RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Prevalence of missing data in the National Cancer Database and association with overall survival
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.10.30.20220855
DO 10.1101/2020.10.30.20220855
A1 Yang, Daniel X.
A1 Khera, Rohan
A1 Miccio, Joseph A.
A1 Jairam, Vikram
A1 Chang, Enoch
A1 Yu, James B.
A1 Park, Henry S.
A1 Krumholz, Harlan M.
A1 Aneja, Sanjay
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/02/01/2020.10.30.20220855.abstract
AB Importance Cancer registries are important real-world data (RWD) sources that rely on data abstraction from the medical record, however, patients with unknown or missing data are under-represented in studies that use such data sources.Objective To determine the prevalence of missing data and its associated overall survival among cancer patientsDesign, Setting, and Participants In this retrospective cohort study, all variables within the National Cancer Database (NCDB) were reviewed for missing or unknown values for the three most common cancers in the United States diagnosed from 2006 to 2015. Prevalence of patient records with missing data and their associated overall survival were determined. Data analysis was performed from February to August 2020.Exposures Any missing data field within a patient record among 63 variables of interest, from over 130 variables total in the NCDB.Main Outcome and Measure Prevalence of cancer patient records with missing data and associated two-year overall survivalResults A total of 1,198,749 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients (mean [SD] age, 68.5 [10.9] years; 569,938 [47.5%] women), 2,120,775 breast cancer patients (mean [SD] age, 61.0 [13.3] years; 2,101,758 [99.1%] women), and 1,158,635 prostate cancer patients (mean [SD] age, 65.2 [9.0] years; 0 [0%] women) were included for analysis. For NSCLC, there were 851,295 (71.0%) patients with missing data in variables of interest; 2-year overall survival was 33.2% for patients with missing data and 51.6% for patients with complete data (p<0.001). For breast cancer, there were 1,161,096 (54.7%) patients with missing data; 2-year overall survival was 93.2% for patients with missing data and 93.9% for patients with complete data (p<0.001). For prostate cancer, there were 460,167 (39.7%) patients with missing data; 2-year overall survival was 91.0% for patients with missing data and 95.6% for patients with complete data (p<0.001).Conclusions and Relevance Within a large cancer registry-based RWD source, missing data that was unable to be ascertained from the medical record was highly prevalent. Missing data among cancer patients was associated with heterogeneous differences in overall survival. Improving documentation and data quality are needed to best leverage RWD for clinical advancements.Competing Interest StatementIn the past three years, Harlan Krumholz received expenses and/or personal fees from UnitedHealth, IBM Watson Health, Element Science, Aetna, Facebook, the Siegfried and Jensen Law Firm, Arnold and Porter Law Firm, Martin/Baughman Law Firm, F-Prime, and the National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases in Beijing. He is an owner of Refactor Health and HugoHealth, and had grants and/or contracts from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Medtronic, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Johnson & Johnson, and the Shenzhen Center for Health Information.Funding StatementThis work was funded in part by a Career Enhancement Program Grant (PI: Aneja) from the Yale SPORE in Lung Cancer (1P50CA196530) and by a Conquer Cancer Career Development Award (PI: Aneja), supported by Hayden Family Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the American Society of Clinical Oncology or Conquer Cancer, or Hayden Family Foundation.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study uses de-identified information and was provided exemption by the Yale University Human Investigation Committee.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe primary data is available by application through the American College of Surgeons (https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/cancer/ncdb/puf). The datasets generated in our analysis can be reproduced using code available at https://github.com/Aneja-Lab-Yale