PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
July 7, 2017JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics18 citationsOpen Access

Automating the Determination of Prostate Cancer Risk Strata From Electronic Medical Records

View Full Paper
JGJustin R. GreggMLMaximilian LangLWLucy Lu Wang

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Purpose: Risk stratification underlies system-wide efforts to promote the delivery of appropriate prostate cancer care. Although the elements of risk stratum are available in the electronic medical record, manual data collection is resource intensive. Therefore, we investigated the feasibility and accuracy of an automated data extraction method using natural language processing (NLP) to determine prostate cancer risk stratum. Methods: Manually collected clinical stage, biopsy Gleason score, and preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values from our prospective prostatectomy database were used to categorize patients as low, intermediate, or high risk by D'Amico risk classification. NLP algorithms were developed to automate the extraction of the same data points from the electronic medical record, and risk strata were recalculated. The ability of NLP to identify elements sufficient to calculate risk (recall) was calculated, and the accuracy of NLP was compared with that of manually collected data using the weighted Cohen's κ statistic. Results: Of the 2,352 patients with available data who underwent prostatectomy from 2010 to 2014, NLP identified sufficient elements to calculate risk for 1,833 (recall, 78%). NLP had a 91% raw agreement with manual risk stratification (κ = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.90 to 0.93). The κ statistics for PSA, Gleason score, and clinical stage extraction by NLP were 0.86, 0.91, and 0.89, respectively; 91.9% of extracted PSA values were within ± 1.0 ng/mL of the manually collected PSA levels. Conclusion: NLP can achieve more than 90% accuracy on D'Amico risk stratification of localized prostate cancer, with adequate recall. This figure is comparable to other NLP tasks and illustrates the known trade off between recall and accuracy. Automating the collection of risk characteristics could be used to power real-time decision support tools and scale up quality measurement in cancer care.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Gregg et al. (2017) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1f16f9e800cc4eef552511https://doi.org/10.1200/cci.16.00045
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Association Between Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Indicators and Hospital Readmissions2014 · 144 citations
  2. 2An Application of Hierarchical Kappa-type Statistics in the Assessment of Majority Agreement among Multiple Observers1977 · 4,123 citations
  3. 3Assessing the quality of prostate cancer care2008 · 13 citations
  4. 4Quality of care indicators for prostate cancer: Progress toward consensus2009 · 26 citations
  5. 5Secondary use of clinical data: The Vanderbilt approach2014 · 295 citations