Larry A Allen1, Marianne Ulcickas Yood, Edward H Wagner, Erin J Aiello Bowles, Roy Pardee, Robert Wellman, Laurel Habel, Larissa Nekhlyudov, Robert L Davis, Adedayo A Onitilo, David J Magid. 1. *Section of Advanced Heart Failure and Transplantation, Division of Cardiology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center, Aurora, CO †Department of Population Sciences, Henry Ford Hospital and Health System, Detroit, MI ‡Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA §Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, WA ∥Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA ¶Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute and Harvard Medical School #Department of Medicine, Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates, Boston, MA **Center for Health Research-Southeast, Kaiser Permanente Georgia, Atlanta, GA ††Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation, Marshfield Clinic, Marshfield ‡‡Department of Hematology/Oncology, Weston, WI §§Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Denver, CO.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiotoxicity is a known complication of certain breast cancer therapies, but rates come from clinical trials with design features that limit external validity. The ability to accurately identify cardiotoxicity from administrative data would enhance safety information. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the performance of clinical coding algorithms for identification of cardiac dysfunction in a cancer population. RESEARCH DESIGN: We sampled 400 charts among 6460 women diagnosed with incident breast cancer, tumor size ≥ 2 cm or node positivity, treated within 8 US health care systems between 1999 and 2007. We abstracted medical records for clinical diagnoses of heart failure (HF) and cardiomyopathy (CM) or evidence of reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. We then assessed the performance of 3 different International Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition (ICD-9)-based algorithms. RESULTS: The HF/CM coding algorithm designed a priori to balance performance characteristics provided a sensitivity of 62% (95% confidence interval, 40%-80%), specificity of 99% (range, 97% to 99%), positive predictive value (PPV) of 69% (range, 45% to 85%), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 98% (range, 96% to 99%). When applied only to incident HF/CM (ICD-9 codes and gold standard diagnosis both occurring after breast cancer diagnosis) in patients exposed to anthracycline and/or trastuzumab therapy, the PPV was 42% (range, 14% to 76%). CONCLUSIONS: Claims-based algorithms have moderate sensitivity and high specificity for identifying HF/CM among patients with invasive breast cancer. As the prevalence of HF/CM among the breast cancer population is low, ICD-9 codes have high NPV but only moderate PPV. These findings suggest a significant degree of misclassification due to HF/CM overcoding versus incomplete clinical documentation of HF/CM in the medical record.
BACKGROUND:Cardiotoxicity is a known complication of certain breast cancer therapies, but rates come from clinical trials with design features that limit external validity. The ability to accurately identify cardiotoxicity from administrative data would enhance safety information. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the performance of clinical coding algorithms for identification of cardiac dysfunction in a cancer population. RESEARCH DESIGN: We sampled 400 charts among 6460 women diagnosed with incident breast cancer, tumor size ≥ 2 cm or node positivity, treated within 8 US health care systems between 1999 and 2007. We abstracted medical records for clinical diagnoses of heart failure (HF) and cardiomyopathy (CM) or evidence of reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. We then assessed the performance of 3 different International Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition (ICD-9)-based algorithms. RESULTS: The HF/CM coding algorithm designed a priori to balance performance characteristics provided a sensitivity of 62% (95% confidence interval, 40%-80%), specificity of 99% (range, 97% to 99%), positive predictive value (PPV) of 69% (range, 45% to 85%), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 98% (range, 96% to 99%). When applied only to incident HF/CM (ICD-9 codes and gold standard diagnosis both occurring after breast cancer diagnosis) in patients exposed to anthracycline and/or trastuzumab therapy, the PPV was 42% (range, 14% to 76%). CONCLUSIONS: Claims-based algorithms have moderate sensitivity and high specificity for identifying HF/CM among patients with invasive breast cancer. As the prevalence of HF/CM among the breast cancer population is low, ICD-9 codes have high NPV but only moderate PPV. These findings suggest a significant degree of misclassification due to HF/CM overcoding versus incomplete clinical documentation of HF/CM in the medical record.
Authors: Alan S Go; Jingrong Yang; Lynn M Ackerson; Krista Lepper; Sean Robbins; Barry M Massie; Michael G Shlipak Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-06-05 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Robert C Hendel; Matthew J Budoff; John F Cardella; Charles E Chambers; John M Dent; David M Fitzgerald; John McB Hodgson; Elizabeth Klodas; Christopher M Kramer; Arthur E Stillman; Peter L Tilkemeier; R Parker Ward; Wm Guy Weigold; Richard D White; Pamela K Woodard Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-12-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Thomas Kümler; Gunnar Hilmar Gislason; Vibeke Kirk; Morten Bay; Olav W Nielsen; Lars Køber; Christian Torp-Pedersen Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2008-06-09 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Heikki Joensuu; Pirkko-Liisa Kellokumpu-Lehtinen; Petri Bono; Tuomo Alanko; Vesa Kataja; Raija Asola; Tapio Utriainen; Riitta Kokko; Akseli Hemminki; Maija Tarkkanen; Taina Turpeenniemi-Hujanen; Sirkku Jyrkkiö; Martti Flander; Leena Helle; Seija Ingalsuo; Kaisu Johansson; Anna-Stina Jääskeläinen; Marjo Pajunen; Mervi Rauhala; Jaana Kaleva-Kerola; Tapio Salminen; Mika Leinonen; Inkeri Elomaa; Jorma Isola Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-02-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kenneth Dickstein; Alain Cohen-Solal; Gerasimos Filippatos; John J V McMurray; Piotr Ponikowski; Philip Alexander Poole-Wilson; Anna Strömberg; Dirk J van Veldhuisen; Dan Atar; Arno W Hoes; Andre Keren; Alexandre Mebazaa; Markku Nieminen; Silvia Giuliana Priori; Karl Swedberg Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2008-09-17 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Lee W Jones; Mark J Haykowsky; Jonas J Swartz; Pamela S Douglas; John R Mackey Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-09-24 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Mary C Pinder; Zhigang Duan; James S Goodwin; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Sharon H Giordano Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-07-30 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Sekwon Jang; Chaoyi Zheng; Huei-Ting Tsai; Alex Z Fu; Ana Barac; Michael B Atkins; Andrew N Freedman; Lori Minasian; Arnold L Potosky Journal: Cancer Date: 2015-10-06 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Tina W F Yen; Purushuttom W Laud; Rodney A Sparapani; Jianing Li; Ann B Nattinger Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2014-09-04 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Heather Greenlee; Carlos Iribarren; Jamal S Rana; Richard Cheng; Mai Nguyen-Huynh; Eileen Rillamas-Sun; Zaixing Shi; Cecile A Laurent; Valerie S Lee; Janise M Roh; Margarita Santiago-Torres; Hanjie Shen; Dawn L Hershman; Lawrence H Kushi; Romain Neugebauer; Marilyn L Kwan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2022-04-06 Impact factor: 50.717
Authors: Katrina A B Goddard; Erin J Aiello Bowles; Heather Spencer Feigelson; Laurel A Habel; Sharon Hensley Alford; Catherine A McCarty; Larissa Nekhlyudov; Adedayo A Onitilo; Alanna K Rahm; Jennifer A Webster Journal: Am J Manag Care Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 2.229
Authors: Mohammed Al-Sadawi; Yasin Hussain; Robert S Copeland-Halperin; Jonathan N Tobin; Chaya S Moskowitz; Chau T Dang; Jennifer E Liu; Richard M Steingart; Michelle N Johnson; Anthony F Yu Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2021-02-20 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Erin J Aiello Bowles; Robert Wellman; Heather Spencer Feigelson; Adedayo A Onitilo; Andrew N Freedman; Thomas Delate; Larry A Allen; Larissa Nekhlyudov; Katrina A B Goddard; Robert L Davis; Laurel A Habel; Marianne Ulcickas Yood; Catherine McCarty; David J Magid; Edward H Wagner Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 13.506