Cause of death for patients with breast cancer: discordance between death certificates and medical files, and impact on survival estimates.
Breast cancer
Cause of death
Cause-specific survival
Death certificates
Misclassification
Relative survival
Journal
Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique
ISSN: 0778-7367
Titre abrégé: Arch Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9208826
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 Jun 2021
23 Jun 2021
Historique:
received:
08
02
2021
accepted:
11
06
2021
entrez:
24
6
2021
pubmed:
25
6
2021
medline:
25
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Registration and coding of cause of death is prone to error since determining the exact underlying condition leading directly to death is challenging. In this study, causes of death from the death certificates were compared to patients' medical files interpreted by experts at University Hospitals Leuven (UHL), to assess concordance between sources and its impact on cancer survival assessment. Breast cancer patients treated at UHL (2009-2014) (follow-up until December 31st 2016) were included in this study. Cause of death was obtained from death certificates and expert-reviewed medical files at UHL. Agreement was calculated using Cohen's kappa coefficient. Cause-specific survival (CSS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and the relative survival probability (RS) using the Ederer II and Pohar Perme method. A total of 2862 patients, of whom 354 died, were included. We found an agreement of 84.7% (kappa-value of 0.69 (95% C.I.: 0.62-0.77)) between death certificates and medical files. Death certificates had 10.7% false positive and 4.5% false negative rates. However, five-year CSS and RS measures were comparable for both sources. For breast cancer patients included in our study, fair agreement of cause of death was seen between death certificates and medical files with similar CSS and RS estimations.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Registration and coding of cause of death is prone to error since determining the exact underlying condition leading directly to death is challenging. In this study, causes of death from the death certificates were compared to patients' medical files interpreted by experts at University Hospitals Leuven (UHL), to assess concordance between sources and its impact on cancer survival assessment.
METHODS
METHODS
Breast cancer patients treated at UHL (2009-2014) (follow-up until December 31st 2016) were included in this study. Cause of death was obtained from death certificates and expert-reviewed medical files at UHL. Agreement was calculated using Cohen's kappa coefficient. Cause-specific survival (CSS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and the relative survival probability (RS) using the Ederer II and Pohar Perme method.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 2862 patients, of whom 354 died, were included. We found an agreement of 84.7% (kappa-value of 0.69 (95% C.I.: 0.62-0.77)) between death certificates and medical files. Death certificates had 10.7% false positive and 4.5% false negative rates. However, five-year CSS and RS measures were comparable for both sources.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
For breast cancer patients included in our study, fair agreement of cause of death was seen between death certificates and medical files with similar CSS and RS estimations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34162431
doi: 10.1186/s13690-021-00637-w
pii: 10.1186/s13690-021-00637-w
pmc: PMC8220845
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
111Références
Hum Pathol. 1982 Nov;13(11):1036-8
pubmed: 7152507
BMC Cancer. 2013 Dec 27;13:609
pubmed: 24373194
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Jul 20;103(14):1130-3
pubmed: 21697545
Radiother Oncol. 1985 Aug;4(1):63-70
pubmed: 4035003
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Nov;62(11):1202-9
pubmed: 19364635
Cancer Epidemiol. 2019 Apr;59:232-235
pubmed: 30836221
Cancer. 2009 Nov 15;115(22):5272-83
pubmed: 19670456
Gac Sanit. 2006 Dec;20 Suppl 3:42-51
pubmed: 17433200
Int J Cancer. 2014 Jul 1;135(1):196-203
pubmed: 24302538
Int J Epidemiol. 2010 Apr;39(2):598-610
pubmed: 20142331
Cancer Epidemiol. 2015 Jun;39(3):465-72
pubmed: 25907643
J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 Feb;59(2):125-31
pubmed: 16426947
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571
Bull World Health Organ. 2014 Nov 1;92(11):807-16
pubmed: 25378742
Am J Ment Defic. 1981 Sep;86(2):127-37
pubmed: 7315877
Chronic Dis Can. 2009;30(1):16-9
pubmed: 20031084
Cancer Epidemiol. 2011 Apr;35(2):126-31
pubmed: 20952269
Am J Public Health. 1981 Mar;71(3):242-50
pubmed: 7468855
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 Oct 20;102(20):1584-98
pubmed: 20937991
Inform Health Soc Care. 2020 Jan;45(1):1-14
pubmed: 30125131
Biometrics. 2012 Mar;68(1):113-20
pubmed: 21689081
Lung Cancer. 2019 Aug;134:16-24
pubmed: 31319976
Cancer Causes Control. 2009 Jul;20(5):533-8
pubmed: 19015942
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1984 Aug 25;289(6443):465-7
pubmed: 6432144
Eur J Cancer. 2017 Feb;72:78-83
pubmed: 28027519
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002 Jul 17;94(14):1044-5
pubmed: 12122090
J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993 Jul 7;85(13):1063-8
pubmed: 8515493
Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1961 Sep;6:101-21
pubmed: 13889176
Acta Radiol Oncol. 1985 Sep-Oct;24(5):385-90
pubmed: 3002134
Am J Epidemiol. 1980 Jan;111(1):99-112
pubmed: 7352463
Cancer Med. 2018 Sep;7(9):4773-4780
pubmed: 30070069