4.5 Article

Blinded and uniform cause of death verification in a lung cancer CT screening trial

Journal

LUNG CANCER
Volume 77, Issue 3, Pages 522-525

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2012.04.018

Keywords

Agreement; Cause of death; Death certificates; Death review; Lung cancer; Screening

Funding

  1. Zorg Onderzoek Nederland-Medische Wetenschappen (ZonMw)
  2. KWF Kankerbestrijding
  3. Stichting Centraal Fonds Reserves van Voormalig Vrijwillige Ziekenfondsverzekeringen (RvvZ)
  4. G. Ph. Verhagen Foundation
  5. Rotterdam Oncologic Thoracic Study Group (ROTS)
  6. Erasmus Trust Fund
  7. Stichting tegen Kanker
  8. Vlaamse Liga tegen Kanker
  9. LOGO Leuven and Hageland

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Disease-specific mortality is the final outcome of a lung cancer screening trial, therefore cause of death verification is crucial. The use of death certificates for this purpose is debated because of bias, inaccurate completion and incorrect ante mortem diagnoses. A cause of death evaluation process was designed to ensure a uniform and unbiased determination of the graduation of certainty that lung cancer was the underlying cause of death. An independent clinical expert committee will review the medical files of all deceased participants once diagnosed with lung cancer and will make use of a flow chart and predetermined criteria. A pilot study of fifty cases was conducted to determine the performance of this process and to compare the outcome with the official death certificates. The independent review has shown an agreement of 90% (kappa 0.65), which demonstrates a uniform classification. The sensitivity and specificity of the death certificates for lung cancer specific mortality were 95.2 and 62.5%. This demonstrates a limited distinctive character of the death certification process in lung cancer patients. Our results imply that the final outcome of a lung cancer screening trial cannot reliably be established without predetermined criteria and an independent review of blinded cases. (c) 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available