Article

Should cause of death from the death certificate be used to examine cancer-specific survival? A study of patients with distant stage disease.

Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 27599-7435, USA.
Cancer Investigation (Impact Factor: 2.06). 08/2010; 28(7):758-64. DOI: 10.3109/07357901003630959
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Death certificates are used to classify cause of death for studies of cancer survival and mortality. Using data from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program, we evaluated cause of death (site-specific, cancer cause-specific, or other cause of death) for 229,181 patients with distant stage disease during 1994-2003 who died by 2005. Agreement between coded cause of death and initial diagnosis was 85% in patients with only one primary and 64% in patients with more than one primary. Our findings support the usefulness of site and cancer cause-specific causes of death reported on the death certificate for distant stage patients with a single cancer.

0 Followers
 · 
90 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Death certificates are a primary data source for assessing the population burden of diseases; however, there are concerns regarding their accuracy. Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG) coding of a terminal hospitalization may provide an alternative view. We analyzed the rate and patterns of disagreement between death certificate data and hospital claims for patients who died during an inpatient hospitalization. Methods We studied respondents from the Health and Retirement Study (a nationally representative sample of older Americans who had an inpatient death documented in the linked Medicare claims from 1993–2007). Causes of death abstracted from death certificates were aggregated to the standard National Center for Health Statistics List of 50 Rankable Causes of Death. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)-DRGs were manually aggregated into a parallel classification. We then compared the two systems via 2×2, focusing on concordance. Our primary analysis was agreement between the two data sources, assessed with percentages and Cohen's kappa statistic. Results 2074 inpatient deaths were included in our analysis. 36.6% of death certificate cause-of-death codes agreed with the reason for the terminal hospitalization in the Medicare claims at the broad category level; when re-classifying DRGs without clear alignment as agreements, the concordance only increased to 61%. Overall Kappa was 0.21, or “fair.” Death certificates in this cohort redemonstrated the conventional top 3 causes of death as diseases of the heart, malignancy, and cerebrovascular disease. However, hospitalization claims data showed infections, diseases of the heart, and cerebrovascular disease as the most common diagnoses for the same terminal hospitalizations. Conclusion There are significant differences between Medicare claims and death certificate data in assigning cause of death for inpatients. The importance of infections as proximal causes of death is underestimated by current death certificate-based strategies.
    PLoS ONE 05/2014; 9(5):e97714. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0097714 · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose/Objectives(s): Early-stage endometrial cancer patients are at higher risk of noncancer mortality than of cancer mortality. Competing event models incorporating co-morbidity could help identify women most likely to benefit from treatment intensification. Methods and Materials: 67,397 women with stage I-II endometrioid adenocarcinoma after total hysterectomy diagnosed from 1988 to 2009 were identified in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) and linked SEER-Medicare databases. Using demographic and clinical information, including comorbidity, we sought to develop and validate a risk score to predict the incidence of competing mortality. Results: In the validation cohort, increasing competing mortality risk score was associated with increased risk of noncancer mortality (subdistribution hazard ratio [SDHR], 1.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.60-2.30) and decreased risk of endometrial cancer mortality (SDHR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.55-0.78). Controlling for other variables, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) Z1 (SDHR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.45-1.82) and CCI > 1 (SDHR, 3.31; 95% CI, 2.74-4.01) were associated with increased risk of noncancer mortality. The 10-year cumulative incidences of competing mortality within low-, medium-, and high-risk strata were 27.3% (95% CI, 25.2%-29.4%), 34.6% (95% CI, 32.5%-36.7%), and 50.3% (95% CI, 48.2%-52.6%), respectively. With increasing competing mortality risk score, we observed a significant decline in omega (omega), indicating a diminishing likelihood of benefit from treatment intensification. Conclusion: Comorbidity and other factors influence the risk of competing mortality among patients with early-stage endometrial cancer. Competing event models could improve our ability to identify patients likely to benefit from treatment intensification. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc.
    International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics 07/2014; 89(4):888-98. DOI:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.03.047 · 4.18 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives To quantify end-of-life (EOL) medical costs for adult Medicaid beneficiaries diagnosed with cancer.Data SourcesWe linked Medicaid administrative data with 2000–2003 cancer registry data to identify 3,512 adult Medicaid beneficiaries who died after a cancer diagnosis and matched them to a cohort of beneficiaries without cancer who died during the same period.Study DesignWe used multivariable regression analysis to estimate incremental per-person EOL cost after controlling for beneficiaries' age, race/ethnicity, sex, cancer site, and state of residence.Principal FindingsEnd-of-life costs during the final 4 months of life were about $10,000 higher for Medicaid cancer patients than for those without cancer. Medicaid cancer patients are more intensive users of inpatient and ambulatory services than are Medicaid patients without cancer. Medicaid cancer patients who die soon after diagnosis have higher costs of care and use inpatient services more intensely than do Medicaid patients without cancer.Conclusions Medicaid cancer patients incur substantially higher EOL costs than noncancer patients. This increased cost may reflect the cost of palliative care. Future studies should assess the types and timing of services provided to Medicaid cancer patients at the EOL.
    Health Services Research 11/2014; DOI:10.1111/1475-6773.12259 · 2.49 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
0 Downloads
Available from