Accuracy of the HPV status site‐specific factor 10 (SSF‐10) variable for patients with oropharyngeal cancers in the Iowa Cancer Registry, 2010‐2014

• Published in: Head & neck Vol. 40; no. 10; pp. 2199 - 2209
• Main Authors: Kahl, Amanda R., Charlton, Mary E., Pagedar, Nitin A., Sperry, Steven M., Matt, Bobbi, Platz, Charles, Lynch, Charles F.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.10.2018
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging; Cancer; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - epidemiology; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell - virology; Clinical Coding; DNA, Viral - analysis; Female; Head & neck cancer; Head and neck; head and neck cancer; Human papillomavirus; human papillomavirus (HPV)‐related cancer; Humans; Iowa - epidemiology; Male; Middle Aged; Nitric-oxide synthase; oropharyngeal cancer; Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - epidemiology; Oropharyngeal Neoplasms - virology; Papillomaviridae - genetics; Papillomavirus Infections - epidemiology; Public Health Surveillance; Registries; SEER Program; Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER); Throat cancer; Iowa; United States > US; American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging; oropharyngeal cancer; head and neck cancer; Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER); human papillomavirus (HPV)-related cancer
• ISSN: 1043-3074; 1097-0347
• DOI: 10.1002/hed.25314

Background Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Cancer Registries (SEER) began collecting human papillomavirus (HPV) status for upper aerodigestive tract cancers in 2010. However, classification of p16‐testing was not included in the Collaborative Stage coding guidelines, potentially leading to inconsistent coding. Methods The HPV values for Iowa patients with oropharyngeal cancers (n = 824) were recoded based on modified guidelines that included p16 test results, and compared with the original guidelines. Results Forty percent of patients were recoded to a different value, and the HPV testing rate increased from 45% to 55%; 56% received p16‐testing only. Of those originally coded as HPV‐type 16 (n = 187), 89% were recoded to HPV‐not otherwise specified (NOS). When comparing high‐level positive/negative/not done categories, original coding captured 81% of patients with HPV‐positive cancers. Conclusion p16 was the most common HPV test but was inconsistently coded as HPV‐testing. p16‐positivity was also erroneously equated with HPV‐type 16. Adding a separate p16 variable would improve consistency and accuracy of HPV coding.