Back to Search Start Over

Contemporary accuracy of death certificates for coding prostate cancer as a cause of death: Is reliance on death certification good enough? A comparison with blinded review by an independent cause of death evaluation committee.

Authors :
Turner, Emma L
Metcalfe, Chris
Donovan, Jenny L
Noble, Sian
Sterne, Jonathan A C
Lane, J Athene
I Walsh, Eleanor
Hill, Elizabeth M
Down, Liz
Ben-Shlomo, Yoav
Oliver, Steven E
Evans, Simon
Brindle, Peter
Williams, Naomi J
Hughes, Laura J
Davies, Charlotte F
Ng, Siaw Yein
Neal, David E
Hamdy, Freddie C
Albertsen, Peter
Source :
British Journal of Cancer; 6/28/2016, Vol. 115 Issue 1, p90-94, 5p, 1 Diagram, 1 Chart
Publication Year :
2016

Abstract

<bold>Background: </bold>Accurate cause of death assignment is crucial for prostate cancer epidemiology and trials reporting prostate cancer-specific mortality outcomes.<bold>Methods: </bold>We compared death certificate information with independent cause of death evaluation by an expert committee within a prostate cancer trial (2002-2015).<bold>Results: </bold>Of 1236 deaths assessed, expert committee evaluation attributed 523 (42%) to prostate cancer, agreeing with death certificate cause of death in 1134 cases (92%, 95% CI: 90%, 93%). The sensitivity of death certificates in identifying prostate cancer deaths as classified by the committee was 91% (95% CI: 89%, 94%); specificity was 92% (95% CI: 90%, 94%). Sensitivity and specificity were lower where death occurred within 1 year of diagnosis, and where there was another primary cancer diagnosis.<bold>Conclusions: </bold>UK death certificates accurately identify cause of death in men with prostate cancer, supporting their use in routine statistics. Possible differential misattribution by trial arm supports independent evaluation in randomised trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
00070920
Volume :
115
Issue :
1
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
British Journal of Cancer
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
116463761
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2016.162