3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Validity of a New Procedure-Based Definition of Cancer Status in Patients with Breast-, Lung- and Colorectal Cancer in the Danish National Patient Registry

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background/Aim

          The Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) provides unique epidemiological insight, but often lacks granular data. We propose a procedure-based definition of cancer status in patients with breast-, lung- and colorectal cancer, which can be applied to administrative health databases. New definitions of cancer status are needed as mortality and morbidity are closely linked to cancer status, yet most studies only use duration since cancer diagnosis as a severity marker. The aim of the study was to validate a new pragmatic definition.

          Methods

          Medical journals of 600 patients, with breast-, lung- and colorectal cancer from the Department of Oncology at Herlev-Gentofte Hospital were retrospectively reviewed. We defined active cancer as a cancer diagnosis, not followed by a potentially curative procedure within 6 months of the diagnosis. The remaining patients were characterized as having non-active cancer. This dichotomization was then compared to a cancer status assessment based on treatment received and paraclinical test such as their first post-procedural control scan. Based on this comparison, we calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) of our definitions of active and non-active cancer.

          Results

          The calculated PPVs for active breast-, lung- and colorectal cancer were 87% (CI 95%: 0.74–0.99), 91% (CI 95%: 0.87–0.96) and 82% (CI 95%: 0.73–0.91). The PPVs for non-active breast-, lung- and colorectal cancer were 95% (CI 95%: 0.92–0.99), 91% (CI 95%: 0.82–0.99) and 73% (CI 95%: 0.66–0.81), respectively.

          Conclusion

          We found an overall high PPV for both active and non-active cancer across all three types of cancer.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Cancer Statistics, 2021

          Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths in the United States and compiles the most recent data on population-based cancer occurrence. Incidence data (through 2017) were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data (through 2018) were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2021, 1,898,160 new cancer cases and 608,570 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States. After increasing for most of the 20th century, the cancer death rate has fallen continuously from its peak in 1991 through 2018, for a total decline of 31%, because of reductions in smoking and improvements in early detection and treatment. This translates to 3.2 million fewer cancer deaths than would have occurred if peak rates had persisted. Long-term declines in mortality for the 4 leading cancers have halted for prostate cancer and slowed for breast and colorectal cancers, but accelerated for lung cancer, which accounted for almost one-half of the total mortality decline from 2014 to 2018. The pace of the annual decline in lung cancer mortality doubled from 3.1% during 2009 through 2013 to 5.5% during 2014 through 2018 in men, from 1.8% to 4.4% in women, and from 2.4% to 5% overall. This trend coincides with steady declines in incidence (2.2%-2.3%) but rapid gains in survival specifically for nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). For example, NSCLC 2-year relative survival increased from 34% for persons diagnosed during 2009 through 2010 to 42% during 2015 through 2016, including absolute increases of 5% to 6% for every stage of diagnosis; survival for small cell lung cancer remained at 14% to 15%. Improved treatment accelerated progress against lung cancer and drove a record drop in overall cancer mortality, despite slowing momentum for other common cancers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Cancer statistics for the year 2020: An overview

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The Danish National Patient Registry: a review of content, data quality, and research potential

              Background The Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) is one of the world’s oldest nationwide hospital registries and is used extensively for research. Many studies have validated algorithms for identifying health events in the DNPR, but the reports are fragmented and no overview exists. Objectives To review the content, data quality, and research potential of the DNPR. Methods We examined the setting, history, aims, content, and classification systems of the DNPR. We searched PubMed and the Danish Medical Journal to create a bibliography of validation studies. We included also studies that were referenced in retrieved papers or known to us beforehand. Methodological considerations related to DNPR data were reviewed. Results During 1977–2012, the DNPR registered 8,085,603 persons, accounting for 7,268,857 inpatient, 5,953,405 outpatient, and 5,097,300 emergency department contacts. The DNPR provides nationwide longitudinal registration of detailed administrative and clinical data. It has recorded information on all patients discharged from Danish nonpsychiatric hospitals since 1977 and on psychiatric inpatients and emergency department and outpatient specialty clinic contacts since 1995. For each patient contact, one primary and optional secondary diagnoses are recorded according to the International Classification of Diseases. The DNPR provides a data source to identify diseases, examinations, certain in-hospital medical treatments, and surgical procedures. Long-term temporal trends in hospitalization and treatment rates can be studied. The positive predictive values of diseases and treatments vary widely (<15%–100%). The DNPR data are linkable at the patient level with data from other Danish administrative registries, clinical registries, randomized controlled trials, population surveys, and epidemiologic field studies – enabling researchers to reconstruct individual life and health trajectories for an entire population. Conclusion The DNPR is a valuable tool for epidemiological research. However, both its strengths and limitations must be considered when interpreting research results, and continuous validation of its clinical data is essential.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Clin Epidemiol
                Clin Epidemiol
                clep
                Clinical Epidemiology
                Dove
                1179-1349
                25 April 2023
                2023
                : 15
                : 483-491
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Cardiology, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital , Copenhagen, Denmark
                [2 ]Department of Surgery, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital , Copenhagen, Denmark
                [3 ]Department of Respiratory Medicine, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital , Copenhagen, Denmark
                [4 ]Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen , Copenhagen, Denmark
                [5 ]Department of Oncology, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital , Copenhagen, Denmark
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Sebastian Kinnberg Nielsen, Department of Cardiology, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital , Gentofte Hospitalsvej 1, Opgang 6, 3. sal 2900, Hellerup, Copenhagen, Denmark, Tel +45 40479556, Email Sebastian.Kinnberg.Nielsen03@regionh.dk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9827-440X
                Article
                401554
                10.2147/CLEP.S401554
                10148644
                8d40a5d5-f54f-4945-97b5-819751b35102
                © 2023 Nielsen et al.

                This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms ( https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).

                History
                : 14 December 2022
                : 01 April 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 2, References: 23, Pages: 9
                Categories
                Original Research

                Public health
                active cancer,non-active cancer,dnpr,validation,epidemiology
                Public health
                active cancer, non-active cancer, dnpr, validation, epidemiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article