Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2022
Identifying monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance from electronic health records.
ОбзорСтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tanenbaum Hilary C, Birmann Brenda M, Bertrand Kimberly A, Teras Lauren R, Krishnan Amrita Y, Pourhassan Hoda, Goldsmith Scott, Cannavale Kimberly, Wang Sophia S, Chao Chun R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) precedes multiple myeloma (MM). Use of electronic health records may facilitate large-scale epidemiologic research to elucidate risk factors for the progression of MGUS to MM or other lymphoid malignancies.
AIMS: We evaluated the accuracy of an electronic health records-based approach for identifying clinically diagnosed MGUS cases for inclusion in studies of patient outcomes/ progression risk.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Data were retrieved from Kaiser Permanente Southern California's comprehensive electronic health records, which contain documentation of all outpatient and inpatient visits, laboratory tests, diagnosis codes and a cancer registry. We ascertained potential MGUS cases diagnosed between 2008 and 2014 using the presence of an MGUS ICD-9 diagnosis code (273.1). We initially excluded those diagnosed with MM within 6 months after MGUS diagnosis, then subsequently those with any lymphoid malignancy diagnosis from 2007 to 2014. We reviewed medical charts for 100 randomly selected potential cases for evidence of a physician diagnosis of MGUS, which served as our gold standard for case confirmation. To assess sensitivity, we also investigated the presence of the ICD-9 code in the records of 40 randomly selected and chart review-confirmed MGUS cases among patients with a laboratory report of elevated circulating monoclonal (M-) protein (a key test for MGUS diagnosis) and no subsequent lymphoid malignancy (as described above). The positive predictive value (PPV) for the ICD-9 code was 98%. All MGUS cases confirmed by chart review also had confirmatory laboratory test results. Of the confirmed cases first identified via M-protein test results, 88% also had the ICD-9 diagnosis code.
CONCLUSION: The diagnosis code-based approach has excellent PPV and likely high sensitivity for detecting clinically diagnosed MGUS. The generalizability of this approach outside an integrated healthcare system warrants further evaluation.
AIMS: We evaluated the accuracy of an electronic health records-based approach for identifying clinically diagnosed MGUS cases for inclusion in studies of patient outcomes/ progression risk.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Data were retrieved from Kaiser Permanente Southern California's comprehensive electronic health records, which contain documentation of all outpatient and inpatient visits, laboratory tests, diagnosis codes and a cancer registry. We ascertained potential MGUS cases diagnosed between 2008 and 2014 using the presence of an MGUS ICD-9 diagnosis code (273.1). We initially excluded those diagnosed with MM within 6 months after MGUS diagnosis, then subsequently those with any lymphoid malignancy diagnosis from 2007 to 2014. We reviewed medical charts for 100 randomly selected potential cases for evidence of a physician diagnosis of MGUS, which served as our gold standard for case confirmation. To assess sensitivity, we also investigated the presence of the ICD-9 code in the records of 40 randomly selected and chart review-confirmed MGUS cases among patients with a laboratory report of elevated circulating monoclonal (M-) protein (a key test for MGUS diagnosis) and no subsequent lymphoid malignancy (as described above). The positive predictive value (PPV) for the ICD-9 code was 98%. All MGUS cases confirmed by chart review also had confirmatory laboratory test results. Of the confirmed cases first identified via M-protein test results, 88% also had the ICD-9 diagnosis code.
CONCLUSION: The diagnosis code-based approach has excellent PPV and likely high sensitivity for detecting clinically diagnosed MGUS. The generalizability of this approach outside an integrated healthcare system warrants further evaluation.