Alexander M Walker1. 1. World Health Information Science Consultants, LLC, Newton, MA 02466, USA. Alec.Walker@WHISCON.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies based on the first appearance of a code for esophageal cancer in the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) have yielded conflicting results concerning the relationship between disease onset and prior bisphosphonate use. The literature on the timing of cancer code appearance in general practice records is scanty but suggests that there may be substantial error by comparison with actual dates of clinical onset. OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy of codes for esophageal cancer in the GPRD and to determine whether it was possible to infer clinical date of onset. METHODS: A reviewer adjudicated the records of women with codes for esophageal cancer from 1996 to 2008 by using chronological GPRD listings of codes for diagnoses, services, and tests. GPRD staff sought reviews by the general practices for 75 women whom the reviewer classified as having esophageal cancer and 25 classified as not having the condition. RESULTS: Essentially all cases bearing a code for the condition had esophageal cancer. Where data were available to permit dating of clinical onset (75% of cases), the result agreed with the date recorded in the clinical record to within 60 days in 89% of cases. The remaining 25% of cases had little or no clinical information and could not be dated. Clinical onset preceded the first appearance of a cancer code by more than 6 months in 10% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: The accurate timing of clinical onset and diagnosis in the GPRD, at least of esophageal cancer in women, may require the review of clinical records or future linkage to cancer registries.
BACKGROUND: Studies based on the first appearance of a code for esophageal cancer in the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) have yielded conflicting results concerning the relationship between disease onset and prior bisphosphonate use. The literature on the timing of cancer code appearance in general practice records is scanty but suggests that there may be substantial error by comparison with actual dates of clinical onset. OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy of codes for esophageal cancer in the GPRD and to determine whether it was possible to infer clinical date of onset. METHODS: A reviewer adjudicated the records of women with codes for esophageal cancer from 1996 to 2008 by using chronological GPRD listings of codes for diagnoses, services, and tests. GPRD staff sought reviews by the general practices for 75 women whom the reviewer classified as having esophageal cancer and 25 classified as not having the condition. RESULTS: Essentially all cases bearing a code for the condition had esophageal cancer. Where data were available to permit dating of clinical onset (75% of cases), the result agreed with the date recorded in the clinical record to within 60 days in 89% of cases. The remaining 25% of cases had little or no clinical information and could not be dated. Clinical onset preceded the first appearance of a cancer code by more than 6 months in 10% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: The accurate timing of clinical onset and diagnosis in the GPRD, at least of esophageal cancer in women, may require the review of clinical records or future linkage to cancer registries.
Authors: Simone P Pinheiro; Donna R Rivera; David J Graham; Andrew N Freedman; Jacqueline M Major; Lynne Penberthy; Mark Levenson; Marie C Bradley; Hui-Lee Wong; Rita Ouellet-Hellstrom Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2016-08-31 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Ramón Salazar; Carmen Cuadra; Marta Gil-Martín; Andrea Vandermeeren; Vicente Alfaro; Cinthya Coronado Journal: Case Rep Oncol Date: 2012-07-05
Authors: James A Kaye; Andrea V Margulis; Joan Fortuny; Lisa J McQuay; Estel Plana; Jennifer L Bartsch; Christine L Bui; Susana Perez-Gutthann; Alejandro Arana Journal: Pharmacotherapy Date: 2017-05-29 Impact factor: 4.705