Krittin J Supapannachart1, Chase W Kwon1, Sokol Tushe2, Jodie L Guest3, Suephy C Chen4,5, Howa Yeung1,6. 1. Department of Dermatology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 2. Department of Information Systems and Operations Management, Emory University Goizueta Business School, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 3. Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 4. Department of Dermatology, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 5. Department of Dermatology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 6. Clinical Resource Hub, Veterans Integrated Service Network VISN 7, Decatur, Georgia, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Actinic keratoses (AK) diagnosis, billing, and pharmacy codes have not been validated among people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), preventing use in epidemiologic and clinical research. We aimed to calculate the positive predictive value (PPV) of AK diagnosis codes, procedural codes for destruction of pre-malignant lesions, and pharmacy codes for topical 5-fluorouracil. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with HIV within the Infectious Disease clinic at the Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center from 1/1/2002 to 8/5/2017 were eligible. Patients were included if they had any of the following: encounters with a diagnosis for AK (International Classification of Diseases [ICD]-9: 702.0; ICD-10: L57.0), procedural codes for destruction of premalignant lesions (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT]: 17000, 17003, and 17004), and prescriptions for topical 5-fluorouracil. PPV and binomial 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: PPV was 91.9% (89.1-94.7) for 369 encounters with an AK diagnosis. For procedural codes, PPV was 52.6% (48.1-57.2) for 454 encounters with destruction of 1 pre-malignant lesion, 63.7% (58.4-68.9) for 322 encounters with destruction of 2-14 lesions, and 57.7% (38.7-76.7) for 26 encounters with destruction of 15+ lesions. PPV was 72.9% (63.5-82.4) for 85 encounters with a prescription of topical 5-fluorouracil. CONCLUSION: AK diagnosis codes are appropriate to use in epidemiologic and health policy research among people living with HIV and may be more reliable than destruction of pre-malignant lesion CPT codes.
PURPOSE: Actinic keratoses (AK) diagnosis, billing, and pharmacy codes have not been validated among people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), preventing use in epidemiologic and clinical research. We aimed to calculate the positive predictive value (PPV) of AK diagnosis codes, procedural codes for destruction of pre-malignant lesions, and pharmacy codes for topical 5-fluorouracil. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with HIV within the Infectious Disease clinic at the Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center from 1/1/2002 to 8/5/2017 were eligible. Patients were included if they had any of the following: encounters with a diagnosis for AK (International Classification of Diseases [ICD]-9: 702.0; ICD-10: L57.0), procedural codes for destruction of premalignant lesions (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT]: 17000, 17003, and 17004), and prescriptions for topical 5-fluorouracil. PPV and binomial 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: PPV was 91.9% (89.1-94.7) for 369 encounters with an AK diagnosis. For procedural codes, PPV was 52.6% (48.1-57.2) for 454 encounters with destruction of 1 pre-malignant lesion, 63.7% (58.4-68.9) for 322 encounters with destruction of 2-14 lesions, and 57.7% (38.7-76.7) for 26 encounters with destruction of 15+ lesions. PPV was 72.9% (63.5-82.4) for 85 encounters with a prescription of topical 5-fluorouracil. CONCLUSION: AK diagnosis codes are appropriate to use in epidemiologic and health policy research among people living with HIV and may be more reliable than destruction of pre-malignant lesion CPT codes.
Authors: Jan P Vandenbroucke; Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Peter C Gøtzsche; Cynthia D Mulrow; Stuart J Pocock; Charles Poole; James J Schlesselman; Matthias Egger Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2007-10-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Michael J Silverberg; Wendy Leyden; E Margaret Warton; Charles P Quesenberry; Eric A Engels; Maryam M Asgari Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2013-01-04 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Howa Yeung; Marissa L Baranowski; Robert A Swerlick; Suephy C Chen; Jennifer Hemingway; Danny R Hughes; Richard Duszak Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: E C Noels; L M Hollestein; S van Egmond; M Lugtenberg; L P J van Nistelrooij; P J E Bindels; J van der Lei; R S Stern; T Nijsten; M Wakkee Journal: Br J Dermatol Date: 2019-04-19 Impact factor: 9.302