Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37958275›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Are Tumor Marker Tests Applied Appropriately in Clinical Practice? A Healthcare Claims Data Analysis.

Sabrina M Stollberg, Markus Näpflin, Michael Nagler, Carola A Huber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Letter to the editor.Clinical oral investigations · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Observational
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

4 authors.

Sabrina M StollbergDepartment of Health Sciences, Helsana Insurance Group, 8081 Zurich, Switzerland.
Markus NäpflinDepartment of Health Sciences, Helsana Insurance Group, 8081 Zurich, Switzerland.
Michael NaglerDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-4319-2367
Carola A HuberDepartment of Health Sciences, Helsana Insurance Group, 8081 Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tumor markers (TM) are crucial in the monitoring of cancer treatment. However, inappropriate requests for screening reasons have a high risk of false positive and negative findings, which can lead to patient anxiety and unnecessary follow-up examinations. We aimed to assess the appropriateness of TM testing in outpatient practice in Switzerland. We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on healthcare claims data. Patients who had received at least one out of seven TM tests (CEA, CA19-9, CA125, CA15-3, CA72-4, Calcitonin, or NSE) between 2018 and 2021 were analyzed. Appropriate determinations were defined as a request with a corresponding cancer-related diagnosis or intervention. Appropriateness of TM determination by patient characteristics and prescriber specialty was estimated by using multivariate analyses. A total of 51,395 TM determinations in 36,537 patients were included. An amount of 41.6% of all TM were determined appropriately. General practitioners most often determined TM (44.3%) and had the lowest number of appropriate requests (27.8%). A strong predictor for appropriate determinations were requests by medical oncologists. A remarkable proportion of TM testing was performed inappropriately, particularly in the primary care setting. Our results suggest that a considerable proportion of the population is at risk for various harms associated with misinterpretations of TM test results.

Indexed as

guideline adherencehealthcare claims datainappropriatenesslaboratory testingoverutilizationtumor marker determination

Identifiers

PMID37958275
PMCPMC10648915

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.