Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
JCO Clin Cancer Inform ; 7: e2300063, 2023 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37910824

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Lung cancer screening (LCS) guidelines in the United States recommend LCS for those age 50-80 years with at least 20 pack-years smoking history who currently smoke or quit within the last 15 years. We tested the performance of simple smoking-related criteria derived from electronic health record (EHR) data and developed and tested the performance of a multivariable model in predicting LCS eligibility. METHODS: Analyses were completed within the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process Lung Consortium (PROSPR-Lung). In our primary validity analyses, the reference standard LCS eligibility was based on self-reported smoking data collected via survey. Within one PROSPR-Lung health system, we used a training data set and penalized multivariable logistic regression using the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator to select EHR-based variables into the prediction model including demographics, smoking history, diagnoses, and prescription medications. A separate test data set assessed model performance. We also conducted external validation analysis in a separate health system and reported AUC, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy metrics associated with the Youden Index. RESULTS: There were 14,214 individuals with survey data to assess LCS eligibility in primary analyses. The overall performance for assigning LCS eligibility status as measured by the AUC values at the two health systems was 0.940 and 0.938. At the Youden Index cutoff value, performance metrics were as follows: accuracy, 0.855 and 0.895; sensitivity, 0.886 and 0.920; specificity, 0.896 and 0.850; PPV, 0.357 and 0.444; and NPV, 0.988 and 0.992. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that health systems can use an EHR-derived multivariable prediction model to aid in the identification of those who may be eligible for LCS.


Asunto(s)
Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Fumar/efectos adversos , Fumar/epidemiología , Pulmón
2.
JCO Clin Cancer Inform ; 3: 1-10, 2019 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31487201

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To evaluate health care systems for the availability of population-level data on the frequency of use and results of clinical molecular marker tests to inform precision cancer care. METHODS: We assessed cancer-related molecular marker test data availability across 12 US health care systems in the Cancer Research Network. Overall, these systems provide care to a diverse population of more than 12 million people in the United States. We performed qualitative analyses of test data availability for five blood-based protein, nine germline, and 14 tissue-based tumor marker tests in each health care system's electronic health record and tumor registry using key informants, test code lists, and manual review of data types and output. We then performed quantitative analyses to estimate the proportion of patients with cancer with test utilization data and results for specific molecular marker tests. RESULTS: Health systems were able to systematically capture population-level data on all five blood protein markers, six of 14 tissue-based tumor markers, and none of the nine germline markers. Successful, systematic data capture was achievable for tests with electronic data feeds for test results (blood protein markers) or through prior manual abstraction by tumor registrars (select tumor-based markers). For test results stored in scanned image files (particularly germline and tumor marker tests), information on which test was performed and test results was not readily accessible in an electronic format. CONCLUSION: Even in health care systems with sophisticated electronic health records, there were few codified data elements available for evaluating precision cancer medicine test use and results at the population level. Health care organizations should establish standards for electronic reporting of precision medicine tests to expedite cancer research and facilitate the implementation of precision medicine approaches.


Asunto(s)
Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Biomarcadores de Tumor , Recolección de Datos , Atención a la Salud , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Humanos , Biopsia Líquida , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Molecular , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/etiología , Neoplasias/terapia , Medicina de Precisión , Vigilancia en Salud Pública , Investigación , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA