Skip to Main Content

An official website of the United States government

Government Funding Lapse

Because of a lapse in government funding, the information on this website may not be up to date, transactions submitted via the website may not be processed, and the agency may not be able to respond to inquiries until appropriations are enacted. The NIH Clinical Center (the research hospital of NIH) is open. For more details about its operating status, please visit  cc.nih.gov. Updates regarding government operating status and resumption of normal operations can be found at OPM.gov.

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

About this Publication
Title
Self-reported Prostate Cancer Progression Status Is Accurate: A Validation Study.
Pubmed ID
32251068 (View this publication on the PubMed website)
Digital Object Identifier
Publication
Epidemiology. 2020 May; Volume 31 (Issue 3): Pages 441-447
Authors
Daugherty SE , Wright JL , Black A , Stanford JL , Hoover R , Berndt SI
Affiliations
  • From the PCORI Washington, DC.
  • University of Washington School of Medicine Seattle, WA.
  • National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD.
  • Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Abstract

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.

Related CDAS Studies