ArticleBMC health services research2025
Assigning cancer stage to patients using administrative claims data: an example for colon and rectal cancers.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study sought to design predictive machine learning models to assign stage at diagnosis to colorectal cancer patients using only administrative claims data. The models were subsequently applied to Medicare fee for service (FFS) and commercially insured populations to assess the relationship between healthcare costs and stage at diagnosis.
methodsFFS patients diagnosed with colon or rectal cancer tumors in 2016 or 2017 were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked dataset. Patients were assigned a cancer stage via multinomial logistic regression using treatment and demographic variables derived from claims data. The models were applied to data from colorectal cancer patients observed in a commercially insured population, and cumulative allowed costs for one to three years post-diagnosis were summarized by stage and compared across insurance coverages (FFS and commercial).
resultsThe predictive cancer staging models achieved an overall staging accuracy of 83% (colon) and 69% (rectal) for newly diagnosed patients. When used to examine healthcare costs by stage, costs for patients diagnosed at stages IIC/III/IV were 2-4x higher than those of patients diagnosed at stages 0/I/IIA/IIB. Average costs for commercially insured patients were 30-40% higher than Medicare patients' costs.
conclusionsNovel multinomial logistic regression models successfully predicted incident colorectal cancer patients' stages at diagnosis using administrative claims data alone. When applied to FFS and commercial populations, use of model-predicted staging confirmed that colorectal cancer patients' costs increase substantially as stage at diagnosis increases. This suggests earlier diagnosis of colorectal cancer could reduce treatment costs.
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.