OHDSI Home | Forums | Wiki | Github

Possible duplicate TNM measurement values in the NAACCR vocabulary and possible missing TNM pathological M value?

Vocabulary Users
#1

Please see here: pM1a with concept id 35919199
and also here: pM1a with concept id 35919220

The second of these is recorded as an answer of TNM Clin M which doesn’t seem correct as this is a pathological M value.

Another pair of possible duplicates:

pM1 with concept id 35919762

pM1 with concept id 35919480 - this is possibly incorrectly entered as an answer of TNM Clin M

Finally, there doesn’t seem to be a concept for pM0 in NAACCR. There is one in SNOMED with concept id 4023593 and one in Nebraska Lexicon with concept id 3175282

Would it be possible to create a concept for the pM0 value in the NAACCR vocabulary?

#2

Conventions for mapping oncology data are a long term work in progress. But I believe the expectation is that the NAACCR vocabulary will be destandardized in the future, in favor if the Cancer Modifier vocabulary. Ditto for the Nebraska Lexicon vocabulary.

See this link for pM1a concepts in Cancer Modifier.

Notice that they have a hierarchy; if you have the AJCC version and want to use, for example, AJCC/UICC 8th pathological M1a Category, otherwise you can use the generic AJCC/UICC pathological M1a Category.

Note also that all Cancer Modifier concepts are in the Measurement domain: you put them in the MEASUREMENT table and use the measurement_event_id and measurement_event_field_concept_id fields to link the measurement record to the CONDITION_OCCURRENCE record it modifies. Create a single condition record as the “primary diagnosis” and use Cancer Modifiers to supply all the tumor attributes.

t