Agreement Estimate among three Italian Cancer Registries in the Coding of Multiple Primary Cancers

Author:

Buiatti Eva1,Crocetti Emanuele1,Gafà Lorenzo2,Falcini Fabio3,Amorosi Andrea4,Milandri Carlo3,La Rosa Maria2

Affiliation:

1. Registro Tumori Toscano, Firenze, Italy

2. Registro Tumori di Ragusa, Ragusa, Italy

3. Registro Tumori della Romagna, Forlì, Italy

4. Istituto di Anatomia e Istologia Patologica, Università di Firenze, Italy

Abstract

Aims The aim of the study was to compare agreement on the coding of multiple primary cancers (MPs) between three Italian cancer registries, the Ragusa Cancer Registry (RCR), the Cancer Registry of Romagna (RTRo), and the Tuscany Tumor Registry (RTT), that adhere to different rules for accepting MPs and to study whether coding according to common international rules (IARC-IACR) increased comparability. Methods One hundred cases were randomly extracted from the archives of each registry from those recorded as having more than one cancer. For each of the 300 patients, the number of independent cancers was attributed independently by one coder from each registry. The coders coded the series twice: once following the local registry rules and once according to the IARC-IACR rules. The agreement was estimated by couples of coders by means of Cohen's kappa statistics. Results The agreement on MP status between coders using local rules and definitions was good between the RTT and RCR (kappa = 0.77) and very good between the RTRo and RCR (kappa = 0.81) and the RTT and RTRo (kappa = 0.96). Exclusion of 23 expected discordant cases increased the agreement. The agreement reached with the use of the IARC-IACR rules was very good (RTRo vs RCR, 0.95; RTT vs RTR, 0.94; RTT vs RTRo, 0.95). Conclusions The comparison among the RTT, RTRo and RCR confirmed that the number of tumors considered MPs may be modified depending on the rules adopted. There were minor differences between the RTT and the RTRo since their rules were very similar. Most differences in agreement were with the RCR since its classification was conceptually different from the other two. The result on agreement with IARC-IACR rules is encouraging from the point of view of conducting a cooperative study among different registries on the incidence of MPs.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology,General Medicine

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3