| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Perspective |
1 Foley Hoag, LLP, 155 Seaport Blvd., Boston, MA 02210-2600.
2 Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine,
St. Louis, MO.
3 HealthTech, San Francisco, CA.
4 Department of Internal Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond,
VA.
5 Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI.
6 Department of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to review the recent expansion of Medicare coverage for 18F-FDG PET for certain cancer indications under the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' new Coverage with Evidence Development (CED) policy and to describe the specific operational mechanics of the National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR).
CONCLUSION. The NOPR will make possible a more accurate assessment of the actual influence of PET on patient management across a wide spectrum of cancer indications. By linking access to PET for virtually all Medicare beneficiaries to the collection of clinically valuable evidence, the NOPR represents the cutting edge of the CED approach.
Keywords: cancer • National Oncologic PET Registry • nuclear medicine • oncologic imaging • PET • PET/CT
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. E. Coleman, B. E. Hillner, A. F. Shields, F. Duan, D. A. Merlino, L. G. Hanna, S. H. Stine, and B. A. Siegel PET and PET/CT Reports: Observations from the National Oncologic PET Registry J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2010; 51(1): 158 - 163. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. V. Pandharipande and G. S. Gazelle Comparative Effectiveness Research: What It Means for Radiology Radiology, December 1, 2009; 253(3): 600 - 605. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 W. K. Evans, A. Laupacis, K. Y. Gulenchyn, L. Levin, and M. Levine Evidence-Based Approach to the Introduction of Positron Emission Tomography in Ontario, Canada J. Clin. Oncol., November 20, 2009; 27(33): 5607 - 5613. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. E. Hillner, B. A. Siegel, A. F. Shields, D. Liu, I. F. Gareen, E. Hunt, and R. E. Coleman Relationship Between Cancer Type and Impact of PET and PET/CT on Intended Management: Findings of the National Oncologic PET Registry J. Nucl. Med., December 1, 2008; 49(12): 1928 - 1935. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. N. Levine and J. A. Julian Registries That Show Efficacy: Good, but Not Good Enough J. Clin. Oncol., November 20, 2008; 26(33): 5316 - 5319. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Chalkidou, J. Lord, A. Fischer, and P. Littlejohns Evidence-Based Decision Making: When Should We Wait For More Information? Health Aff., November 1, 2008; 27(6): 1642 - 1653. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. E. Hillner, B. A. Siegel, D. Liu, A. F. Shields, I. F. Gareen, L. Hanna, S. H. Stine, and R. E. Coleman Impact of Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography and Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Alone on Expected Management of Patients With Cancer: Initial Results From the National Oncologic PET Registry J. Clin. Oncol., May 1, 2008; 26(13): 2155 - 2161. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. E. Hillner, D. Liu, R. E. Coleman, A. F. Shields, I. F. Gareen, L. Hanna, S. H. Stine, and B. A. Siegel The National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR): Design and Analysis Plan J. Nucl. Med., November 1, 2007; 48(11): 1901 - 1908. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
