Structured Data Capture for Oncology

Feasibility of structuring electronic health record data to facilitate real-world data research: ICAREdata methods applied to multicenter cancer clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The use of electronic health record (EHR) data for research is limited by a lack of structure and a standard data model. The objective of the ICAREdata (Integrating Clinical Trials and Real-World Endpoints Data) project was to structure key research data elements in EHRs using a minimal Common Oncology Data Elements (mCODE) data model to extract and transmit data.

METHODS

The ICAREdata project captured two EHR data elements essential to clinical trials: cancer disease status and treatment plan change. The project was implemented in clinical sites participating in Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology trials. Data were extracted from EHRs and sent by secure Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resource messaging (a standard for exchanging EHRs) to a database. Selected elements were compared with corresponding data from the trial's electronic data capture (EDC) system, Medidata Rave.

RESULTS

By December 2023, data were extracted and transmitted from 10 sites for 35 patients, involving 367 clinical encounters across 15 clinical trials. Data through March 2023 demonstrated that concordance for the elements treatment plan change and cancer disease status was 79% and 34%, respectively. When disease evaluation was reported by both EHR and EDC (n = 15), there was 87% agreement on cancer disease status.

CONCLUSIONS

Documentation, extraction, and aggregation of structured data elements in EHRs using mCODE and ICAREdata methods is feasible in multi-institutional cancer clinical trials. EDC as a reference data set allowed assessment of the completeness of EHR data capture. Future initiatives will focus on elements with shared definitions in clinical and research environments and efficient workflows.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Clinical trials use electronic case report forms to report data, and data must be manually entered on these forms, which is costly and time consuming. ICAREdata methods use structured, organized data from clinical trials that can be more easily shared instead having to enter free text into electronic health records.

(Common) Data Elements in Radiation Oncology: A Systematic Literature Review

PURPOSE

Structured medical data documentation is highly relevant in a data-driven discipline such as radiation oncology. Defined (common) data elements (CDEs) can be used to record data in clinical trials, health records, or computer systems for improved standardization and data exchange. The International Society for Radiation Oncology Informatics initiated a project for a scientific literature analysis of defined data elements for structured documentation in radiation oncology.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review on both PubMed and Scopus to analyze publications relevant to the utilization of specified data elements for the documentation of radiation therapy (RT)-related information. Relevant publications were retrieved as full-text and searched for published data elements. Finally, the extracted data elements were quantitatively analyzed and classified.

RESULTS

We found a total of 452 publications, of which 46 were considered relevant for structured data documentation. Twenty-nine publications addressed defined RT-specific data elements, of which 12 publications provided data elements. Only two publications focused on data elements in radiation oncology. The 29 analyzed publications were heterogeneous regarding the subject and usage of the defined data elements, and different concepts/terms for defined data elements were used.

CONCLUSION

The literature about structured data documentation in radiation oncology using defined data elements is scarce. There is a need for a comprehensive list of RT-specific CDEs the radio-oncologic community can rely on. As it has been done in other medical fields, establishing such a list would be of great value for clinical practice and research as it would promote interoperability and standardization.

Introducing HL7 FHIR Genomics Operations: a developer-friendly approach to genomics-EHR integration

OBJECTIVE

Enabling clinicians to formulate individualized clinical management strategies from the sea of molecular data remains a fundamentally important but daunting task. Here, we describe efforts towards a new paradigm in genomics-electronic health record (HER) integration, using a standardized suite of FHIR Genomics Operations that encapsulates the complexity of molecular data so that precision medicine solution developers can focus on building applications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

FHIR Genomics Operations essentially "wrap" a genomics data repository, presenting a uniform interface to applications. More importantly, operations encapsulate the complexity of data within a repository and normalize redundant data representations-particularly relevant in genomics, where a tremendous amount of raw data exists in often-complex non-FHIR formats.

RESULTS

Fifteen FHIR Genomics Operations have been developed, designed to support a wide range of clinical scenarios, such as variant discovery; clinical trial matching; hereditary condition and pharmacogenomic screening; and variant reanalysis. Operations are being matured through the HL7 balloting process, connectathons, pilots, and the HL7 FHIR Accelerator program.

DISCUSSION

Next-generation sequencing can identify thousands to millions of variants, whose clinical significance can change over time as our knowledge evolves. To manage such a large volume of dynamic and complex data, new models of genomics-EHR integration are needed. Qualitative observations to date suggest that freeing application developers from the need to understand the nuances of genomic data, and instead base applications on standardized APIs can not only accelerate integration but also dramatically expand the applications of Omic data in driving precision care at scale for all.

Patterns of Care for Breast Radiotherapy in Italy: Breast IRRadiATA (Italian Repository of Radiotherapy dATA) Feasibility Study

Aim. Breast IRRADIATA (Italian Repository of RADIotherapy dATA) is a collaborative nationwide project supported by the Italian Society of Radiotherapy and Clinical Oncology (AIRO) and the Italian League Against Cancer (LILT). It focuses on breast cancer (BC) patients treated with radiotherapy (RT) and was developed to create a national registry and define the patterns of care in Italy. A dedicated tool for data collection was created and pilot tested. The results of this feasibility study are reported here. Methods. To validate the applicability of a user-friendly data collection tool, a feasibility study involving 17 Italian Radiation Oncology Centers was conducted from July to October 2021, generating a data repository of 335 BC patients treated between January and March 2020, with a minimum follow-up time of 6 months. A snapshot of the clinical presentation, treatment modalities and radiotherapy toxicity in these patients was obtained. A Data Entry Survey and a Satisfaction Questionnaire were also sent to all participants. Results. All institutions completed the pilot study. Regarding the Data Entry survey, all questions achieved 100% of responses and no participant reported spending more than 10 min time for either the first data entry or for the updating of follow-up. Results from the Satisfaction Questionnaire revealed that the project was described as excellent by 14 centers (82.3%) and good by 3 (17.7%). Conclusion. Current knowledge for the treatment of high-prevalence diseases, such as BC, has evolved toward patient-centered medicine, evidence-based care and real-world evidence (RWE), which means evidence obtained from real-world data (RWD). To this aim, Breast IRRADIATA was developed as a simple tool to probe the current pattern of RT care in Italy. The pilot feasibility of IRRADIATA encourages a larger application of this tool nationwide and opens the way to the assessment of the pattern of care radiotherapy directed to other cancers.

Clinical annotations for prostate cancer research: Defining data elements, creating a reproducible analytical pipeline, and assessing data quality

BACKGROUND

Routine clinical data from clinical charts are indispensable for retrospective and prospective observational studies and clinical trials. Their reproducibility is often not assessed. We developed a prostate cancer-specific database for clinical annotations and evaluated data reproducibility.

METHODS

For men with prostate cancer who had clinical-grade paired tumor-normal sequencing at a comprehensive cancer center, we performed team-based retrospective data collection from the electronic medical record using a defined source hierarchy. We developed an open-source R package for data processing. With blinded repeat annotation by a reference medical oncologist, we assessed data completeness, reproducibility of team-based annotations, and impact of measurement error on bias in survival analyses.

RESULTS

Data elements on demographics, diagnosis and staging, disease state at the time of procuring a genomically characterized sample, and clinical outcomes were piloted and then abstracted for 2261 patients (with 2631 samples). Completeness of data elements was generally high. Comparing to the repeat annotation by a medical oncologist blinded to the database (100 patients/samples), reproducibility of annotations was high; T stage, metastasis date, and presence and date of castration resistance had lower reproducibility. Impact of measurement error on estimates for strong prognostic factors was modest.

CONCLUSIONS

With a prostate cancer-specific data dictionary and quality control measures, manual clinical annotations by a multidisciplinary team can be scalable and reproducible. The data dictionary and the R package for reproducible data processing are freely available to increase data quality and efficiency in clinical prostate cancer research.

Supporting Structured Data Capture for Patients With Cancer: An Initiative of the University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center Survivorship Program to Improve Capture of Malignant Diagnosis and Cancer Staging Data

PURPOSE

Structured data elements within electronic health records are health-related information that can be entered, stored, and extracted in an organized manner at later time points. Tracking outcomes for cancer survivors is also enabled by structured data. We sought to increase structured data capture within oncology practices at multiple sites sharing the same electronic health records.

METHODS

Applying engineering approaches and the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle, we launched dual quality improvement initiatives to ensure that a malignant diagnosis and stage were captured as structured data. Intervention: Close Visit Validation (CVV) requires providers to satisfy certain criteria before closing ambulatory encounters. CVV may be used to track open clinical encounters and chart delinquencies to encourage optimal clinical workflows. We added two cancer-specific required criteria at the time of closing encounters in oncology clinics: (1) the presence of at least one malignant diagnosis on the Problem List and (2) staging all the malignant diagnoses on the Problem List when appropriate.

RESULTS

Six months before the CVV implementation, the percentage of encounters with a malignant diagnosis on the Problem List at the time of the encounter was 65%, whereas the percentage of encounters with a staged diagnosis was 32%. Three months after cancer-specific CVV implementation, the percentages were 85% and 75%, respectively. Rates had increased to 90% and 88% more than 2 years after implementation.

CONCLUSION

Oncologist performance improved after the implementation of cancer-specific CVV criteria, with persistently high percentages of relevant malignant diagnoses and cancer stage structured data capture 2 years after the intervention.

Chasm Between Cancer Quality Measures and Electronic Health Record Data Quality

PURPOSE

The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA) requires eligible clinicians to report clinical quality measures (CQMs) in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) to maximize reimbursement. To determine whether structured data in electronic health records (EHRs) were adequate to report MIPS CQMs, EHR data aggregated by ASCO's CancerLinQ platform were analyzed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the CancerLinQ health technology platform, 19 Oncology MIPS (oMIPS) CQMs were evaluated to determine the presence of data elements (DEs) necessary to satisfy each CQM and the DE percent population with patient data (fill rates). At the time of this analysis, the CancerLinQ network comprised 63 active practices, representing eight different EHR vendors and containing records for more than 1.63 million unique patients with one or more malignant neoplasms (1.73 million cancer cases).

RESULTS

Fill rates for the 63 oMIPS-associated DEs varied widely among the practices. The average site had at least one filled DE for 52% of the DEs. Only 35% of the DEs were populated for at least one patient record in 95% of the practices. However, the average DE fill rate of all practices was 23%. No data were found at any practice for 22% of the DEs. Since any oMIPS CQM with an unpopulated DE component resulted in an inability to compute the measure, only two (10.5%) of the 19 oMIPS CQMs were computable for more than 1% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

Although EHR systems had relatively high DE fill rates for some DEs, underfilling and inconsistency of DEs in EHRs render automated oncology MIPS CQM calculations impractical.

College of American Pathologists Cancer Protocols: From Optimizing Cancer Patient Care to Facilitating Interoperable Reporting and Downstream Data Use

The College of American Pathologists Cancer Protocols have offered guidance to pathologists for standard cancer pathology reporting for more than 35 years. The adoption of computer readable versions of these protocols by electronic health record and laboratory information system (LIS) vendors has provided a mechanism for pathologists to report within their LIS workflow, in addition to enabling standardized structured data capture and reporting to downstream consumers of these data such as the cancer surveillance community. This paper reviews the history of the Cancer Protocols and electronic Cancer Checklists, outlines the current use of these critically important cancer case reporting tools, and examines future directions, including plans to help improve the integration of the Cancer Protocols into clinical, public health, research, and other workflows.