Jessica L Tobin1, Stefanie M Thomas2, David R Freyer3,4, Ann S Hamilton5, Joel E Milam5. 1. Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Jessi.tobin@gmail.com. 2. Pediatric Hematology Oncology and Blood and Marrow Transplantation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, USA. 3. Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. USC Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 5. Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Intensity of Treatment Rating (ITR) Scale condenses treatment and clinical characteristics into a single measure to study treatment effects on downstream health outcomes across cancer types. This rating was originally developed for clinicians to determine from medical charts. However, large studies are often unable to access medical charts for all study participants. We developed and tested a method of estimating treatment intensity (TI) using cancer registry and patient self-reported data. METHODS: We estimated two versions of TI for a cohort of pediatric cancer survivors-one utilized information solely available from cancer registry variables (TIR) and the other included registry and self-reported information (TIS) from survey participants. In a subset of cases (n = 135) for whom the gold standard TI (TIC) was known, both TIR and TIS were compared to TIC by calculating percent agreement and weighted Cohen's kappa, overall and within cancer subtypes. RESULTS: In comparison to TIC, 71% of TI scores from both methods were in agreement (k = 0.61 TIR/0.54 TIS). Among subgroups, agreement ranged from lowest (46% TIR/39% TIS) for non-defined tumors (e.g., "Tumor-other"), to highest (94% TIR/94% TIS) for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a methodology to estimate TI for pediatric cancer research when medical chart review is not possible. High reliability was observed for ALL, the most common pediatric cancer. Additional validation is needed among a larger sample of other cancer subgroups. The ability to estimate TI from cancer registry data would assist with monitoring effects of treatment during survivorship in registry-based epidemiological studies.
OBJECTIVE: The Intensity of Treatment Rating (ITR) Scale condenses treatment and clinical characteristics into a single measure to study treatment effects on downstream health outcomes across cancer types. This rating was originally developed for clinicians to determine from medical charts. However, large studies are often unable to access medical charts for all study participants. We developed and tested a method of estimating treatment intensity (TI) using cancer registry and patient self-reported data. METHODS: We estimated two versions of TI for a cohort of pediatric cancer survivors-one utilized information solely available from cancer registry variables (TIR) and the other included registry and self-reported information (TIS) from survey participants. In a subset of cases (n = 135) for whom the gold standard TI (TIC) was known, both TIR and TIS were compared to TIC by calculating percent agreement and weighted Cohen's kappa, overall and within cancer subtypes. RESULTS: In comparison to TIC, 71% of TI scores from both methods were in agreement (k = 0.61 TIR/0.54 TIS). Among subgroups, agreement ranged from lowest (46% TIR/39% TIS) for non-defined tumors (e.g., "Tumor-other"), to highest (94% TIR/94% TIS) for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). CONCLUSIONS: We developed a methodology to estimate TI for pediatric cancer research when medical chart review is not possible. High reliability was observed for ALL, the most common pediatric cancer. Additional validation is needed among a larger sample of other cancer subgroups. The ability to estimate TI from cancer registry data would assist with monitoring effects of treatment during survivorship in registry-based epidemiological studies.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer registry; Epidemiology; Pediatric and adolescent cancer; Treatment intensity
Authors: Lena Wettergren; Erin E Kent; Sandra A Mitchell; Brad Zebrack; Charles F Lynch; Mara B Rubenstein; Theresa H M Keegan; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Helen M Parsons; Ashley Wilder Smith Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2016-06-20 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Joel E Milam; Kathleen Meeske; Rhona I Slaughter; Sandra Sherman-Bien; Anamara Ritt-Olson; Aura Kuperberg; David R Freyer; Ann S Hamilton Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-10-23 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Molly H Gardner; Sylvie Mrug; David C Schwebel; Sean Phipps; Kimberly Whelan; Avi Madan-Swain Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2017 Sep/Oct Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: Kimberly A Miller; Cynthia N Ramirez; Katherine Y Wojcik; Anamara Ritt-Olson; Lourdes Baezconde-Garbanati; Stefanie M Thomas; David R Freyer; Ann S Hamilton; Joel E Milam Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Anne E Kazak; Matthew C Hocking; Richard F Ittenbach; Anna T Meadows; Wendy Hobbie; Branlyn Werba DeRosa; Ann Leahey; Leslie Kersun; Anne Reilly Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2011-08-19 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Kimberly A Miller; Katherine Y Wojcik; Cynthia N Ramirez; Anamara Ritt-Olson; David R Freyer; Ann S Hamilton; Joel E Milam Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2016-08-27 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Matthew J Bitsko; Debra Cohen; Robyn Dillon; Jeanne Harvey; Kevin Krull; James L Klosky Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2015-10-21 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Nina S Kadan-Lottick; Leslie L Robison; James G Gurney; Joseph P Neglia; Yutaka Yasui; Robert Hayashi; Melissa Hudson; Mark Greenberg; Ann C Mertens Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-04-10 Impact factor: 157.335
Authors: Erin M Mobley; Sue E Kim; Michael Cousineau; Jennifer Tsui; Kimberly A Miller; Jessica Tobin; David R Freyer; Joel E Milam Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2021-09-07 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Jessica Tobin; Myles Cockburn; Jennifer B Unger; Brian K Finch; Ann S Hamilton; Anamara Ritt-Olson; Joel E Milam Journal: J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol Date: 2021-07-19 Impact factor: 1.757
Authors: Peter M Anderson; Stefanie M Thomas; Shauna Sartoski; Jacob G Scott; Kaitlin Sobilo; Sara Bewley; Laura K Salvador; Maritza Salazar-Abshire Journal: Nutrients Date: 2021-12-08 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Joel Milam; David R Freyer; Kimberly A Miller; Jessica Tobin; Katherine Y Wojcik; Cynthia N Ramirez; Anamara Ritt-Olson; Stefanie M Thomas; Lourdes Baezconde-Garbanati; Michael Cousineau; Denise Modjeski; Sapna Gupta; Ann S Hamilton Journal: JNCI Cancer Spectr Date: 2021-07-17