OBJECTIVE: We have developed and validated an algorithm based on Piedmont hospital discharge abstracts for ascertainment of incident cases of breast, colorectal, and lung cancer. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The algorithm training and validation sets were based on data from 2000 and 2001, respectively. The validation was carried out at an individual level by linkage of cases identified by the algorithm with cases in the Piedmont Cancer Registry diagnosed in 2001. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the algorithm was higher for lung cancer (80.8%) than for breast (76.7%) and colorectal (72.4%) cancers. The positive predictive values were 78.7%, 87.9%, and 92.6% for lung, colorectal, and breast cancer, respectively. The high values for colorectal and breast cancers were due to the model's ability to distinguish prevalent from incident cases and to the accuracy of surgery claims for case identification. CONCLUSIONS: Given its moderate sensitivity, this algorithm is not intended to replace cancer registration, but it is a valuable tool to investigate other aspects of cancer surveillance. This method provides a valid study base for timely monitoring cancer practice and related outcomes, geographic and temporal variations, and costs.
OBJECTIVE: We have developed and validated an algorithm based on Piedmont hospital discharge abstracts for ascertainment of incident cases of breast, colorectal, and lung cancer. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The algorithm training and validation sets were based on data from 2000 and 2001, respectively. The validation was carried out at an individual level by linkage of cases identified by the algorithm with cases in the Piedmont Cancer Registry diagnosed in 2001. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the algorithm was higher for lung cancer (80.8%) than for breast (76.7%) and colorectal (72.4%) cancers. The positive predictive values were 78.7%, 87.9%, and 92.6% for lung, colorectal, and breast cancer, respectively. The high values for colorectal and breast cancers were due to the model's ability to distinguish prevalent from incident cases and to the accuracy of surgery claims for case identification. CONCLUSIONS: Given its moderate sensitivity, this algorithm is not intended to replace cancer registration, but it is a valuable tool to investigate other aspects of cancer surveillance. This method provides a valid study base for timely monitoring cancer practice and related outcomes, geographic and temporal variations, and costs.
Authors: Lesley S Park; Janet P Tate; Maria C Rodriguez-Barradas; David Rimland; Matthew Bidwell Goetz; Cynthia Gibert; Sheldon T Brown; Michael J Kelley; Amy C Justice; Robert Dubrow Journal: J AIDS Clin Res Date: 2014-07
Authors: Jeff Friedlin; Marc Overhage; Mohammed A Al-Haddad; Joshua A Waters; J Juan R Aguilar-Saavedra; Joe Kesterson; Max Schmidt Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2010-11-13
Authors: Carlos H Barcenas; Jiangong Niu; Ning Zhang; Yufeng Zhang; Thomas A Buchholz; Linda S Elting; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Benjamin D Smith; Sharon H Giordano Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-05-27 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ashley Earles; Lin Liu; Ranier Bustamante; Pat Coke; Julie Lynch; Karen Messer; María Elena Martínez; James D Murphy; Christina D Williams; Deborah A Fisher; Dawn T Provenzale; Andrew J Gawron; Tonya Kaltenbach; Samir Gupta Journal: JCO Clin Cancer Inform Date: 2018-12
Authors: Ronac Mamtani; Kevin Haynes; Ben Boursi; Frank I Scott; David S Goldberg; Stephen M Keefe; David J Vaughn; S Bruce Malkowicz; James D Lewis Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-11-11 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Melody J Eide; Richard Krajenta; Dayna Johnson; Jordan J Long; Gordon Jacobsen; Maryam M Asgari; Henry W Lim; Christine C Johnson Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2009-12-06 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Vikas R Dharnidharka; Abhijit S Naik; David Axelrod; Mark A Schnitzler; Huiling Xiao; Daniel C Brennan; Dorry L Segev; Henry Randall; Jiajing Chen; Bertram Kasiske; Krista L Lentine Journal: Transplantation Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Mackenzie R Bronson; Nirav S Kapadia; Andrea M Austin; Qianfei Wang; Diane Feskanich; Julie P W Bynum; Francine Grodstein; Anna N A Tosteson Journal: Med Care Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: J M Escribà; M Banqué; F Macià; J Gálvez; L Esteban; L Pareja; R Clèries; X Sanz; X Castells; J M Borrás; J Ribes Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2019-10-04 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Enrique E Bernal-Delgado; Carmen Martos; Natalia Martínez; María Dolores Chirlaque; Mirari Márquez; Carmen Navarro; Lauro Hernando; Joaquín Palomar; Isabel Izarzugaza; Nerea Larrañaga; Olatz Mokoroa; M Cres Tobalina; Joseba Bidaurrazaga; María José Sánchez; Carmen Martínez; Miguel Rodríguez; Esther Pérez; Yoe Ling Chang Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2010-01-08 Impact factor: 2.655