This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: M2130v1 14/6/736    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by McCowan, I. A. Articles by Fry, M.-J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by McCowan, I. A. Articles by Fry, M.-J.

Collection of Cancer Stage Data by Classifying Free-text Medical Reports

^a CSIRO e-Health Research Centre, Brisbane, Australia
^b Department of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
^c Department of Anatomical Pathology, The Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, Australia
^d Queensland Cancer Control Analysis Team, Queensland Health, Brisbane, Australia

^_* Correspondence: Iain McCowan, PhD, CSIRO e-Health Research Centre, PO Box 10842 Adelaide Street, Brisbane QLD 4000, Australia (Email: iain.mccowan{at}csiro.au).

Received for publication: 04/19/06; accepted for publication: 08/02/07.

Cancer staging provides a basis for planning clinical management, but also allows for meaningful analysis of cancer outcomes and evaluation of cancer care services. Despite this, stage data in cancer registries is often incomplete, inaccurate, or simply not collected. This article describes a prototype software system (Cancer Stage Interpretation System, CSIS) that automatically extracts cancer staging information from medical reports. The system uses text classification techniques to train support vector machines (SVMs) to extract elements of stage listed in cancer staging guidelines. When processing new reports, CSIS identifies sentences relevant to the staging decision, and subsequently assigns the most likely stage. The system was developed using a database of staging data and pathology reports for 710 lung cancer patients, then validated in an independent set of 179 patients against pathologic stage assigned by two independent pathologists. CSIS achieved overall accuracy of 74% for tumor (T) staging and 87% for node (N) staging, and errors were observed to mirror disagreements between human experts.