Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Mar 6:12:e47744.
doi: 10.2196/47744.

Real-World Data Quality Framework for Oncology Time to Treatment Discontinuation Use Case: Implementation and Evaluation Study

Affiliations

Real-World Data Quality Framework for Oncology Time to Treatment Discontinuation Use Case: Implementation and Evaluation Study

Boshu Ru et al. JMIR Med Inform. .

Abstract

Background: The importance of real-world evidence is widely recognized in observational oncology studies. However, the lack of interoperable data quality standards in the fragmented health information technology landscape represents an important challenge. Therefore, adopting validated systematic methods for evaluating data quality is important for oncology outcomes research leveraging real-world data (RWD).

Objective: This study aims to implement real-world time to treatment discontinuation (rwTTD) for a systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) as a new use case for the Use Case Specific Relevance and Quality Assessment, a framework linking data quality and relevance in fit-for-purpose RWD assessment.

Methods: To define the rwTTD use case, we mapped the operational definition of rwTTD to RWD elements commonly available from oncology electronic health record-derived data sets. We identified 20 tasks to check the completeness and plausibility of data elements concerning SACT use, line of therapy (LOT), death date, and length of follow-up. Using descriptive statistics, we illustrated how to implement the Use Case Specific Relevance and Quality Assessment on 2 oncology databases (Data sets A and B) to estimate the rwTTD of an SACT drug (target SACT) for patients with advanced head and neck cancer diagnosed on or after January 1, 2015.

Results: A total of 1200 (24.96%) of 4808 patients in Data set A and 237 (5.92%) of 4003 patients in Data set B received the target SACT, suggesting better relevance of the former in estimating the rwTTD of the target SACT. The 2 data sets differed with regard to the terminology used for SACT drugs, LOT format, and target SACT LOT distribution over time. Data set B appeared to have less complete SACT records, longer lags in incorporating the latest data, and incomplete mortality data, suggesting a lack of fitness for estimating rwTTD.

Conclusions: The fit-for-purpose data quality assessment demonstrated substantial variability in the quality of the 2 real-world data sets. The data quality specifications applied for rwTTD estimation can be expanded to support a broad spectrum of oncology use cases.

Keywords: UReQA framework; Use Case Specific Relevance and Quality Assessment; data quality assessment; real-world data; real-world time to treatment discontinuation; systemic anticancer therapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: BR, KD, and SK report employment with Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc, Rahway, NJ, United States, and stock ownership of Merck & Co, Inc, Rahway, NJ, United States. AS reports employment with Real World Evidence, Epidemiology, Medical Affairs and Value Statistics (REM) Data Science department, Jazz Pharmaceutical. SC reports employment with ConcertAI. LY reports employment with and ownership of Polygon Health Analytics LLC. AS, SC, and LY were employees of Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc, Rahway, NJ, United States, when they worked on this study.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Task 10: number of patients initiating the target systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) by year and quarter in (A) Data set A and (B) Data set B. Note: Y-axis heights in panels A and B differ but were selected to best depict the patient numbers in Data sets A and B. 1L: first-line therapy; 2L+: second-line or later therapy; combo: target SACT in any combination therapy (approved or not approved); mono: target SACT monotherapy; Q1: first quarter; Q2: second quarter; Q3: third quarter; Q4: fourth quarter.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Khozin S, Blumenthal GM, Pazdur R. Real-world data for clinical evidence generation in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017 Nov 01;109(11):1–5. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djx187.4157738 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Miksad RA, Samant MK, Sarkar S, Abernethy AP. Small but mighty: the use of real-world evidence to inform precision medicine. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2019 Jul;106(1):87–90. doi: 10.1002/cpt.1466. https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/31112289 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Desai KD, Chandwani S, Ru B, Reynolds MW, Christian JB, Estiri H. Fit-for-purpose real-world data assessments in oncology: a call for cross-stakeholder collaboration. Value Outcomes Spotlight. 2021 Jun;24:S25. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.04.129. https://www.valueinhealthjournal.com/article/S1098-3015(21)00346-6/fulltext - DOI
    1. Dagenais S, Russo L, Madsen A, Webster J, Becnel L. Use of real-world evidence to drive drug development strategy and inform clinical trial design. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2022 Jan;111(1):77–89. doi: 10.1002/cpt.2480. https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/34839524 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lakdawalla DN, Shafrin J, Hou N, Peneva D, Vine S, Park J, Zhang J, Brookmeyer R, Figlin RA. Predicting real-world effectiveness of cancer therapies using overall survival and progression-free survival from clinical trials: empirical evidence for the ASCO value framework. Value Health. 2017;20(7):866–75. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.04.003. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1098-3015(17)30203-6 S1098-3015(17)30203-6 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources