Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25161127›Full record

ArticleJournal of oncology practice2015

Preliminary Development and Evaluation of an Algorithm to Identify Breast Cancer Chemotherapy Toxicities Using Electronic Medical Records and Administrative Data.

Jeanne S Mandelblatt, Karl Huang, Solomon B Makgoeng, Gheorghe Luta, Jun X Song, Michelle Tallarico, Janise M Roh, Julie R Munneke, Cathie A Houlston, Meghan E McGuckin and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oncology practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The association between sociodemographic, clinical, and potentially preventive therapies with oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy in colorectal cancer patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Accuracy of Adverse Event Ascertainment in Clinical Trials for Pediatric Acute Myeloid Leukemia.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2016
    Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jeanne S MandelblattGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY Mandelbj@georgetown.edu.
Karl HuangGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Solomon B MakgoengGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Gheorghe LutaGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Jun X SongGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Michelle TallaricoGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Janise M RohGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Julie R MunnekeGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Cathie A HoulstonGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Meghan E McGuckinGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Ling CaiGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Grace Clarke HillyerGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Dawn L HershmanGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Alfred I NeugutGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Claudine IsaacsGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Larry KushiGeorgetown University Medical Center; Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC; Kaiser Permanente Medical Group, Oakland, CA; and Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY.
Georgetown University · USGeorgetown University Medical Center · US

Funding

Collaborations and NCORP Collective ManagementUG1CA189823 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI Evanthia Galanis, Olwen Hahn · 2014 to 2026
$120.6M
Tissue Culture Shared ResourceP30CA051008 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI Sharon Gail Levy · 1990 to 2026
$71.5M
Prospective Study of Breast Cancer SurvivorshipR01CA105274 · NCI · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI KUSHI, LAWRENCE H · 2004 to 2014
$19.9M
CRN4: Cancer Research Resources & Collaboration in Integrated Health Care SystemsU24CA171524 · NCI · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI KUSHI, LAWRENCE H · 2012 to 2016
$16.0M
Using Physiological Age to Predict Chemotherapy ToxicityR01CA124924 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI MANDELBLATT, JEANNE · 2007 to 2011
$2.9M
Cancer Control at the Intersection of Aging ResearchK05CA096940 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI MANDELBLATT, JEANNE · 2002 to 2011
$1.5M
NCI NIH HHS K05 CA096940NCI NIH HHS P30 CA051008NCI NIH HHS R01 CA105274NCI NIH HHS R01 CA124924NCI NIH HHS U24 CA171524NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA189823
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBreast cancer chemotherapy toxicity is not well documented outside of randomized trials. We developed and conducted preliminary evaluation of an algorithm to detect grade 3 and 4 toxicities using electronic data from a large integrated managed care organization.

methodsThe algorithm used administrative, pharmacy, and electronic data from outpatient, emergency room, and inpatient records of 99 women diagnosed with breast cancer from 2006 to 2009 who underwent chemotherapy. Data were abstracted for 12 months post-treatment initiation (24 months for trastuzumab recipients). An oncology nurse independently blindly reviewed records; these results were the "gold standard." Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for overall toxicity, categories of toxicities, and toxicity by age or regimen. The algorithm was applied to an independent sample of 1,575 patients with breast cancer diagnosed during the study period to estimate prevalence rates.

resultsThe overall sensitivity for detecting chemotherapy-related toxicity was 89% (95% CI, 77% to 95%). The highest sensitivity was for identification of hematologic toxicities (97%; 95% CI, 84% to 99%). There were good sensitivities for infectious toxicity, but rates dropped for GI and neurological toxicities. Specificity was high within each category (89% to 99%), but when combined to measure any toxicity, it was lower (70%; 95% CI, 57% to 81%). When applied to an independent chemotherapy sample, the algorithm estimates a 26% rate of hematologic toxicity; rates were higher among patients age ≥ 65 years versus less than 65 years.

conclusionsIf validated in other samples and health care settings, algorithms to capture toxicity could be useful in comparative and cost-effectiveness evaluations of community practice-delivered treatment.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsElectronic Health RecordsAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBreast NeoplasmsCaliforniaFemaleHumansManaged Care ProgramsMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID25161127
PMCPMC4295421
OpenAlexW2127005710

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.