Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37708308›Full record

ArticleArchives of pathology & laboratory medicine2024

Creation of a Quality Payment Program Measure for Mismatch Repair or Microsatellite Instability Biomarker Testing Status in Colorectal, Endometrial, Gastroesophageal, or Small Bowel Carcinoma.

Gregary T Bocsi, Jennifer Laudadio, Richa Jain, Sarah M Eakin, Amarpreet Bhalla, Jonathan A Rosenberg, Jennifer K Maratt, Sonia S Kupfer, David A Leiman, Diana M Cardona

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine, 2024. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

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

10 authors.

Gregary T BocsiFrom the Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora (Bocsi).
Jennifer Laudadiothe Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock (Laudadio).
Richa JainPathology Specialists of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee (Jain).
Sarah M EakinPathology Associates of Erie, Erie, Pennsylvania (Eakin).
Amarpreet Bhallathe Department of Pathology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York (Bhalla).
Jonathan A RosenbergIllinois Gastroenterology Group, GI Alliance, Gurnee (Rosenberg).
Jennifer K Marattthe Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis (Maratt).
Sonia S Kupferthe Section of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois (Kupfer).
David A Leimanthe Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine (Leiman) and Department of Pathology (Cardona), Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.
Diana M Cardonathe Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine (Leiman) and Department of Pathology (Cardona), Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina.

Funding

FITting noninvasive testing into Lynch syndrome colorectal cancer surveillance: a multicenter, prospective trialR01CA287257 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI Fay Kastrinos, Sonia Kupfer · 2024 to 2026
$3.4M
Colonic responses to vitamin D and aspirin in African- and European-AmericansR01CA220329 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI KUPFER, SONIA · 2018 to 2022
$1.9M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA220329NCI NIH HHS R01 CA287257
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

CONTEXT.—: Quality measures that are supported by evidence-based clinical practice guidelines are preferred for assessing the quality of pathologists' practices. Careful testing of a measure ensures that scores obtained by that measure reflect the quality of a pathologist's practice. OBJECTIVE.—: To specify a new quality measure and to demonstrate through testing that it is suitable for measuring pathologists' appropriate incorporation of information regarding microsatellite instability (MSI) and/or mismatch repair (MMR) status in pathology reports for colorectal, endometrial, gastroesophageal, and small bowel carcinoma. DESIGN.—: The College of American Pathologists collaborated with the American Gastroenterological Association to specify and test the new measure. Face validity testing was used to investigate the validity of the measure. Feasibility testing was conducted to understand if data elements required by the measure specification were readily accessible. Signal-to-noise analysis was used to characterize the measure's reliability. RESULTS.—: Guideline recommendations for MSI and/or MMR testing supported specifications for the measure. Face validity testing indicated that the measure could distinguish the quality of care provided. Data elements required by the measure specification were found to be accessible, which supported the measure's feasibility. Reliability testing showed that differences in measure score were attributable to real differences in performance rather than random variation in scoring. CONCLUSIONS.—: The Mismatch Repair or Microsatellite Instability Biomarker Testing Status in Colorectal Carcinoma, Endometrial, Gastroesophageal, or Small Bowel Carcinoma measure was appropriately specified, and testing demonstrated that it is well suited for characterizing the quality of pathologists' communication of MMR and/or MSI status.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsDNA Mismatch RepairEndometrial NeoplasmsMicrosatellite InstabilityBiomarkers, TumorEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansIntestinal NeoplasmsIntestine, SmallPathology, ClinicalReproducibility of ResultsBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID37708308
PMCPMC12369274

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.