Self-reported Prostate Cancer Progression Status Is Accurate A Validation Study

被引:1
|
作者
Daugherty, Sarah E. [1 ]
Wright, Jonathan L. [2 ,4 ]
Black, Amanda [3 ]
Stanford, Janet L. [4 ]
Hoover, Robert [3 ]
Berndt, Sonja, I [3 ]
机构
[1] PCORI Washington, Washington, DC USA
[2] Univ Washington, Sch Med, Seattle, WA USA
[3] NCI, NIH, Rockville, MD USA
[4] Univ Washington, Fred Hutchinson Canc Res Ctr, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
关键词
PPV; Prostate cancer progression; Self-report; Sensitivity; Specificity; Validation study; RECOMMENDATIONS; MORTALITY; UPDATE; LUNG;
D O I
10.1097/EDE.0000000000001170
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background: Studies of prostate cancer progression are important for discovering risk factors that may increase the risk of prostate cancer-specific death; however, little is known about the validity of self-reported prostate cancer progression. Methods: We conducted a validation study of self-reported prostate cancer progression in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial and in a prostate cancer cohort enrolled in a Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (FHCRC)-based study. We calculated measures of validity for self-reported progression, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value using medical records as the gold standard. Results: Our results suggest that ascertaining prostate cancer progression-related events (i.e., prostate-specific antigen elevation, recurrence, metastasis, and use of secondary treatment) through self-report may be a viable option for identifying men whose disease has progressed after diagnosis or initial therapy, particularly when multiple questions related to progression are included in the assessment (aggregate cluster of questions: sensitivity = 0.76 [PLCO]; 0.93 [FHCRC], specificity = 0.80 [PLCO]; 0.97 [FHCRC]). With an aggregate positive predictive value of 0.50 (PLCO), however, our PLCO results suggest that additional medical record verification of self-reported progression events may be necessary to rule out false positives. Most individuals reporting no evidence of progression-related events, however, were true negatives (aggregate negative predictive value = 0.92 [PLCO]; 0.98 [FHCRC]). Thus, there may be limited utility to investing resources in chart review to confirm self-reported nonevents. Conclusion: Ascertaining prostate cancer progression through self-report provides an efficient and valid approach to enhancing existing cancer cohorts with updated data on progression status. See video abstract at, http://links.lww.com/EDE/B658.
引用
收藏
页码:441 / 447
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] VALIDATION OF SELF-REPORTED CANCER DIAGNOSIS BY COGNITIVE STATUS IN THE HEALTH AND RETIREMENT STUDY
    Mullins, Megan
    Kler, Jasdeep
    Eastman, Marissa
    Kabeto, Mohammed
    Wallner, Lauren
    Kobayashi, Lindsay
    [J]. INNOVATION IN AGING, 2021, 5 : 164 - 164
  • [2] Validation of Self-Reported Cancer Diagnoses by Respondent Cognitive Status in the US Health and Retirement Study
    Mullins, Megan A.
    Kabeto, Mohammed
    Wallner, Lauren P.
    Kobayashi, Lindsay C.
    [J]. JOURNALS OF GERONTOLOGY SERIES A-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2023, 78 (07): : 1239 - 1245
  • [3] Self-reported psychopathy: A validation study
    Lynam, DR
    Whiteside, S
    Jones, S
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT, 1999, 73 (01) : 110 - 132
  • [4] Self-reported acne is not associated with prostate cancer
    Cremers, Ruben G.
    Aben, Katja K.
    Vermeulen, Sita H.
    den Heijer, Martin
    van Oort, Inge M.
    van de Kerkhof, Peter C.
    Schalken, Jack A.
    Kiemeney, Lambertus A.
    [J]. UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2014, 32 (07) : 941 - 945
  • [5] Self-reported prostate cancer screening in Austria
    Vutuc, Christian
    Waldhoer, Thomas
    Sevelda, Paul
    Micksche, Michael
    Haidinger, Gerald
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 2006, 13 (03) : 148 - 151
  • [6] Validation of self-reported measures of nutritional status: a study based on the PNS 2019
    Brito, Renatha Celiana da Silva
    Oliveira, Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli da Costa
    [J]. REVISTA DE SAUDE PUBLICA, 2024, 58
  • [7] Validation of self-reported asthma in a generation study
    Kuiper, Ingrid Nordeide
    Svanes, Cecilie
    Benediktsdottir, Bryndis
    Bertelsen, Randi Jacobsen
    Braback, Lennart
    Dharmage, Shyamali C.
    Holm, Mathias
    Janson, Christer
    Jogi, Rain
    Moratalla, Jesus Martinez
    Real, Francisco Gomez
    Sanchez, Jose Luis
    Schlunssen, Vivi
    Timm, Signe
    Johannessen, Ane
    [J]. EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, 2016, 48
  • [8] Validation of self-reported history of colorectal cancer screening
    Khoja, Shariq
    McGregor, S. Elizabeth
    Hilsden, Robert J.
    [J]. CANADIAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN, 2007, 53 : 1192 - 1197
  • [9] Validation study of self-reported measures of fat distribution
    Weaver, TW
    Kushi, LH
    McGovern, PG
    Potter, JD
    Rich, SS
    King, RA
    Whitbeck, J
    Sellers, TA
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBESITY, 1996, 20 (07) : 644 - 650
  • [10] Validation of self-reported cancers in the California Teachers Study
    Parikh-Patel, A
    Allen, M
    Wright, WE
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2003, 157 (06) : 539 - 545