Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41665916›Full record

ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2026

Agreement between Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results- and Medicare Claims-Derived Uterine Cancer Treatment Data.

Ashley S Felix, Jiahao Ping, Caitlin E Meade, Simran A Kanal, Qinhan Hu, Tasleem J Padamsee, Macarius M Donneyong, Allison M Quick, Anusha M Vable, Kemi M Doll and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2026. 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

11 authors.

Ashley S FelixDepartment of Epidemiology and Prevention, Division of Public Health Sciences, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0001-8347-9018
Jiahao PingDepartment of Statistics, College of Arts and Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.ORCID 0009-0006-9016-0412
Caitlin E MeadeDepartment of Epidemiology and Prevention, Division of Public Health Sciences, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.ORCID 0009-0005-6417-1399
Simran A KanalDepartment of Epidemiology and Prevention, Division of Public Health Sciences, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.ORCID 0009-0002-6712-6153
Qinhan HuDivision of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.ORCID 0009-0001-6622-1354
Tasleem J PadamseeDivision of Health Services Management and Policy, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.ORCID 0000-0001-6644-8084
Macarius M DonneyongDivision of Health Services Management and Policy, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.ORCID 0000-0003-2710-913X
Allison M QuickDepartment of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute, Columbus, Ohio.ORCID 0000-0002-2260-6586
Anusha M VableSchool of Public Health, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri.ORCID 0000-0002-2202-0294
Kemi M DollDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.ORCID 0000-0002-3040-2962
Jennifer A SinnottDepartment of Statistics, College of Arts and Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.ORCID 0000-0001-5472-9671

Funding

Understanding multilevel drivers of gaps in guideline-concordant endometrial cancer treatment in high-risk populationsR37CA266204 · NCI · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Ashley S. Felix · 2022 to 2026
$2.3M
National Cancer Institute (NCI) R37CA266204NCI NIH HHS HHSN261201800009CNCI NIH HHS HHSN261201800009INCI NIH HHS HHSN261201800015CNCI NIH HHS HHSN261201800015INCI NIH HHS HHSN261201800032CNCI NIH HHS HHSN261201800032INCI NIH HHS R37 CA266204
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the prevalent use of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data to study uterine cancer treatment patterns and survival, concordance between SEER and Medicare claims has not been a focus of prior research. We assessed the agreement between SEER and Medicare claims, predictors of disagreement between sources, and associations between treatment (identified in SEER vs. Medicare) and survival.

methodsPatients diagnosed with uterine cancer between 2000 and 2019 were identified using the SEER-Medicare linked database. We calculated kappa statistics to assess the agreement between the two data sources for receipt of hysterectomy with or without bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO), hysterectomy with BSO, lymphadenectomy, external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), vaginal brachytherapy (VBT), and chemotherapy. For each treatment type, we examined temporal trends in the kappa and used multivariable-adjusted logistic regression to examine predictors of disagreement. Treatment hazard ratios in Cox proportional hazards regression models using treatment information from SEER versus Medicare were compared.

resultsFor each treatment, we excluded patients with unknown SEER information, resulting in variable sample sizes. Agreement was lowest for hysterectomy with BSO (kappa = 0.71) and highest for lymphadenectomy and chemotherapy (kappas = 0.85). Temporal variation was evident, with lymphadenectomy, EBRT, and VBT agreement dropping in recent years. Black race, younger age at diagnosis, high-risk histology, and advanced stage were associated with higher odds of disagreement for certain treatments. Associations between treatment identified in SEER versus Medicare and survival outcomes were similar.

conclusionsTreatment agreement between SEER and Medicare was high. IMPACT: Our results support the use of both data sources for uterine cancer treatment-survival analyses.

Indexed as

MedicareSEER ProgramUterine NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansHysterectomyUnited States

Identifiers

PMID41665916
PMCPMC12976662

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.