ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2024
Extraction of Unstructured Electronic Health Records to Evaluate Glioblastoma Treatment Patterns.
Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enabling Just-in-Time Clinical Oncology Analysis With Large Language Models: Feasibility and Validation Study Using Unstructured Synthetic Data.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- Assessing the Data Quality Dimensions of Surgical Oncology Cohorts in theJCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeData on lines of therapy (LOTs) for cancer treatment are important for clinical oncology research, but LOTs are not explicitly recorded in electronic health records (EHRs). We present an efficient approach for clinical data abstraction and a flexible algorithm to derive LOTs from EHR-based medication data on patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM).
methodsNonclinicians were trained to abstract the diagnosis of GBM from EHRs, and their accuracy was compared with abstraction performed by clinicians. The resulting data were used to build a cohort of patients with confirmed GBM diagnosis. An algorithm was developed to derive LOTs using structured medication data, accounting for the addition and discontinuation of therapies and drug class. Descriptive statistics were calculated and time-to-next-treatment (TTNT) analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method.
resultsTreating clinicians as the gold standard, nonclinicians abstracted GBM diagnosis with a sensitivity of 0.98, specificity 1.00, positive predictive value 1.00, and negative predictive value 0.90, suggesting that nonclinician abstraction of GBM diagnosis was comparable with clinician abstraction. Of 693 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of GBM, 246 patients contained structured information about the types of medications received. Of them, 165 (67.1%) received a first-line therapy (1L) of temozolomide, and the median TTNT from the start of 1L was 179 days.
conclusionWe described a workflow for extracting diagnosis of GBM and LOT from EHR data that combines nonclinician abstraction with algorithmic processing, demonstrating comparable accuracy with clinician abstraction and highlighting the potential for scalable and efficient EHR-based oncology research.
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.