Dataset Information

Does simplicity compromise accuracy in ACS risk prediction? A retrospective analysis of the TIMI and GRACE risk scores.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) risk scores for Unstable Angina/Non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI) and ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk scores for in-hospital and 6-month mortality are established tools for assessing risk in Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) patients. The objective of our study was to compare the discriminative abilities of the TIMI and GRACE risk scores in a broad-spectrum, unselected ACS population and to assess the relative contributions of model simplicity and model composition to any observed differences between the two scoring systems.

Methodology/principal findings

ACS patients admitted to the University of Michigan between 1999 and 2005 were divided into UA/NSTEMI (n = 2753) and STEMI (n = 698) subpopulations. The predictive abilities of the TIMI and GRACE scores for in-hospital and 6-month mortality were assessed by calibration and discrimination. There were 137 in-hospital deaths (4%), and among the survivors, 234 (7.4%) died by 6 months post-discharge. In the UA/NSTEMI population, the GRACE risk scores demonstrated better discrimination than the TIMI UA/NSTEMI score for in-hospital (C = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.81-0.89, versus 0.54, 95% CI: 0.48-0.60; p<0.01) and 6-month (C = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.76-0.83, versus 0.56, 95% CI: 0.52-0.60; p<0.01) mortality. Among STEMI patients, the GRACE and TIMI STEMI scores demonstrated comparably excellent discrimination for in-hospital (C = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.78-0.90 versus 0.83, 95% CI: 0.78-0.89; p = 0.83) and 6-month (C = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.63-0.81, versus 0.71, 95% CI: 0.64-0.79; p = 0.79) mortality. An analysis of refitted multivariate models demonstrated a marked improvement in the discriminative power of the TIMI UA/NSTEMI model with the incorporation of heart failure and hemodynamic variables. Study limitations included unaccounted for confounders inherent to observational, single institution studies with moderate sample sizes.

Conclusions/significance

The GRACE scores provided superior discrimination as compared with the TIMI UA/NSTEMI score in predicting in-hospital and 6-month mortality in UA/NSTEMI patients, although the GRACE and TIMI STEMI scores performed equally well in STEMI patients. The observed discriminative deficit of the TIMI UA/NSTEMI score likely results from the omission of key risk factors rather than from the relative simplicity of the scoring system.

SUBMITTER: Aragam KG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2776353 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Does simplicity compromise accuracy in ACS risk prediction? A retrospective analysis of the TIMI and GRACE risk scores.

Aragam Krishna G KG Tamhane Umesh U UU Kline-Rogers Eva E Li Jin J Fox Keith A A KA Goodman Shaun G SG Eagle Kim A KA Gurm Hitinder S HS

PloS one 20091123 11

<h4>Background</h4>The Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) risk scores for Unstable Angina/Non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI) and ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk scores for in-hospital and 6-month mortality are established tools for assessing risk in Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) patients. The objective of our study was to compare the discriminative abilities of the TIMI and GRACE risk scores in a b ...[more]

PMID: 19956773

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRisk stratification in non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) determines the intervention time. Limited study compared two risk scores, the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) and Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk scores in the current East Asian NSTEMI patients.MethodsThis retrospective observational study consecutively collected patients in a large academic hospital between 01/01 and 11/01/2017 and followed for 4 years. Patients were scored by TIMI and GRACE scores on hospital admission. In-hospital endpoints were defined as the in-hospital composite event, including mortality, re-infarction, heart failure, stroke, cardiac shock, or resuscitation. Long-term outcomes were all-cause mortality and cardiac mortality in 4-year follow-up.ResultsA total of 232 patients were included (female 29.7%, median age 67 years), with a median follow-up of 3.7 years. GRACE score grouped most patients (45.7%) into high risk, while TIMI grouped the majority (61.2%) into medium risk. Further subgrouping the TIMI medium group showed that half (53.5%) of the TIMI medium risk population was GRACE high risk (≥ 140). Compared to TIMI medium group + GRACE < 140 subgroup, the TIMI medium + GRACE high-risk (≥ 140) subgroup had a significantly higher in-hospital events (39.5% vs. 9.1%, p < 0.05), long-term all-cause mortality (22.2% vs. 0% p < 0.001) and cardiac death (11.1% vs. 0% p = 0.045) in 4-year follow-up. GRACE risk scores showed a better predictive ability than TIMI risk scores both for in-hospital and long-term outcomes. (AUC of GRACE vs. TIMI, In-hospital: 0.82 vs. 0.62; long-term mortality: 0.89 vs. 0.68; long-term cardiac mortality: 0.91 vs. 0.67, all p < 0.05). Combined use of the two risk scores reserved both the convenience of scoring and the predictive accuracy.ConclusionGRACE showed better predictive accuracy than TIMI in East Asian NSTEMI patients in both in-hospital and long-term outcomes. The sequential use of TIMI and GRACE scores provide an easy and promising discriminative tool in predicting outcomes in NSTEMI East Asian patients.

Project description:Background A residual risk of ischemic events following an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains despite antiplatelet therapy. The addition of an antithrombin as part of a “dual pathway” approach may further improve outcomes as thrombin generation persists for several months post‐ACS. The present study evaluates the safety and efficacy of “dual pathway” therapy (rivaroxaban plus aspirin) as compared with aspirin monotherapy among post‐ACS patients. Methods and Results A total of 1477 patients were analyzed in a pooled analysis of subsets of the ATLAS ACS‐TIMI (Anti‐Xa Therapy to Lower cardiovascular events in addition to Aspirin with or without thienopyridine therapy in Subjects with Acute Coronary Syndrome – Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction) 46 and ATLAS ACS 2‐TIMI 51 trials including post‐ACS patients receiving aspirin monotherapy and randomized to either rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID or rivaroxaban 5 mg BID or placebo. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke (ischemic, hemorrhagic, or of uncertain cause). The primary safety end point was TIMI‐non‐coronary artery bypass (CABG) major bleeding. The combined rivaroxaban group (2.5 or 5 mg BID) among stabilized post‐ACS patients on a background of aspirin monotherapy was associated with a significant reduction in the primary end point as compared with placebo (hazard ratio=0.65, 95% CI=0.45–0.92, P=0.016). Although the combined rivaroxaban dose groups were associated with higher rates of non‐CABG TIMI major bleeding, the 2.5 mg dose group was not, and the overall number of patients experiencing a non‐CABG TIMI major bleeding event was low (1.5%). Conclusions Among patients in the immediate post‐ACS period, a “dual pathway” approach using aspirin and low‐dose rivaroxaban may reduce the risk of secondary atherothrombotic events, but increase bleeding risk. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT00402597; NCT00809965. See Editorial by Harrison and Newby

Project description:BackgroundInequality in health outcomes in relation to Americans' socioeconomic position is rising.ObjectiveFirst, to evaluate the spatial relationship between neighborhood disadvantage and major atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD)-related events; second, to evaluate the relative extent to which neighborhood disadvantage and physiologic risk account for neighborhood-level variation in ASCVD event rates.DesignObservational cohort analysis of geocoded longitudinal electronic health records.SettingA single academic health center and surrounding neighborhoods in northeastern Ohio.Patients109 793 patients from the Cleveland Clinic Health System (CCHS) who had an outpatient lipid panel drawn between 2007 and 2010. The date of the first qualifying lipid panel served as the study baseline.MeasurementsTime from baseline to the first occurrence of a major ASCVD event (myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death) within 5 years, modeled as a function of a locally derived neighborhood disadvantage index (NDI) and the predicted 5-year ASCVD event rate from the Pooled Cohort Equations Risk Model (PCERM) of the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association. Outcome data were censored if no CCHS encounters occurred for 2 consecutive years or when state death data were no longer available (that is, from 2014 onward).ResultsThe PCERM systematically underpredicted ASCVD event risk among patients from disadvantaged communities. Model discrimination was poorer among these patients (concordance index [C], 0.70 [95% CI, 0.67 to 0.74]) than those from the most affluent communities (C, 0.80 [CI, 0.78 to 0.81]). The NDI alone accounted for 32.0% of census tract-level variation in ASCVD event rates, compared with 10.0% accounted for by the PCERM.LimitationsPatients from affluent communities were overrepresented. Outcomes of patients who received treatment for cardiovascular disease at Cleveland Clinic were assumed to be independent of whether the patients came from a disadvantaged or an affluent neighborhood.ConclusionNeighborhood disadvantage may be a powerful regulator of ASCVD event risk. In addition to supplemental risk models and clinical screening criteria, population-based solutions are needed to ameliorate the deleterious effects of neighborhood disadvantage on health outcomes.Primary funding sourceThe Clinical and Translational Science Collaborative of Cleveland and National Institutes of Health.

Dataset Information

Does simplicity compromise accuracy in ACS risk prediction? A retrospective analysis of the TIMI and GRACE risk scores.

Background

Methodology/principal findings

Conclusions/significance

Publications

Does simplicity compromise accuracy in ACS risk prediction? A retrospective analysis of the TIMI and GRACE risk scores.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets