Prostate cancer treatment ascertained from several sources: analysis of disagreement and error.

BACKGROUND: Treatment data for prostate cancer can be obtained from a variety of sources. Each of these sources has its own strengths and weaknesses and is subject to error. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a population-based cohort of 319 prostate cancer patients, data on treatment were obtained from five sources: two patient interviews at 6 and 12 months after diagnosis, primary caregiver interviews, physician questionnaires, and medical records. Inter-reporting agreement and accuracy of reporting (compared with medical records) were assessed. Multivariate analyses examined patient, caregiver, and physician characteristics as determinants of reporting error. RESULTS: The agreement among different reporting methods was generally good to excellent for prostatectomy and brachytherapy (kappa range 0.70-0.90) and fair to good (kappa range 0.35-0.75) for external beam radiation and hormonal treatment. Compared with medical records, the interview- and questionnaire-based data collection methods were more accurate for prostatectomy and brachytherapy than for external beam radiation and hormonal therapy. Using medical records as the 'gold standard', patient and caregiver interviews at 6 months after the diagnosis had higher sensitivity and specificity than other reporting sources. CONCLUSION: Interviews of prostate cancer patients and caregivers are useful alternatives to medical record abstraction, particularly if carried out during, or soon after, treatment.

The pulmonary response of white and black adults to six concentrations of ozone.

Many early studies of respiratory responsiveness to ozone (O3) were done on healthy, young, white males. The purpose of this study was to determine whether gender or race differences in O3 response exist among white and black, males and females, and to develop concentration-response curves for each of the gender-race groups. Three hundred seventy-two subjects (n > 90 in each gender-race group), ages 18 to 35 yr, were exposed once for 2.33 h to 0.0 (purified air), 0.12, 0.18, 0.24, 0.30, or 0.40 ppm O3. Each exposure was preceded by baseline pulmonary function tests and a symptom questionnaire. The first 2 h of exposure included alternating 15-min periods of rest and exercise on a motorized treadmill producing a minute ventilation (VE) of 25 L/min/m2 body surface area (BSA). After exposure, subjects completed a set of pulmonary function tests and a symptom questionnaire. Lung function and symptom responses were expressed as percent change from baseline and analyzed using a nonparametric two factor analysis of variance. Three primary variables were analyzed: FEV1, specific airway resistance (SRaw), and cough. Statistical analysis demonstrated no significant differences in response to O3 among the individual gender-race groups. For the group as a whole, changes in the variables FEV1, SRaw, and cough were first noted at 0.12, 0.18, and 0.18 ppm O3, respectively. Adjusted for exercise difference, concentration-response curves for FEV1 and cough among white males were consistent with previous reports (1).