Literature DB >> 21422962

Tradeoffs of using administrative claims and medical records to identify the use of personalized medicine for patients with breast cancer.

Su-Ying Liang1, Kathryn A Phillips, Grace Wang, Carol Keohane, Joanne Armstrong, William M Morris, Jennifer S Haas.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Administrative claims and medical records are important data sources to examine healthcare utilization and outcomes. Little is known about identifying personalized medicine technologies in these sources.
OBJECTIVES: To describe agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of administrative claims compared with medical records for 2 pairs of targeted tests and treatments for breast cancer. RESEARCH
DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of medical records linked to administrative claims from a large health plan. We examined whether agreement varied by factors that facilitate tracking in claims (coding and cost) and that enhance medical record completeness (records from multiple providers).
SUBJECTS: Women (35 to 65 y of age) with incident breast cancer diagnosed in 2006 to 2007 (n=775). MEASURES: Use of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and gene expression profiling (GEP) testing, trastuzumab, and adjuvant chemotherapy in claims and medical records.
RESULTS: Agreement between claims and records was substantial for GEP, trastuzumab, and chemotherapy, and lowest for HER2 tests. GEP, an expensive test with unique billing codes, had higher agreement (91.6% vs. 75.2%), sensitivity (94.9% vs. 76.7%), and specificity (90.1% vs. 29.2%) than HER2, a test without unique billing codes. Trastuzumab, a treatment with unique billing codes, had slightly higher agreement (95.1% vs. 90%) and sensitivity (98.1% vs. 87.9%) than adjuvant chemotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Higher agreement and specificity were associated with services that had unique billing codes and high cost. Administrative claims may be sufficient for examining services with unique billing codes. Medical records provide better data for identifying tests lacking specific codes and for research requiring detailed clinical information.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21422962      PMCID: PMC3383782          DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318207e87e

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  25 in total

1.  External validation of medicare claims for breast cancer chemotherapy compared with medical chart reviews.

Authors:  Xianglin L Du; Charles R Key; Lois Dickie; Ronald Darling; Jane M Geraci; Dong Zhang
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  What is the concordance between the medical record and patient self-report as data sources for ambulatory care?

Authors:  Diana M Tisnado; John L Adams; Honghu Liu; Cheryl L Damberg; Wen-Pin Chen; Fang Ashlee Hu; David M Carlisle; Carol M Mangione; Katherine L Kahn
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  Data sources for measuring colorectal endoscopy use among Medicare enrollees.

Authors:  Anna P Schenck; Carrie N Klabunde; Joan L Warren; Sharon Peacock; William W Davis; Sarah T Hawley; Michael Pignone; David F Ransohoff
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  High agreement but low kappa: II. Resolving the paradoxes.

Authors:  D V Cicchetti; A R Feinstein
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Frequency and cost of chemotherapy-related serious adverse effects in a population sample of women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Michael J Hassett; A James O'Malley; Juliana R Pakes; Joseph P Newhouse; Craig C Earle
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-08-16       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer.

Authors:  Antonio C Wolff; M Elizabeth H Hammond; Jared N Schwartz; Karen L Hagerty; D Craig Allred; Richard J Cote; Mitchell Dowsett; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Wedad M Hanna; Amy Langer; Lisa M McShane; Soonmyung Paik; Mark D Pegram; Edith A Perez; Michael F Press; Anthony Rhodes; Catharine Sturgeon; Sheila E Taube; Raymond Tubbs; Gail H Vance; Marc van de Vijver; Thomas M Wheeler; Daniel F Hayes
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-12-11       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Utility of the SEER-Medicare data to identify chemotherapy use.

Authors:  Joan L Warren; Linda C Harlan; Angela Fahey; Beth A Virnig; Jean L Freeman; Carrie N Klabunde; Gregory S Cooper; Kevin B Knopf
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Sensitivity of administrative claims to identify incident cases of lung cancer: a comparison of 3 health plans.

Authors:  Scott D Ramsey; John F Scoggins; David K Blough; Cara L McDermott; Carolina M Reyes
Journal:  J Manag Care Pharm       Date:  2009-10

9.  Measuring agreement of administrative data with chart data using prevalence unadjusted and adjusted kappa.

Authors:  Guanmin Chen; Peter Faris; Brenda Hemmelgarn; Robin L Walker; Hude Quan
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2009-01-21       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  External validation of a claims-based algorithm for classifying kidney-cancer surgeries.

Authors:  David C Miller; Christopher S Saigal; Joan L Warren; Meryl Leventhal; Dennis Deapen; Mousumi Banerjee; Julie Lai; Jan Hanley; Mark S Litwin
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-06-06       Impact factor: 2.655

View more
  10 in total

1.  Clinical Molecular Marker Testing Data Capture to Promote Precision Medicine Research Within the Cancer Research Network.

Authors:  Andrea N Burnett-Hartman; Natalia Udaltsova; Lawrence H Kushi; Christine Neslund-Dudas; Alanna Kulchak Rahm; Pamala A Pawloski; Douglas A Corley; Sarah Knerr; Heather Spencer Feigelson; Jessica Ezzell Hunter; David C Tabano; Mara M Epstein; Stacey A Honda; Monica Ter-Minassian; Julie A Lynch; Christine Y Lu
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2019-09

2.  Gene expression profile testing for breast cancer and the use of chemotherapy, serious adverse effects, and costs of care.

Authors:  Jennifer S Haas; Su-Ying Liang; Michael J Hassett; Stephen Shiboski; Elena B Elkin; Kathryn A Phillips
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-06-17       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  Identifying specific chemotherapeutic agents in Medicare data: a validation study.

Authors:  Jennifer L Lund; Til Stürmer; Linda C Harlan; Hanna K Sanoff; Robert S Sandler; Maurice Alan Brookhart; Joan L Warren
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  First do no harm: population-based study shows non-evidence-based trastuzumab prescription may harm elderly women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Ying Xu; Wenli Dong; Fabrice Smieliauskas; Sharon Giordano; Yu Shen
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2014-02-21       Impact factor: 4.872

5.  Intended versus inferred management after PET for cancer restaging: analysis of Medicare claims linked to a coverage with evidence development registry.

Authors:  Bruce E Hillner; Tor D Tosteson; Anna N A Tosteson; Qianfei Wang; Yunjie Song; Tracy Onega; Lucy G Hanna; Barry A Siegel
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Exploration of PCORnet Data Resources for Assessing Use of Molecular-Guided Cancer Treatment.

Authors:  Ryan M Carnahan; Lemuel R Waitman; Mary E Charlton; Mary C Schroeder; Aaron D Bossler; W Scott Campbell; James R Campbell; Bradley D McDowell; Nicholas C Smith; Brian M Gryzlak; Elizabeth A Chrischilles
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2020-08

7.  Intended versus inferred care after PET performed for initial staging in the National Oncologic PET Registry.

Authors:  Bruce E Hillner; Anna N Tosteson; Tor D Tosteson; Qianfei Wang; Yunjie Song; Lucy G Hanna; Barry A Siegel
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Validity of International Classification of Diseases codes in identifying illicit drug use target conditions using medical record data as a reference standard: A systematic review.

Authors:  Kaitlin M McGrew; Juell B Homco; Tabitha Garwe; Hanh Dung Dao; Mary B Williams; Douglas A Drevets; S Reza Jafarzadeh; Yan Daniel Zhao; Hélène Carabin
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2019-12-23       Impact factor: 4.852

9.  A feasibility study to assess the validity of administrative data sources and self-reported information of breast cancer survivors.

Authors:  Rola Hamood; Hatem Hamood; Ilya Merhasin; Lital Keinan-Boker
Journal:  Isr J Health Policy Res       Date:  2016-12-01

10.  Validity of Administrative Databases in Comparison to Medical Charts for Breast Cancer Treatment Data.

Authors:  Ashini Weerasinghe; Courtney R Smith; Vicky Majpruz; Anjali Pandya; Kristina M Blackmore; Claire M B Holloway; Roanne Segal-Nadlere; Cathy Paroschy Harris; Ashley Hendry; Amanda Hey; Anat Kornecki; George Lougheed; Barbara-Anne Maier; Patricia Marchand; David McCready; Carol Rand; Simon Raphael; Neelu Sehgal; Anna M Chiarelli
Journal:  J Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2018-05-14
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.