Identification of cancer chemotherapy regimens and patient cohorts in administrative claims: challenges, opportunities, and a proposed algorithm
Author
Lockhart, C.M.McDermott, C.L.
Mendelsohn, A.B.
Marshall, J.
McBride, A.
Yee, G.
Li, M.S.
Jamal-Allial, A.
Djibo, D.A.
Vazquez, Benitez, G.
DeFor, T.A.
Pawloski, P.A.
Affiliation
College of Pharmacy, University of ArizonaIssue Date
2023-03-14
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
Taylor and Francis Ltd.Citation
Lockhart, C. M., McDermott, C. L., Mendelsohn, A. B., Marshall, J., McBride, A., Yee, G., … Pawloski, P. A. (2023). Identification of cancer chemotherapy regimens and patient cohorts in administrative claims: challenges, opportunities, and a proposed algorithm. Journal of Medical Economics, 26(1), 403–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2023.2187196Journal
Journal of Medical EconomicsRights
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Background: Real-world evidence is a valuable source of information in healthcare. This study describes the challenges and successes during algorithm development to identify cancer cohorts and multi-agent chemotherapy regimens from claims data to perform a comparative effectiveness analysis of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) use. Methods: Using the Biologics and Biosimilars Collective Intelligence Consortium’s Distributed Research Network, we iteratively developed and tested a de novo algorithm to accurately identify patients by cancer diagnosis, then extract chemotherapy and G-CSF administrations for a retrospective study of prophylactic G-CSF. Results: After identifying patients with cancer and subsequent chemotherapy exposures, we observed only 12% of patients with cancer received chemotherapy, which is fewer than expected based on prior analyses. Therefore, we reversed the initial inclusion criteria to identify chemotherapy receipt, then prior cancer diagnosis, which increased the number of patients from 2,814 to 3,645, or 68% of patients receiving chemotherapy had diagnoses of interest. Additionally, we excluded patients with cancer diagnoses that differed from those of interest in the 183 days before the index date of G-CSF receipt, including early-stage cancers without G-CSF or chemotherapy exposure. By removing this criterion, we retained 77 patients who were previously excluded. Finally, we incorporated a 5-day window to identify all chemotherapy drugs administered (excluding oral prednisone and methotrexate, as these medications may be used for other non-malignant conditions) as patients may fill oral prescriptions days to weeks prior to infusion. This increased the number of patients with chemotherapy exposures of interest to 6,010. The final cohort of included patients, based on G-CSF exposure, increased from 420 from the initial algorithm to 886 using the final algorithm. Conclusions: Medications used for multiple indications, sensitivity and specificity of administrative codes, and relative timing of medication exposure must all be evaluated to identify patient cohorts receiving chemotherapy from claims data. © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.Note
Open access articleISSN
1369-6998PubMed ID
36883996Version
Final Published Versionae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1080/13696998.2023.2187196
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Related articles
- Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor use and medical costs after initial adjuvant chemotherapy in older patients with early-stage breast cancer.
- Authors: Griffiths RI, Barron RL, Gleeson ML, Danese MD, O'Hagan A, Chia VM, Legg JC, Lyman GH
- Issue date: 2012 Feb 1
- Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
- Authors: Crider K, Williams J, Qi YP, Gutman J, Yeung L, Mai C, Finkelstain J, Mehta S, Pons-Duran C, Menéndez C, Moraleda C, Rogers L, Daniels K, Green P
- Issue date: 2022 Feb 1
- Comparative effectiveness of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors to prevent febrile neutropenia and related complications in cancer patients in clinical practice: A systematic review.
- Authors: Mitchell S, Li X, Woods M, Garcia J, Hebard-Massey K, Barron R, Samuel M
- Issue date: 2016 Oct
- Patterns of primary prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use in older Medicare patients with cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy.
- Authors: Schenfeld J, Gong T, Henry D, Kelsh M, Gawade P, Peng Y, Bradbury BD, Li S
- Issue date: 2022 Jul
- Prophylactic antibiotics or G(M)-CSF for the prevention of infections and improvement of survival in cancer patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy.
- Authors: Skoetz N, Bohlius J, Engert A, Monsef I, Blank O, Vehreschild JJ
- Issue date: 2015 Dec 21