ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2019
Classifying Stage IV Lung Cancer From Health Care Claims: A Comparison of Multiple Analytic Approaches.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Estimating Breast Cancer Recurrence at the Population Level With Administrative Data.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2020Pooled it
- Automated classification of lung cancer subtypes cells using microscopic images and ensembled deep learning architectures.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Assigning cancer stage to patients using administrative claims data: an example for colon and rectal cancers.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Development and Optimization of a Bladder Cancer Algorithm Using SEER-Medicare Claims Data.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2024Article
- Development of a Machine Learning Model to Identify Colorectal Cancer Stage in Medicare Claims.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2023Article
- Practice-Level Variation in Molecular Testing and Use of Targeted Therapy for Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Colorectal Cancer.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Uncertainty in lung cancer stage for survival estimation via set-valued classification.Statistics in medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Data Integration to Improve Real-world Health Outcomes Research for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the United States: Descriptive and Qualitative Exploration.JMIR cancer · 2021Article
- Influence of respiratory function training under the mode of mutual-assisted patients on postoperative pulmonary infection and immune function on lung cancer.American journal of translational research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeCancer stage is a key determinant of outcomes; however, stage is not available in claims-based data sources used for real-world evaluations. We compare multiple methods for classifying lung cancer stage from claims data.
methodsOur study used the linked SEER-Medicare data. The patient samples included fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with lung cancer from 2010 to 2011 (development cohort) and 2012 to 2013 (validation cohort) who received chemotherapy. Classification algorithms considered Medicare Part A and B claims for care in the 3 months before and after chemotherapy initiation. We developed a clinical algorithm to predict stage IV (
resultsDevelopment and validation cohorts included 14,760 and 14,620 patients with lung cancer, respectively. Validation analyses assessed clinical, random forest, and simple logistic regression algorithms. The best performing classifier within the development cohort was the random forests, but this performance was not replicated in validation analysis. Logistic regression had stable performance across cohorts. Compared with the clinical algorithm, the 14-variable logistic regression algorithm demonstrated higher accuracy in both the development (77%
conclusionMachine learning algorithms have potential to improve lung cancer stage classification but may be prone to overfitting. Use of ensembles, cross-validation, and external validation can aid generalizability. Degradation of accuracy between development and validation cohorts suggests the need for caution in implementing machine learning in research or care delivery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.