A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The Research Implications of Prostate Specific Antigen Registry Errors: Data from the Veterans Health Administration. | LitMetric

The Research Implications of Prostate Specific Antigen Registry Errors: Data from the Veterans Health Administration.

J Urol

Department of Urology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California; Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California. Electronic address:

Published: September 2018

Purpose: We sought to characterize the effects of prostate specific antigen registry errors on clinical research by comparing cohorts based on cancer registry prostate specific antigen values with those based directly on results in the electronic health record.

Materials And Methods: We defined sample cohorts of men with prostate cancer using data from the Veterans Health Administration, including those with a prostate specific antigen value less than 4.0, 4.0 to 10.0, 10.0 to 20.0 and 20.0 to 98.0 ng/ml, respectively. We compared the composition of each cohort and overall patient survival when using prostate specific antigen values from the Veteran Affairs Central Cancer Registry vs the gold standard electronic health record laboratory file results.

Results: There was limited agreement among cohorts when defined by cancer registry prostate specific antigen values vs the laboratory file of the electronic health record. The least agreement of 58% was seen in patients with prostate specific antigen less than 4.0 ng/ml and greatest agreement of 89% was noted among patients with prostate specific antigen between 4.0 and 10.0 ng/ml. In each cohort patients assigned to a cohort based only on the cancer registry prostate specific antigen value had significantly different overall survival when compared with patients assigned based on registry and laboratory file prostate specific antigen values.

Conclusions: Cohorts based exclusively on cancer registry prostate specific antigen values may have high rates of misclassification that can introduce concerning differences in key characteristics and result in measurable differences in clinical outcomes.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.03.127DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

prostate specific
44
specific antigen
44
cancer registry
20
registry prostate
16
antigen values
16
electronic health
12
laboratory file
12
specific
11
antigen
11
prostate
11

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!