Suppr超能文献

实际死因的误诊及其对分析的影响:非小细胞肺癌的案例研究。

Misclassification of the actual causes of death and its impact on analysis: A case study in non-small cell lung cancer.

机构信息

Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Ave, 2(nd) Floor, New York, NY, 10017, United States.

出版信息

Lung Cancer. 2019 Aug;134:16-24. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2019.05.016. Epub 2019 May 16.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Cumulative incidence of lung cancer deaths (LC-CID) is an important metric to understand cancer prognosis and to determine treatment options. However, credible estimates of LC-CID rely on accurate cause-of-death coding in death certificates. Results from lung cancer screening trials estimated 15% under-reporting and 1% over-reporting of lung cancer deaths due to misclassification. This study investigated the impact of cause-of-death misclassification on the estimation of LC-CID.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with stage I/II non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry were included. LC-CID was estimated using the competing-risk approach in two ways: (1) reporting observed estimates that ignore potential cause-of-death misclassification and (2) correcting for plausible misclassification rates reported in the literature (15% under-reporting and 1% over-reporting). Bias was quantified as the difference between observed and corrected 10-year LC-CIDs: positive values indicated that observed LC-CID overestimated true LC-CID, whereas negative values indicated the opposite.

RESULTS

Among 66,179 patients, the impact of over-reporting on 10-year LC-CID was negligible across all age groups. In contrast, under-reporting resulted in substantial underestimation of 10-year LC-CID. The biases increased as age increased due to higher LC-CIDs: 10-year LC-CIDs among stage I patients 18-44, 45-59, 60-74 and ≥75 years were 25%, 32%, 41%, and 50%, respectively, and the corresponding biases given the plausible misclassification rates were -4.4%, -5.6%, -7.1%, and -8.6%. Because the observed LC-CIDs among patients with stage II disease were higher than those with stage I disease, the biases were greater among stage II patients, up to -12.5% in the oldest age group.

CONCLUSIONS

In lung cancer, LC-CID may be severely underestimated due to under-reporting of lung cancer deaths, particularly among older patients or those with late-stage disease. Future studies that involve such subpopulations should present the corrected LC-CIDs based on plausible misclassification rates alongside the observed LC-CIDs.

摘要

目的

肺癌死亡率的累积发生率(LC-CID)是了解癌症预后和确定治疗方案的重要指标。然而,准确的死因编码在死亡证明中对于可信的 LC-CID 估计至关重要。肺癌筛查试验的结果估计,由于分类错误,肺癌死亡的漏报率为 15%,误报率为 1%。本研究旨在调查死因分类错误对 LC-CID 估计的影响。

材料和方法

本研究纳入了监测、流行病学和最终结果(SEER)登记处的 I 期/II 期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者。LC-CID 使用竞争风险方法进行了两种方式的估计:(1)报告忽略潜在死因分类错误的观察估计值;(2)校正文献中报告的合理分类错误率(15%的漏报率和 1%的误报率)。偏倚被量化为观察到的和校正后的 10 年 LC-CID 之间的差异:正值表示观察到的 LC-CID 高估了真实的 LC-CID,而负值则表示相反。

结果

在 66179 名患者中,在所有年龄组中,过度报告对 10 年 LC-CID 的影响可以忽略不计。相比之下,漏报导致 10 年 LC-CID 的严重低估。由于 LC-CID 较高,偏倚随年龄增加而增加:18-44、45-59、60-74 和≥75 岁的 I 期患者的 10 年 LC-CID 分别为 25%、32%、41%和 50%,而根据合理分类错误率,对应的偏倚分别为-4.4%、-5.6%、-7.1%和-8.6%。由于 II 期患者的观察到的 LC-CID 高于 I 期患者,因此在最年长的年龄组中,偏倚更大,高达-12.5%。

结论

在肺癌中,由于肺癌死亡的漏报率较高,特别是在老年患者或晚期疾病患者中,LC-CID 可能会严重低估。涉及此类亚人群的未来研究应在报告观察到的 LC-CID 的同时,根据合理的分类错误率呈现校正后的 LC-CID。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

1
Competing risks and cancer-specific mortality: why it matters.竞争风险与癌症特异性死亡率:为何重要。
Oncotarget. 2017 Dec 28;9(7):7272-7273. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.23729. eCollection 2018 Jan 26.
5
Cancer survival: an overview of measures, uses, and interpretation.癌症生存率:测量方法、用途及解读概述
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2014 Nov;2014(49):145-86. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgu024.
9
Should relative survival be used with lung cancer data?是否应使用肺癌数据的相对生存率?
Br J Cancer. 2012 May 22;106(11):1854-9. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2012.182. Epub 2012 May 3.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验