Can Oncology Practice Claims Data Replace Physician Reporting to State Cancer Registries?

Recently, the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program facilitated the linkage of claims data from oncology practices to cancer registry data. Since physician reporting places a burden on oncology practices and presents a challenge for cancer registries, the question arises as to whether claims data can replace physician reporting. Using data reported to the New York State Cancer Registry, we evaluated the information that would be lost if oncology practices were to cease reporting abstracted data to the registry.

We identified cancer cases diagnosed in 2017 and reported by 3 oncology practices. We estimated the proportion of cases reported solely by these practices and examined characteristics of these cases compared to those reported by multiple sources. We used Match*Pro to link cases reported by the oncology practices to claims data and examined the availability of claims data for these cases.

The 3 oncology practices reported 3,224 malignant tumors diagnosed in 2017. Of these, 233 (7.2%) were reported solely by the practices. Cases reported by an oncology practice only tended to be older than those reported by multiple sources and were statistically significantly more likely to be non-Hispanic White and less likely to be a first reportable cancer, early stage, or receive treatment. Of the 233 sole report tumors, 5 (2.1%) were not captured in claims data.

Most cancers reported by oncology practices were also reported by other sources or were included in claims data. However, relying on claims data for these cases would result in missing data items and a small number of unreported cancers. These results may help to optimize oncology practice reporting by informing reporting requirements to balance the need for complete data with the convenience of obtaining data through automated means.