Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Breast Surgical Oncology Epidemiologic Research: A Guide and Comparison of Four National Databases

  • Global Health Services Research
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

National databases are a rich source of epidemiologic data for breast surgical oncology research. However, these databases differ in the demographic, surgical, and oncologic variables provided. This study aimed to compare the strengths and limitations of four national databases in the context of breast surgical oncology research.

Methods

The study comprised a descriptive analysis of four national databases (the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program [NSQIP], the Nationwide Inpatient Sample [NIS], the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results [SEER] program, and the National Cancer Database [NCDB]) to assess their strengths and limitations in the context of breast surgical oncology. The study assessed the data available in each database for female patients with a breast cancer diagnosis between 2007 and 2017, and compared patient age, ethnicity, and race distributions.

Results

Data from 3.9 million female patients were examined, with most patients being between 60 and 69 years of age, non-Hispanic, and white. Age, ethnicity, and race distributions were similar in the databases. The NSQIP includes data on operative details, comorbidities, and postoperative outcomes. The NIS provides health services and inpatient utilization information, but does not evaluate outpatient procedures. The SEER program provides population-based oncologic detail including stage, histology, and neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment. The NCDB offers hospital-based oncologic information and the largest population in the study period, with approximately 2.5 million breast cancer patients.

Conclusion

Epidemiologic datasets offer tremendous potential for the examination of oncologic breast surgery, with each database providing unique data useful for addressing different epidemiologic questions. Understanding the strengths and limitations of each database creates a more efficient and productive research environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Surgeons Aco. ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/acs-nsqip. Accessed 1 Oct 2021.

  2. Surgeons Aco. ACS NSQIP History. https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/acs-nsqip/about/history. Accessed 1 Oct 2021.

  3. Surgeons Aco. ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/acs-nsqip. Accessed 21 July 2021.

  4. Surgeons Aco. About ACS NSQIP. https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/acs-nsqip/about. Accessed 1 Dec 2021.

  5. (HCUP) HDHCaUP. Overview of the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample (NIS). 2021. https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/nisoverview.jsp. Accessed 1 Oct 2021.

  6. (HCUP) HDHCaUP. 2012 NIS Redesign Report Available on HCUP Website (May 2014). 2014 https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/news/announcements/nisredesign_2012.jsp. Accessed 1 Oct 2021.

  7. (HCUP) HDHCaUP. Introduction to the HCUP National Inpatient Sample (NIS), 2017. 2020. https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/db/nation/nis/NIS_Introduction_2017.jsp#table2app1. Accessed 1 Oct 2021.

  8. National Cancer Institute S, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Overview of the SEER Program. https://seer.cancer.gov/about/overview.html. Accessed 1 Oct 2021.

  9. National Cancer Institute S, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Goals of the SEER Program. https://seer.cancer.gov/about/goals.html. Accessed 1 Oct 2021.

  10. Surgeons Aco. National Cancer Database. https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/cancer/ncdb. Accessed 1 Oct 2021.

  11. Mohanty S, Bilimoria KY. Comparing national cancer registries: the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. J Surg Oncol. 2014;109:629–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mettlin CJ, Menck HR, Winchester DP, Murphy GP. A comparison of breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancers reported to the National Cancer Data Base and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Cancer. 1997;79:2052–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Winchester DP, Stewart AK, Bura C, Jones RS. The National Cancer Data Base: a clinical surveillance and quality improvement tool. J Surg Oncol. 2004;85:1–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bilimoria KY, Stewart AK, Winchester DP, Ko CY. The National Cancer Data Base: a powerful initiative to improve cancer care in the United States. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:683–90.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Feig B. Comprehensive databases: a cautionary note. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:1756–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lerro CC, Robbins AS, Phillips JL, Stewart AK. Comparison of cases captured in the National Cancer Database with those in population-based central cancer registries. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:1759–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bohl DD, Basques BA, Golinvaux NS, Baumgaertner MR, Grauer JN. Nationwide Inpatient Sample and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program give different results in hip fracture studies. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472:1672–80.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Kwaan MR. Using NSQIP as a research tool: how to answer questions that are not amenable to local data. Semin Colon Rectal Surg. 2016;27:83–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Alluri RK, Leland H, Heckmann N. Surgical research using national databases. Ann Transl Med. 2016;4:393.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Boffa DJ. Using the National Cancer Database for outcomes research: a review. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3:1722–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mallin K, Browner A, Palis B, et al. Incident cases captured in the National Cancer Database compared with those in U.S. population-based central cancer registries in 2012–2014. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26:1604–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. McCabe RM. National Cancer Database: the past, present, and future of the Cancer Registry and its efforts to improve the quality of cancer care. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2019;29:323–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Janz TA, Graboyes EM, Nguyen SA, et al. A comparison of the NCDB and SEER database for research involving head and neck cancer. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019;160:284–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Surgeons Aco. ACS NSQIP Participant Use Data File. Retrieved 1 October at https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/acs-nsqip/participant-use.

  25. National Cancer Institute S, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. How to Request Access to SEER Data. 1 October 2021 at https://seer.cancer.gov/data/access.html.

  26. National Cancer Institute S, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. SEER*Stat Databases: November 2020 submission. Retrieved 1 October 2021 at https://seer.cancer.gov/data-software/documentation/seerstat/nov2020/#ss-variables.

  27. National Cancer Institute S, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Registry Groupings in SEER Data and Statistics. Retrieved 1 October 2021 at https://seer.cancer.gov/registries/terms.html.

  28. Surgeons Aco. Participant User Files. Retrieved 1 October 2021 at https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/cancer/ncdb/puf.

  29. National Cancer Institute S, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery. Retrieved 25 May 2022 at https://seer.cancer.gov/seerstat/variables/seer/regional_ln/.

  30. American college of Surgeons NCD. National Cancer Database Participant User File, 2017 Data Dictionary, Includes patients diagnosed in 2004–2017. 2020; pp 139–44. Retrieved 25 May 2022 at: https://www.facs.org/media/khro23pr/puf_data_dictionary_2017.pdf.

  31. Fritz AG. International Classification of Diseases for Oncology: ICD-O. 3rd edn. Geneva: First revision. World Health Organization; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  32. (HCUP) HHCaUP. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Recommendations for Reporting Trends using ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM/PCS Data. 2017. Retrieved 1 October 2021 at https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/datainnovations/HCUP_RecomForReportingTrends_070517.pdf.

  33. Mandelbaum AD, Thompson CK, Attai DJ, et al. National trends in immediate breast reconstruction: an analysis of implant-based versus autologous reconstruction after mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27:4777–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. National Cancer Institute STM. Types of Registries. Retrieved 1 October 2021 at https://training.seer.cancer.gov/registration/types/.

  35. Bilimoria KY, Bentrem DJ, Stewart AK, Winchester DP, Ko CY. Comparison of commission on cancer-approved and -nonapproved hospitals in the United States: implications for studies that use the National Cancer Database. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4177–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This research was funded in part through the NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA008748, which supports Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center’s research infrastructure.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Robyn N. Rubenstein and Jonas A. Nelson contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

    Robyn N. Rubenstein MD, Jonas A. Nelson MD, MPH, Saïd C. Azoury MD, Meghana G. Shamsunder MPH, Kathryn Haglich BS, MS, Shen Yin PhD, Carrie S. Stern MD & Evan Matros MD, MMSc, MPH

Authors
  1. Robyn N. Rubenstein MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jonas A. Nelson MD, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Saïd C. Azoury MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Meghana G. Shamsunder MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kathryn Haglich BS, MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Shen Yin PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Carrie S. Stern MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Evan Matros MD, MMSc, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jonas A. Nelson MD, MPH or Evan Matros MD, MMSc, MPH.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

There are no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 16 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rubenstein, R.N., Nelson, J.A., Azoury, S.C. et al. Breast Surgical Oncology Epidemiologic Research: A Guide and Comparison of Four National Databases. Ann Surg Oncol 30, 2069–2084 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-12890-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-12890-6

Search

Navigation