Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37128596›Full record

ArticleClinical epidemiology2023

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.

Sebastian Kinnberg Nielsen, Nina Nouhravesh, Mads Hashiba Jensen, Rawia Farah Gedde Jensen, Mads Falk Klein, Zaigham Saghir, Dorte Nielsen, Morten Schou, Morten Lamberts

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sebastian Kinnberg NielsenDepartment of Cardiology, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Nina NouhraveshDepartment of Cardiology, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mads Hashiba JensenDepartment of Cardiology, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Rawia Farah Gedde JensenDepartment of Cardiology, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mads Falk KleinDepartment of Surgery, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Zaigham SaghirDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Dorte NielsenDepartment of Oncology, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Morten SchouDepartment of Cardiology, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Morten LambertsDepartment of Cardiology, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-9827-440X
Gentofte Hospital · DKUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

active cancerDNPRepidemiologynon-active cancervalidation

Identifiers

PMID37128596
PMCPMC10148644
OpenAlexW4366992625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.