Neetu Chawla1, K Robin Yabroff2, Angela Mariotto3, Timothy S McNeel4, Deborah Schrag5, Joan L Warren2. 1. Outcomes Research Branch, Applied Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD; Health Services and Economics Branch, Applied Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD. Electronic address: neetu.chawla@nih.gov. 2. Health Services and Economics Branch, Applied Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD. 3. Data Modeling Branch, Surveillance Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD. 4. Information Management Services, Inc, Calverton, MD. 5. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.
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.
PURPOSE: Researchers are using diagnosis codes from health claims to identify metastatic disease in cancerpatients. 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 cancerpatients 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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: 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