• Journal of Hospice and Palliative Care
• /
• v.2 no.2
• /
• pp.114-124
• /
• 1999

Purpose : To clarify the relation between psychosocial variables and cancer in Korea. Methods : Case-control study. Participants: 239 subjects in 2 university hospitals in Seoul completed a series of psychometric instruments(the Olson's FACES III and the Lee's 98-items life event scale). Results : In bivariable analysis, there were statistically significant difference in age and economic status(income): marginal significance in education status and marital status between the cases and controls. The family function type and stress score were not significantly different. The result of multivariable logistic regression, analysis showed that the risk of cancer was associated with economic status and marital status, but neither the family function nor the life event stress. Conclusion : In this study, we cannot prove the statistical association between the family function, life event stress and cancer. It is necessary to persevere in our efforts to clarify the relation between stress and disease and to develop the useful tools to measure the Korean family function and life event stress.

• Journal of Radiation Protection and Research
• /
• v.38 no.4
• /
• pp.214-227
• /
• 2013

Computed tomographic scan as a screening procedures in asymptomatic individuals has seen a steady increase with the introduction of multiple-raw detector CT scanners. This report provides a brief review of the current controversy surrounding CT cancer screening, with a focus on the radiation induced cancer risks and clinical efficacy. 1. A large study of patients at high risk of lung cancer(the National Lung Screening Trial[NLST]) showed that CT screening reduced cancer deaths by 20%(1.33% in those screened compared with 1.67% in those not screened). The rate of positive screening tests was 24.2% and 96.4% of the positive screening results in the low-dose CT group were false-positive. Radiation induced lung cancer risk was estimated the most important in screening population because ERR of radiation induced lung cancer does not show the decrease with increasing age and synergistic connection between smoking and radiation risk. Therefore, the radiation risk may be on the same order of magnitude as the benefit observed in the NLST. Optimal screening strategy remain uncertain, CT lung cancer screening is not yet ready for implementation. 2. Computed tomographic colonography is as good as colonoscopy for detecting colon cancer and is almost as good as colonoscopy for detecting advanced adenomas, but significantly less sensitive and specific for smaller lesions and disadvantageous for subsequent therapeutic optical colonoscopy if polyps are detected. The average effective dose from CT colonography was estimated 8-10 $mS{\nu}$, which could be a significant dose if administered routinely within the population over many years. CT colonography should a) achieve at least 90% sensitivity and specificity in the size category from 6 and 10 mm, b) offer non-cathartic bowl preparation and c) be optimized and standardized CT parameters if it is to be used for mass screening. 3. There is little evidence that demonstrates, for whole-body scanning, the benefit outweighs the detriment. This test found large portion of patient(86~90.8%) had at least one abnormal finding, whereas only 2% were estimated to have clinically significant disease. Annual scans from ages 45 to 75 years would accrue an estimated lifetime cancer mortality risk of 1.9%. There is no group within the medical community that recommends whole-body CT. No good studies indicate the accuracy of screening CT, at this time. The benefit/risk balance for any of the commonly suggested CT screening techniques has yet to be established. These areas need further research. Therefore wild screening should be avoided.