Chelsea Anderson1, Christopher D Baggett2, Chandrika Rao3, Lisa Moy4, Lawrence H Kushi4, Chun R Chao5, Hazel B Nichols2. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, US. Electronic address: Chelsea.anderson@cancer.org. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC, US. 3. North Carolina Central Cancer Registry, Raleigh, NC, US. 4. Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, US. 5. Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena, CA, US.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Population-based cancer registries collect information on first course of treatment that may be utilized in research on cancer care quality, yet few studies have investigated the validity of this information. We examined the accuracy and completeness of registry-based treatment information in a cohort of adolescent and young adult women. METHODS: Women diagnosed with breast cancer, lymphoma, thyroid cancer, cervical/uterine cancer or ovarian cancer at ages 15-39 during 2003-2014 were identified using data from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry (CCR) (N = 2342). CCR data were linked to Medicaid and private insurance claims data, and claims were reviewed for the 12 months following diagnosis to identify cancer treatments received. Using claims data as the gold standard, we calculated the sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of CCR data for receipt of chemotherapy, radiation and hormone therapy. We also compared dates of treatment initiation between the two data sources. RESULTS: For all cancer types combined, the sensitivity of the CCR data was high for chemotherapy (86%) and moderate for radiation (74%). PPVs were 82% and 83% for chemotherapy and radiation, respectively. Both the sensitivity (67%) and PPV (70%) were lower for hormone therapy for breast cancer. For all three treatment types, dates of initiation in the registry and the claims differed by ≤30 days for most women. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of young women, population-based cancer registry data on chemotherapy receipt was reasonably accurate and complete in comparison with insurance claims. Radiation and hormone therapy appeared to be less complete.
BACKGROUND: Population-based cancer registries collect information on first course of treatment that may be utilized in research on cancer care quality, yet few studies have investigated the validity of this information. We examined the accuracy and completeness of registry-based treatment information in a cohort of adolescent and young adult women. METHODS:Women diagnosed with breast cancer, lymphoma, thyroid cancer, cervical/uterine cancer or ovarian cancer at ages 15-39 during 2003-2014 were identified using data from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry (CCR) (N = 2342). CCR data were linked to Medicaid and private insurance claims data, and claims were reviewed for the 12 months following diagnosis to identify cancer treatments received. Using claims data as the gold standard, we calculated the sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of CCR data for receipt of chemotherapy, radiation and hormone therapy. We also compared dates of treatment initiation between the two data sources. RESULTS: For all cancer types combined, the sensitivity of the CCR data was high for chemotherapy (86%) and moderate for radiation (74%). PPVs were 82% and 83% for chemotherapy and radiation, respectively. Both the sensitivity (67%) and PPV (70%) were lower for hormone therapy for breast cancer. For all three treatment types, dates of initiation in the registry and the claims differed by ≤30 days for most women. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of young women, population-based cancer registry data on chemotherapy receipt was reasonably accurate and complete in comparison with insurance claims. Radiation and hormone therapy appeared to be less complete.
Authors: Xianglin L Du; Charles R Key; Lois Dickie; Ronald Darling; George L Delclos; Kim Waller; Dong Zhang Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2005-09-30 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Anne-Marie Meyer; Andrew F Olshan; Laura Green; Adrian Meyer; Stephanie B Wheeler; Ethan Basch; William R Carpenter Journal: N C Med J Date: 2014 Jul-Aug
Authors: Reshma Jagsi; Paul Abrahamse; Sarah T Hawley; John J Graff; Ann S Hamilton; Steven J Katz Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-06-29 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Jennifer L Malin; Katherine L Kahn; John Adams; Lorna Kwan; Marianne Laouri; Patricia A Ganz Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2002-06-05 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Robert R German; Jennifer M Wike; Katrina R Bauer; Steven T Fleming; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Mary Namiak; Lyn Almon; Karen Knight; Carin Perkins Journal: J Registry Manag Date: 2011
Authors: Beth A Virnig; Joan L Warren; Gregory S Cooper; Carrie N Klabunde; Nicola Schussler; Jean Freeman Journal: Med Care Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Anne-Michelle Noone; Jennifer L Lund; Angela Mariotto; Kathleen Cronin; Timothy McNeel; Dennis Deapen; Joan L Warren Journal: Med Care Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 3.178
Authors: Cameron B Haas; Erin J Aiello Bowles; Janie M Lee; Jennifer Specht; Diana S M Buist Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2022-07-07 Impact factor: 2.532
Authors: Clare Meernik; Stephanie M Engel; Ally Wardell; Christopher D Baggett; Parul Gupta; Nidia Rodriguez-Ormaza; Barbara Luke; Valerie L Baker; Ethan Wantman; Jose Alejandro Rauh-Hain; Jennifer E Mersereau; Andrew F Olshan; Andrew B Smitherman; Jianwen Cai; Hazel B Nichols Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2022-02-16 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Mya L Roberson; Hazel B Nichols; Stephanie B Wheeler; Katherine E Reeder-Hayes; Andrew F Olshan; Christopher D Baggett; Whitney R Robinson Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2021-11-16 Impact factor: 2.532
Authors: Chun R Chao; Lawrence H Kushi; Hazel B Nichols; Chris D Baggett; Stephanie M Engel; Darios Getahun; Chelsea Anderson; Nancy T Cannizzaro; Laura Green; Parul Gupta; Cecile A Laurent; Paul C Lin; Clare Meernik; Lisa M Moy; Ethan Wantman; Lanfang Xu; Marilyn L Kwan; Jennifer E Mersereau Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2021-02-22 Impact factor: 4.090