IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/25328.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Long-run Impact of New Medical Ideas on Cancer Survival and Mortality

Author

Listed:
  • Frank R. Lichtenberg

Abstract

I investigate whether the types of cancer (breast, colon, lung, etc.) subject to greater penetration of new ideas had larger subsequent survival gains and mortality reductions, controlling for changing incidence. I use the MEDLINE/PubMED database, which contains more than 23 million references to journal articles published in 5400 leading biomedical journals, to construct longitudinal measures of the penetration of new medical ideas. The 5-year survival rate is strongly positively related to the novelty of ideas in articles published 12-24 years earlier. This finding is consistent with evidence from case studies that it takes a long time for research evidence to reach clinical practice. The estimates suggest that about 70% of the 1994-2008 increase in the 5-year observed survival rate for all cancer sites combined may have been due to the increase in the novelty of medical ideas 12-24 years earlier. The number of years of potential life lost from cancer before ages 80 and 70 are inversely related to the novelty of ideas in articles published 12-24 years earlier, conditional on incidence. The increase in medical idea novelty was estimated to have caused a 38% decline in the premature (before age 80) cancer mortality rate 12-24 years later.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2018. "The Long-run Impact of New Medical Ideas on Cancer Survival and Mortality," NBER Working Papers 25328, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:25328
    Note: AG DAE EH PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w25328.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Bloom & Charles I. Jones & John Van Reenen & Michael Webb, 2020. "Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(4), pages 1104-1144, April.
    2. Ali, Ayfer & Gittelman, Michelle, 2016. "Research paradigms and useful inventions in medicine: Patents and licensing by teams of clinical and basic scientists in Academic Medical Centers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1499-1511.
    3. Bo E. Honoré & Adriana Lleras-Muney, 2006. "Bounds in Competing Risks Models and the War on Cancer," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(6), pages 1675-1698, November.
    4. Jovanovic, Boyan & Yatsenko, Yuri, 2012. "Investment in vintage capital," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 551-569.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jeon, Sung-Hee & Pohl, R. Vincent, 2019. "Medical innovation, education, and labor market outcomes of cancer patients," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    2. Anne-Line Koch Helsø & Mr. Nicola Pierri & Adelina Yanyue Wang, 2019. "The Economic Impact of Healthcare Quality," IMF Working Papers 2019/173, International Monetary Fund.
    3. Volha Lazuka, 2022. "Household and individual economic responses to different health shocks: The role of medical innovations," Papers 2206.03306, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2022.
    4. Rebecca McKibbin & Bruce A. Weinberg, 2021. "Does Research Save Lives? The Local Spillovers of Biomedical Research on Mortality," NBER Working Papers 29420, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kuosmanen, Natalia & Valmari, Nelli, 2023. "Renewal of Companies Through Product Switching," ETLA Working Papers 104, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    2. Sokbae Lee, 2006. "Identification of a competing risks model with unknown transformations of latent failure times," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 93(4), pages 996-1002, December.
    3. Basso, Henrique S. & Jimeno, Juan F., 2021. "From secular stagnation to robocalypse? Implications of demographic and technological changes," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 833-847.
    4. Christian Bontemps & Thierry Magnac & Eric Maurin, 2012. "Set Identified Linear Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(3), pages 1129-1155, May.
    5. Diane Coyle & Jen‐Chung Mei, 2023. "Diagnosing the UK productivity slowdown: which sectors matter and why?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 90(359), pages 813-850, July.
    6. Ufuk Akcigit & Sina T. Ates, 2023. "What Happened to US Business Dynamism?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 131(8), pages 2059-2124.
    7. Naudé, Wim & Nagler, Paula, 2022. "The Ossified Economy: The Case of Germany, 1870-2020," IZA Discussion Papers 15607, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Josh Lerner & Ramana Nanda, 2020. "Venture Capital's Role in Financing Innovation: What We Know and How Much We Still Need to Learn," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(3), pages 237-261, Summer.
    9. Hyuk-Soo Kwon & Jihong Lee & Sokbae Lee & Ryungha Oh, 2022. "Knowledge spillovers and patent citations: trends in geographic localization, 1976–2015," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 123-147, April.
    10. Karol Jan Borowiecki, 2022. "Good Reverberations? Teacher Influence in Music Composition since 1450," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(4), pages 991-1090.
    11. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Fernández, Gastón P. & Rammer, Christian, 2023. "Artificial intelligence and firm-level productivity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 188-205.
    12. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    13. Diemer, Andreas & Regan, Tanner Weldon Dean, 2020. "No inventor is an island: social connectedness and the geography of knowledge flows in the US," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121852, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Venturini, Francesco, 2022. "Intelligent technologies and productivity spillovers: Evidence from the Fourth Industrial Revolution," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 220-243.
    15. Ligang Song & Yixiao Zhou, 2020. "The COVID‐19 Pandemic and Its Impact on the Global Economy: What Does It Take to Turn Crisis into Opportunity?," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 28(4), pages 1-25, July.
    16. Weshah Razzak, 2023. "Research Effort and Economic Growth," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(3), pages 2318-2340, September.
    17. Juan Carlos Conesa & Pau S. Pujolas, 2019. "The Canadian productivity stagnation, 20022014," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 52(2), pages 561-583, May.
    18. Pierre Lortie, 2019. "Nurturing Global Growth Companies: Time For A New Policy Toolkit," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 12(27), September.
    19. Nicholas Bloom & Philip Bunn & Paul Mizen & Pawel Smietanka & Gregory Thwaites, 2020. "The Impact of Covid-19 on Productivity," NBER Working Papers 28233, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Howdon, Daniel & Jones, Andrew M., 2015. "A discrete latent factor model for smoking, cancer and mortality," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 57-73.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
    • J11 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Demographic Trends, Macroeconomic Effects, and Forecasts
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:25328. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.