Administrative data algorithms to identify second breast cancer events following early-stage invasive breast cancer.

Group Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Ave, Ste. 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USA.
CancerSpectrum Knowledge Environment (Impact Factor: 15.16). 04/2012; 104(12):931-40. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djs233
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Studies of breast cancer outcomes rely on the identification of second breast cancer events (recurrences and second breast primary tumors). Cancer registries often do not capture recurrences, and chart abstraction can be infeasible or expensive. An alternative is using administrative health-care data to identify second breast cancer events; however, these algorithms must be validated against a gold standard.
We developed algorithms using data from 3152 women in an integrated health-care system who were diagnosed with stage I or II breast cancer in 1993-2006. Medical record review served as the gold standard for second breast cancer events. Administrative data used in algorithm development included procedures, diagnoses, prescription fills, and cancer registry records. We randomly divided the cohort into training and testing samples and used a classification and regression tree analysis to build algorithms for classifying women as having or not having a second breast cancer event. We created several algorithms for researchers to use based on the relative importance of sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) in future studies.
The algorithm with high specificity and PPV had 89% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI] = 84% to 92%), 99% specificity (95% CI = 98% to 99%), and 90% PPV (95% CI = 86% to 94%); the high-sensitivity algorithm had 96% sensitivity (95% CI = 93% to 98%), 95% specificity (95% CI = 94% to 96%), and 74% PPV (95% CI = 68% to 78%).
Algorithms based on administrative data can identify second breast cancer events with high sensitivity, specificity, and PPV. The algorithms presented here promote efficient outcomes research, allowing researchers to prioritize sensitivity, specificity, or PPV in identifying second breast cancer events.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines discourage the use of tumor marker assessment for routine surveillance in nonmetastatic breast cancer, their use in practice is uncertain. Our objective was to determine use of tumor marker tests such as carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 15-3/CA 27.29 and associated Medicare costs in early-stage breast cancer survivors.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 10/2014; 33(2). DOI:10.1200/JCO.2014.55.5409 · 17.88 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective To develop and validate Medicare claims-based approaches for identifying abnormal screening mammography interpretation.Data SourcesMammography data and linked Medicare claims for 387,709 mammograms performed from 1999 to 2005 within the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC).Study DesignSplit-sample validation of algorithms based on claims for breast imaging or biopsy following screening mammography.Data Extraction Methods Medicare claims and BCSC mammography data were pooled at a central Statistical Coordinating Center.Principal FindingsPresence of claims for subsequent imaging or biopsy had sensitivity of 74.9 percent (95 percent confidence interval [CI], 74.1–75.6) and specificity of 99.4 percent (95 percent CI, 99.4–99.5). A classification and regression tree improved sensitivity to 82.5 percent (95 percent CI, 81.9–83.2) but decreased specificity (96.6 percent, 95 percent CI, 96.6–96.8).Conclusions Medicare claims may be a feasible data source for research or quality improvement efforts addressing high rates of abnormal screening mammography.
    Health Services Research 06/2014; 50(1). DOI:10.1111/1475-6773.12194 · 2.49 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To examine the validity of claims data to identify colorectal cancer (CRC) recurrence and determine the extent to which misclassification of recurrence status affects estimates of its association with overall survival in a population-based administrative database. We calculated the accuracy of claims data relative to medical records from one large tertiary hospital to identify CRC recurrence. We estimated the effect of misclassifying recurrence on survival by applying these findings to the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data. Of 174 eligible CRC patients identified through medical records, 32 (18.4%) had a recurrence. A claims-based algorithm of secondary malignancy codes yielded a sensitivity of 81% and specificity of 99% for identifying recurrence. Agreement between data sources was almost perfect (kappa: 0.86). In a model unadjusted for misclassification, CRC patients with recurrence were 3.04 times (95% confidence interval: 2.92-3.17) more likely to die of any cause than those without recurrence. In the corrected model, CRC patients with recurrence were 3.47 times (95% confidence interval: 3.06-4.14) more likely to die than those without recurrence. Identifying recurrence in CRC patients using claims data is feasible with moderate sensitivity and high specificity. Future studies can use this algorithm with Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data to study treatment patterns and outcomes of CRC patients with recurrence. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Annals of Epidemiology 01/2015; 25(4). DOI:10.1016/j.annepidem.2015.01.005 · 2.15 Impact Factor