Evaluating Data Sources for Monitoring Guideline-Concordant Endometrial Cancer Treatment Among Older Adults

BACKGROUND: Guideline-concordant endometrial cancer treatment - care consistent with recommended treatment based on tumor characteristics - is critical for survival. However, cancer registry-based assessments typically determine concordance based on whether a recommended treatment modality was received, without clinical details needed to assess treatment adequacy, including appropriate timing, amount, and duration. These details are observable in claims, raising the possibility that registry-based measures of guideline-concordance may misclassify guideline-concordant treatment. We compared guideline-concordant treatment classifications based on claims data, which capture both treatment receipt and adequacy, with classifications based on SEER registry data, which capture treatment receipt but not adequacy. METHODS: Older patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer from 2000-2019 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked dataset. For Medicare claims, observed surgery and adjuvant treatment were classified using treatment receipt and adequacy criteria, including timing, number of chemotherapy cycles or radiation fractions, and duration. For SEER, observed treatment was classified using registry-coded treatment receipt without adequacy criteria. For each data source, observed treatment was then compared with treatment recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) according to year of diagnosis, stage, histology, and grade to determine guideline concordance. Agreement between data sources was assessed using kappa statistics. RESULTS: Among 29,209 patients for surgery and 14,372 patients for adjuvant treatment, guideline-concordant care was more frequent in SEER than Medicare claims (surgery: 88.2% vs. 79.8%; adjuvant treatment: 85.4% vs. 71.6%). Agreement between SEER and Medicare was moderate for both surgery (kappa=0.46) and adjuvant treatment (kappa=0.47). CONCLUSIONS: SEER-based measures that rely solely on treatment fields may overestimate guideline-concordant treatment for older patients with endometrial cancer by failing to account for treatment adequacy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Epidemiology
Published
2026-09-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/ede.0000000000002051
Primary Topic
Endometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Evaluating Data Sources for Monitoring Guideline-Concordant Endometrial Cancer Treatment Among Older Adults

Ashley Sinclair Felix, Allison Marie Quick, Simran A. Kanal, Caitlin E. Meade et al.
Epidemiology
Endometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
article

Evaluating Data Sources for Monitoring Guideline-Concordant Endometrial Cancer Treatment Among Older Adults

Ashley Sinclair Felix, Allison Marie Quick, Simran A. Kanal, Caitlin E. Meade, Jennifer Anne Sinnott, Kemi M. Doll
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Guideline-concordant endometrial cancer treatment - care consistent with recommended treatment based on tumor characteristics - is critical for survival. However, cancer registry-based assessments typically determine concordance based on whether a recommended treatment modality was received, without clinical details needed to assess treatment adequacy, including appropriate timing, amount, and duration. These details are observable in claims, raising the possibility that registry-based measures of guideline-concordance may misclassify guideline-concordant treatment. We compared guideline-concordant treatment classifications based on claims data, which capture both treatment receipt and adequacy, with classifications based on SEER registry data, which capture treatment receipt but not adequacy. METHODS: Older patients diagnosed with endometrial cancer from 2000-2019 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked dataset. For Medicare claims, observed surgery and adjuvant treatment were classified using treatment receipt and adequacy criteria, including timing, number of chemotherapy cycles or radiation fractions, and duration. For SEER, observed treatment was classified using registry-coded treatment receipt without adequacy criteria. For each data source, observed treatment was then compared with treatment recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) according to year of diagnosis, stage, histology, and grade to determine guideline concordance. Agreement between data sources was assessed using kappa statistics. RESULTS: Among 29,209 patients for surgery and 14,372 patients for adjuvant treatment, guideline-concordant care was more frequent in SEER than Medicare claims (surgery: 88.2% vs. 79.8%; adjuvant treatment: 85.4% vs. 71.6%). Agreement between SEER and Medicare was moderate for both surgery (kappa=0.46) and adjuvant treatment (kappa=0.47). CONCLUSIONS: SEER-based measures that rely solely on treatment fields may overestimate guideline-concordant treatment for older patients with endometrial cancer by failing to account for treatment adequacy.

Epidemiology
University of Washington (US), The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (US), Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US), Wake Forest University (US), The Ohio State University (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Endometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
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.