts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Methods: Postmenopausal average-risk women, aged 50-74, with intact ovaries and no previous ovarian or current non-ovarian cancer.

Interventions: One of two annual screening strategies: (1) multimodal screening (MMS) using a longitudinal CA125 algorithm with repeat CA125 testing and transvaginal scan (TVS) as second line test (2) ultrasound screening (USS) using TVS alone with repeat scan to confirm any abnormality. The control (C) group had no screening. Follow-up was through linkage to national registries, postal follow-up questionnaires and direct communication with trial centres and participants.

Objective: To assess comprehensively risks and benefits of ovarian cancer screening in the general population.

Outcome: Primary outcome was death due to ovarian or tubal cancer as assigned by an independent outcomes review committee. Secondary outcomes included incidence and stage at diagnosis of ovarian and tubal cancer, compliance, performance characteristics, harms and cost-effectiveness of the two screening strategies and a bioresource for future research.

Randomisation: The trial management system confirmed eligibility and randomly allocated participants using computer-generated random numbers to MMS, USS and C groups in a 1:1:2 ratio.

Blinding: Investigators and participants were unblinded and outcomes review committee was masked to randomisation group.

Analyses: Primary analyses were by intention to screen, comparing separately MMS and USS with C using the Versatile test.

Results: 1,243,282 women were invited and 205,090 attended for recruitment between April 2001 and September 2005.

Randomised: 202,638 women: 50,640 MMS, 50,639 USS and 101,359 C group.

Numbers analysed for primary outcome: 202,562 (>99.9%): 50,625 (>99.9%) MMS, 50,623 (>99.9%) USS, and 101,314 (>99.9%) C group.

Outcome: Women in MMS and USS groups underwent 345,570 and 327,775 annual screens between randomisation and 31 December 2011. At median follow-up of 16.3 (IQR 15.1-17.3) years, 2055 women developed ovarian or tubal cancer: 522 (1.0% of 50,625) MMS, 517 (1.0% of 50,623) USS, and 1016 (1.0% of 101314) in C group. Compared to the C group, in the MMS group, the incidence of Stage I/II disease was 39.2% (95% CI 16.1 to 66.9) higher and stage III/IV 10.2% (95% CI -21.3 to 2.4) lower. There was no difference in stage in the USS group. 1206 women died of the disease: 296 (0.6%) MMS, 291 (0.6%) USS, and 619 (0.6%) C group. There was no significant reduction in ovarian and tubal cancer deaths in either MMS (p = 0.580) or USS (p = 0.360) groups compared to the C group. Overall compliance with annual screening episode was 80.8% (345,570/420,047) in the MMS and 78.0% (327,775/420,047) in the USS group. For ovarian and tubal cancers diagnosed within one year of the last test in a screening episode, in the MMS group, the sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values were 83.8% (95% CI 78.7 to 88.1), 99.8% (95% CI 99.8 to 99.9), and 28.8% (95% CI 25.5 to 32.2) and in the USS group, 72.2% (95% CI 65.9 to 78.0), 99.5% (95% CI 99.5 to 99.5), and 9.1% (95% CI 7.8 to 10.5) respectively. The final within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was not undertaken as there was no mortality reduction. A bioresource (UKCTOCS Longitudinal Women's Cohort) of longitudinal outcome data and over 0.5 million serum samples including serial annual samples in women in the MMS group was established and to date has been used in many new studies, mainly focused on early detection of cancer.

Harms: Both screening tests (venepuncture and TVS) were associated with minor complications with low (8.6/100,000 screens MMS; 18.6/100,000 screens USS) complication rates. Screening itself did not cause anxiety unless more intense repeat testing was required following abnormal screens. In the MMS group, for each screen-detected ovarian or tubal cancer, an additional 2.3 (489 false positives; 212 cancers) women in the MMS group had unnecessary false-positive (benign adnexal pathology or normal adnexa) surgery. Overall, 14 (489/345,572 annual screens) underwent unnecessary surgery per 10,000 screens. In the USS group, for each screen-detected ovarian or tubal cancer, an additional 10 (1630 false positives; 164 cancers) underwent unnecessary false-positive surgery. Overall, 50 (1630/327,775 annual screens) women underwent unnecessary surgery per 10,000 screens.

Conclusions: Population screening for ovarian and tubal cancer for average-risk women using these strategies should not be undertaken. Decreased incidence of Stage III/IV cancers during multimodal screening did not translate to mortality reduction. Researchers should be cautious about using early stage as a surrogate outcome in screening trials. Meanwhile the bioresource provides a unique opportunity to evaluate early cancer detection tests.

Funding: Long-term follow-up UKCTOCS (2015-2020) - National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR HTA grant 16/46/01), Cancer Research UK, and The Eve Appeal. UKCTOCS (2001-2014) - Medical Research Council (MRC) (G9901012/G0801228), Cancer Research UK (C1479/A2884), and the UK Department of Health, with additional support from The Eve Appeal. Researchers at UCL were supported by the NIHR UCL Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre and by MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL core funding (MR_UU_12023).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health technology assessment
Health technology assessment 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Technology Assessment (HTA) publishes research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信