Using Electronic Health Record Data to Identify Prostate Cancer Patients That May Qualify for Active Surveillance.
BACKGROUND
The introduction of the protein-specific antigen (PSA) test in care means that prostate cancer (PCa) is being detected earlier and more frequently. The result of increased screening using PSA, digital rectal examination and awareness of prostate was an increase in the number of men with low risk cancers. Active surveillance has become a viable alternative to immediate treatment with surgery, radiation and other forms of localized treatment. Evidence suggests that there is no significant difference in mortality rates between AS and surgery. In addition, patients may potentially delay other complications associated with surgery, radiation or deprivation therapy.


METHODS
This quality improvement study using a delivery system science framework describes the electronic identification of AS candidates given an evidence-based identification criteria based upon national guidelines and clinical judgement. The study population (n=649) was drawn from health records of all patients who received a prostate biopsy (n=1731) at Intermountain Healthcare from 1/1/2013 to 12/31/2014. Automated and manual abstraction was performed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to compare AS-eligible patients to the actual treatment received to identify potential care improvement opportunities. Among those with complete data, 24.7% of this population (n=160) met "AS-eligible" criteria. 39.1% of the population had not received surgery, radiation or androgen deprivation therapy and were considered as being treated using an AS approach. 9% of AS-eligible patients did not receive AS; 27% of patients who did not meet AS-eligible criteria received AS. Estimated guideline adherence measured using area under the curve was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.66-0.73). Modest variation in criteria parameters for identifying AS-eligible patients did not significantly change estimated adherence levels.


CONCLUSIONS
Implementation of evidence-based criteria for detection of AS candidates is feasible using electronic health record data and provides a reasonable basis for delivery system evaluation of practice patterns and for quality improvement.
Intermountain Healthcare.
Andrew J
AJ
Knighton
Intermountain Healthcare.
Tom
T
Belnap
Intermountain Healthcare.
Kim
K
Brunisholz
Intermountain Healthcare.
Kelly
K
Huynh
Intermountain Urological Institute.
Jay T
JT
Bishoff
Cancer; Population Health; Quality Measurement
Urol Oncol. 2006 Jan-Feb;24(1):46-50
16414494
Eur Urol. 2015 Apr;67(4):646-8
25435266
Eur Urol. 2009 Jun;55(6):1321-30
19286302
Res Rep Urol. 2014 Aug 16;6:107-12
25202685
J Urol. 2007 Sep;178(3 Pt 1):826-31; discussion 831-2
17632144
JAMA. 1994 Feb 2;271(5):368-74
7506797
Cancer. 2008 Jun 15;112(12):2664-70
18433013
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002 Jul 3;94(13):981-90
12096083
Cancer. 2008 Apr 15;112(8):1650-9
18306379
Ann Intern Med. 2012 Apr 17;156(8):591-5
22351514
J Urol. 2007 Dec;178(6):2359-64; discussion 2364-5
17936806
N Engl J Med. 2008 Mar 20;358(12):1250-61
18354103
EBioMedicine. 2015 Jul 29;2(9):1133-44
26501111
Eur Urol. 2012 Sep;62(3):462-8
22445138
NIH Consens State Sci Statements. 2011 Dec 5-7;28(1):1-27
23392076
Eur Urol. 2012 Dec;62(6):976-83
22698574