Accuracy of the HPV status site-specific factor 10 (SSF-10) variable for patients with oropharyngeal cancers in the Iowa Cancer Registry, 2010-2014
| Autor: | Mary E. Charlton, Bobbi Matt, Charles F. Lynch, Nitin A. Pagedar, Charles C. Platz, Steven M. Sperry, Amanda R. Kahl |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2018 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Male 0301 basic medicine Oncology medicine.medical_specialty Article 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Internal medicine Epidemiology medicine Humans Public Health Surveillance Registries Stage (cooking) Papillomaviridae Hpv status Aged business.industry Papillomavirus Infections Head and neck cancer Clinical Coding virus diseases Cancer Middle Aged medicine.disease Iowa female genital diseases and pregnancy complications Cancer registry Oropharyngeal Neoplasms Hpv testing 030104 developmental biology Otorhinolaryngology 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis DNA Viral Carcinoma Squamous Cell Female business Oropharyngeal Cancers SEER Program |
| Zdroj: | Head & Neck. 40:2199-2209 |
| ISSN: | 1043-3074 |
| Popis: | Background Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Cancer Registries (SEER) began collecting human papillomavirus (HPV) status for upper aerodigestive tract cancers in 2010. However, classification of p16-testing was not included in the Collaborative Stage coding guidelines, potentially leading to inconsistent coding. Methods The HPV values for Iowa patients with oropharyngeal cancers (n = 824) were recoded based on modified guidelines that included p16 test results, and compared with the original guidelines. Results Forty percent of patients were recoded to a different value, and the HPV testing rate increased from 45% to 55%; 56% received p16-testing only. Of those originally coded as HPV-type 16 (n = 187), 89% were recoded to HPV-not otherwise specified (NOS). When comparing high-level positive/negative/not done categories, original coding captured 81% of patients with HPV-positive cancers. Conclusion p16 was the most common HPV test but was inconsistently coded as HPV-testing. p16-positivity was also erroneously equated with HPV-type 16. Adding a separate p16 variable would improve consistency and accuracy of HPV coding. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text