Using Electronic Health Records to Classify Cancer Site and Metastasis

The Enhanced EHR-facilitated Cancer Symptom Control (E2C2) Trial is a pragmatic trial testing a collaborative care approach for managing common cancer symptoms. There were challenges in identifying cancer site and metastatic status.This study compares three different approaches to determine cancer site and six strategies for identifying the presence of metastasis using EHR and cancer registry data.The E2C2 cohort included 50,559 patients seen in the medical oncology clinics of a large health system. SPPADE symptoms were assessed with 0 to 10 numeric rating scales (NRS). A multistep process was used to develop three approaches for representing cancer site: the single most prevalent International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10) code, the two most prevalent codes, and any diagnostic code. Six approaches for identifying metastatic disease were compared: ICD-10 codes, natural language processing (NLP), cancer registry, medications typically prescribed for incurable disease, treatment plan, and evaluation for phase 1 trials.The approach counting the two most prevalent ICD-10 cancer site diagnoses per patient detected a median of 92% of the cases identified by counting all cancer site diagnoses, whereas the approach counting only the single most prevalent cancer site diagnosis identified a median of 65%. However, agreement among the three approaches was very good (kappa > 0.80) for most cancer sites. ICD and NLP methods could be applied to the entire cohort and had the highest agreement (kappa = 0.53) for identifying metastasis. Cancer registry data was available for less than half of the patients.Identification of cancer site and metastatic disease using EHR data was feasible in this large and diverse cohort of patients with common cancer symptoms. The methods were pragmatic and may be acceptable for covariates, but likely require refinement for key dependent and independent variables.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied Clinical Informatics
Published
2025-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2544-3117
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.52

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Using Electronic Health Records to Classify Cancer Site and Metastasis

Jeph Herrin, Sandra A. Mitchell, Karin E. Tobin, Keith A. Marsolo et al.
1 citations
Applied Clinical Informatics
Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
1.52
article

Using Electronic Health Records to Classify Cancer Site and Metastasis

Jeph Herrin, Sandra A. Mitchell, Karin E. Tobin, Keith A. Marsolo, Joan M. Griffin, Kathryn J. Ruddy, Kurt Kroenke, Jennifer L. Ridgeway, Jessica D. Austin, Deirdre R. Pachman, Parvez Rahman, Andrea Lynne Cheville, Linda L. Chlan, Veronica Grzegorczyk
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The Enhanced EHR-facilitated Cancer Symptom Control (E2C2) Trial is a pragmatic trial testing a collaborative care approach for managing common cancer symptoms. There were challenges in identifying cancer site and metastatic status.This study compares three different approaches to determine cancer site and six strategies for identifying the presence of metastasis using EHR and cancer registry data.The E2C2 cohort included 50,559 patients seen in the medical oncology clinics of a large health system. SPPADE symptoms were assessed with 0 to 10 numeric rating scales (NRS). A multistep process was used to develop three approaches for representing cancer site: the single most prevalent International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10) code, the two most prevalent codes, and any diagnostic code. Six approaches for identifying metastatic disease were compared: ICD-10 codes, natural language processing (NLP), cancer registry, medications typically prescribed for incurable disease, treatment plan, and evaluation for phase 1 trials.The approach counting the two most prevalent ICD-10 cancer site diagnoses per patient detected a median of 92% of the cases identified by counting all cancer site diagnoses, whereas the approach counting only the single most prevalent cancer site diagnosis identified a median of 65%. However, agreement among the three approaches was very good (kappa > 0.80) for most cancer sites. ICD and NLP methods could be applied to the entire cohort and had the highest agreement (kappa = 0.53) for identifying metastasis. Cancer registry data was available for less than half of the patients.Identification of cancer site and metastatic disease using EHR data was feasible in this large and diverse cohort of patients with common cancer symptoms. The methods were pragmatic and may be acceptable for covariates, but likely require refinement for key dependent and independent variables.

Applied Clinical InformaticsVol. 16(03)
Regenstrief Institute (US), Mayo Clinic (US), Duke University (US), WinnMed (US), Yale University (US), Mayo Clinic in Arizona (US), National Cancer Institute (US), Mayo Clinic in Florida (US), Indiana University School of Medicine, Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis (US)
National Cancer Institute
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
1.52
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.