National Trends in Active Surveillance for Prostate Cancer: Validation of Medicare Claims-based Algorithms - 17/09/18
Résumé |
Objective |
To better describe the real-world use of active surveillance. Active surveillance is a preferred management option for low-risk prostate cancer, yet its use outside of high-volume institutions is poorly understood. We created multiple claims-based algorithms, validated them using a robust clinical registry, and applied them to Medicare claims to describe national utilization.
Materials and Methods |
We identified men with prostate cancer from 2012-2014 in a 100% sample of Michigan Medicare data and linked them with the Michigan Urologic Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) registry. Using MUSIC treatment assignment as the standard, we determined the performance of 8 claims-based algorithms to identify men on active surveillance. We selected 3 algorithms (the most sensitive, the most specific, and a balanced algorithm incorporating age and comorbidity) and applied them to a 20% national Medicare sample to describe national trends.
Results |
We identified 1186 men with incident prostate cancer and completely linked data. Eight algorithms were tested with sensitivity ranging from 23.5% to 88.2% and specificity ranging from 93.5% to 99.1%. We found that the use of surveillance for men with incident prostate cancer increased from 2007 to 2014, nationally. However, among all men in the population, there was a large decrease in the rate of prostate cancer diagnosis and an increased or stable rate in the use of active surveillance, depending on the algorithm used. Less than 25% of men on active surveillance underwent a confirmatory prostate biopsy.
Conclusion |
We describe the performance of claims-based algorithms to identify active surveillance.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
Funding Disclosure: Funding for the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) and the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) is provided by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) as part of the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Value Partnerships program; however, the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect those of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan or any of its employees. Additional support from NCI T32CA180984 (PM), AHRQ R01HS257007 (BH), NCI R01CA168691 (VS). JMD receives salary support from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) for his roles in the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative and Michigan Value Collaborative. The views expressed in this article do not reflect the views of the federal government. |
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?