Literature DB >> 25066409

Limited validity of diagnosis codes in Medicare claims for identifying cancer metastases and inferring stage.

Neetu Chawla1, K Robin Yabroff2, Angela Mariotto3, Timothy S McNeel4, Deborah Schrag5, Joan L Warren2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Researchers are using diagnosis codes from health claims to identify metastatic disease in cancer patients. The validity of this approach has not been established.
METHODS: We used the linked 2005-2007 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data to assess the validity of metastasis codes at diagnosis from claims compared with stage reported by SEER cancer registries. The cohort included 80,052 incident breast, lung, and colorectal cancer patients aged 65 years and older. Using gold-standard SEER data, we evaluated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of claims-based stage, survival by stage classification, and patient factors associated with stage misclassification using multivariable regression.
RESULTS: For patients with a registry report of distant metastatic cancer, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of claims never simultaneously exceeded 80% for any cancer: lung (42.7%, 94.8%, and 88.1%), breast (51.0%, 98.3%, and 65.8%), and colorectal (72.8%, 93.8%, and 68.5%). Misclassification of stage from Medicare claims was significantly associated with inaccurate estimates of stage-specific survival (P < .001). In adjusted analysis, patients who were older, black, or living in low-income areas were more likely to have their stage misclassified in claims.
CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis codes in Medicare claims have limited validity for inferring cancer stage and metastatic disease. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer; Medicare claims; Metastasis; Registry; SEER; Stage at diagnosis

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25066409      PMCID: PMC4135357          DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2014.06.099

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Epidemiol        ISSN: 1047-2797            Impact factor:   3.797


  21 in total

1.  The utility of Medicare claims data for measuring cancer stage.

Authors:  G S Cooper; Z Yuan; K C Stange; S B Amini; L K Dennis; A A Rimm
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  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

3.  Identification of metastatic cancer in claims data.

Authors:  Beth L Nordstrom; Joanna L Whyte; Marilyn Stolar; Catherine Mercaldi; Joel D Kallich
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 2.890

4.  Differences in late-stage diagnosis, treatment, and colorectal cancer-related death between rural and urban African Americans and whites in Georgia.

Authors:  Robert B Hines; Talar W Markossian
Journal:  J Rural Health       Date:  2011-08-24       Impact factor: 4.333

5.  Validating billing/encounter codes as indicators of lung, colorectal, breast, and prostate cancer recurrence using 2 large contemporary cohorts.

Authors:  Michael J Hassett; Debra P Ritzwoller; Nathan Taback; Nikki Carroll; Angel M Cronin; Gladys V Ting; Deb Schrag; Joan L Warren; Mark C Hornbrook; Jane C Weeks
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Ten-year survival and cost following breast cancer recurrence: estimates from SEER-medicare data.

Authors:  Michael E Stokes; David Thompson; Eduardo L Montoya; Milton C Weinstein; Eric P Winer; Craig C Earle
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2008 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.725

7.  Identification in administrative databases of women dying of breast cancer.

Authors:  Bruno Gagnon; Nancy E Mayo; Carroll Laurin; James A Hanley; Neil McDonald
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-02-20       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Use of ICD-9 coding as a proxy for stage of disease in lung cancer.

Authors:  Simu K Thomas; Sandra E Brooks; C Daniel Mullins; Claudia R Baquet; Sanjay Merchant
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.890

9.  A refined comorbidity measurement algorithm for claims-based studies of breast, prostate, colorectal, and lung cancer patients.

Authors:  Carrie N Klabunde; Julie M Legler; Joan L Warren; Laura-Mae Baldwin; Deborah Schrag
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2007-05-25       Impact factor: 3.797

10.  Sensitivity of Medicare Claims to Identify Cancer Recurrence in Elderly Colorectal and Breast Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Joan L Warren; Angela Mariotto; Danielle Melbert; Deborah Schrag; Paul Doria-Rose; David Penson; K Robin Yabroff
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  28 in total

1.  Contralateral Breast Cancer Event Detection Using Nature Language Processing.

Authors:  Zexian Zeng; Xiaoyu Li; Sasa Espino; Ankita Roy; Kristen Kitsch; Susan Clare; Seema Khan; Yuan Luo
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2018-04-16

2.  Propensity scores with misclassified treatment assignment: a likelihood-based adjustment.

Authors:  Danielle Braun; Malka Gorfine; Giovanni Parmigiani; Nils D Arvold; Francesca Dominici; Corwin Zigler
Journal:  Biostatistics       Date:  2017-10-01       Impact factor: 5.899

3.  Challenges and opportunities in measuring cancer recurrence in the United States.

Authors:  Joan L Warren; K Robin Yabroff
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-05-12       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Diffusion of Bevacizumab Across Oncology Practices: An Observational Study.

Authors:  Nancy L Keating; Haiden A Huskamp; Deborah Schrag; John M McWilliams; Barbara J McNeil; Bruce E Landon; Michael E Chernew; Sharon-Lise T Normand
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  A Systematic Review of Estimating Breast Cancer Recurrence at the Population Level With Administrative Data.

Authors:  Hava Izci; Tim Tambuyzer; Krizia Tuand; Victoria Depoorter; Annouschka Laenen; Hans Wildiers; Ignace Vergote; Liesbet Van Eycken; Harlinde De Schutter; Freija Verdoodt; Patrick Neven
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  A comparison of reintervention rates after endovascular aneurysm repair between the Vascular Quality Initiative registry, Medicare claims, and chart review.

Authors:  Jesse A Columbo; Ravinder Kang; Andrew W Hoel; Jeanwan Kang; Kathleen A Leinweber; Karissa S Tauber; Regis Hila; Niveditta Ramkumar; Art Sedrakyan; Philip P Goodney
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 4.268

7.  Detection of incident breast and colorectal cancer cases from an administrative healthcare database in Catalonia, Spain.

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

8.  Longitudinal Trends in Costs of Palliative Radiation for Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Timothy J Robinson; Michaela A Dinan; Yanhong Li; W Robert Lee; Shelby D Reed
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2015-08-04       Impact factor: 2.947

9.  Patient and Provider Variables Associated with Variation in the Systemic Treatment of Advanced Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Megan E V Caram; Shikun Wang; Phoebe Tsao; Jennifer J Griggs; David C Miller; Brent K Hollenbeck; Paul Lin; Bhramar Mukherjee
Journal:  Urol Pract       Date:  2019-07-01

10.  Association of Breast Cancer Screening Behaviors With Stage at Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Potential for Additive Multi-Cancer Detection via Liquid Biopsy Screening: A Claims-Based Study.

Authors:  Christine Hathaway; Peter Paetsch; Yali Li; Jincao Wu; Sam Asgarian; Alex Parker; Alley Welsh; Patricia Deverka; Ariella Cohain
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.