Dataset Information

Mortality Risk Prediction: Can Comorbidity Indices Be Improved With Psychosocial Data?

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Predicting risk of premature death is one of the most basic tasks in medicine and public health, but has proven to be difficult over the long term even with the best prognostic models. One popular strategy has been to improve prognostic models with candidate genes and other novel biomarkers. However, the gains in predictive power have been modest and the costs have been high, leading to a demand for cost-effective alternatives. We conducted a proof-of-principle investigation to examine whether simple, cheap, and noninvasive paper-and-pencil measures of social class and personality phenotype could improve the performance of one of the most widely used prediction models for all-cause mortality, the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). METHODS:We used data from baseline and 25-year mortality follow-up of the UK Health and Lifestyle Study cohort. In a subset of the cohort, we first identified 5 psychosocial factors highly predictive of mortality: income, education, type A personality, communalism (preference for the company of others), and "lie" scale (a measure of denial, putatively associated with ill health). We then examined the predictive performance of the CCI with and without these measures in a validation subsample. RESULTS:Across 5-, 10-, 15-, 20-, and 25-year time horizons, the psychosocially augmented CCI showed substantially better discrimination [area under the receiver-operating curves (95% confidence interval) from 0.83 (0.81-0.85) to 0.84 (0.83-0.86)] than the CCI [area under the receiver-operating curves from 0.74 (0.71-0.76) to 0.77 (0.76-0.79)]. These translated into net reclassification improvements from 27% (23%-31%) to 35% (32%-38%) of survivors and from 23% (17%-30%) to 34% (17%-30%) of decedents; and 23%-42% reductions in the Number Needed to Screen. Calibration improved at all time horizons except 25 years, where it was decreased. CONCLUSION:Widespread attempts to improve prognostic models might consider not only novel biomarkers, but also psychosocial questionnaire measures.

SUBMITTER: Chapman BP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4658312 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mortality Risk Prediction: Can Comorbidity Indices Be Improved With Psychosocial Data?

Chapman Benjamin P BP Weiss Alexander A Fiscella Kevin K Muennig Peter P Kawachi Ichiro I Duberstein Paul P

Medical care 20151101 11

<h4>Background</h4>Predicting risk of premature death is one of the most basic tasks in medicine and public health, but has proven to be difficult over the long term even with the best prognostic models. One popular strategy has been to improve prognostic models with candidate genes and other novel biomarkers. However, the gains in predictive power have been modest and the costs have been high, leading to a demand for cost-effective alternatives. We conducted a proof-of-principle investigation t ...[more]

PMID: 26421372

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity indices are mortality predictors often used in clinical, administrative, and research applications. The Intermountain Mortality Risk Scores (IMRS) are validated mortality predictors that use all factors from the complete blood count and basic metabolic profile. How IMRS, Charlson, and Elixhauser relate to each other is unknown. METHODS:All inpatient admissions except obstetric patients at Intermountain Healthcare's 21 adult care hospitals from 2010-2014 (N = 197,680) were examined in a observational cohort study. The most recent admission was a patient's index encounter. Follow-up to 2018 used hospital death records, Utah death certificates, and the Social Security death master file. Three Charlson versions, 8 Elixhauser versions, and 3 IMRS formulations were evaluated in Cox regression and the one of each that was most predictive was used in dual risk score mortality analyses (in-hospital, 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year mortality). RESULTS:Indices with the strongest mortality associations and selected for dual score study were the age-adjusted Charlson, the van Walraven version of the acute Elixhauser, and the 1-year IMRS. For in-hospital mortality, Charlson (c = 0.719; HR = 4.75, 95% CI = 4.45, 5.07), Elixhauser (c = 0.783; HR = 5.79, CI = 5.41, 6.19), and IMRS (c = 0.821; HR = 17.95, CI = 15.90, 20.26) were significant predictors (p<0.001) in univariate analyses. Dual score analysis of Charlson (HR = 1.79, CI = 1.66, 1.92) with IMRS (HR = 13.10, CI = 11.53, 14.87) and of Elixhauser (HR = 3.00, CI = 2.80, 3.21) with IMRS (HR = 11.42, CI = 10.09, 12.92) found significance for both scores in each model. Results were similar for 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS:IMRS provided the strongest ability to predict mortality, adding to and attenuating the predictive ability of the Charlson and Elixhauser indices whose mortality associations remained statistically significant. IMRS uses common, standardized, objective laboratory data and should be further evaluated for integration into mortality risk evaluations.

Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding how comorbidity measures contribute to patient mortality is essential both to describe patient health status and to adjust for risks and potential confounding. The Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity indices are well-established for risk adjustment and mortality prediction. Still, a different set of comorbidity weights might improve the prediction of in-hospital mortality. The present study, therefore, aimed to derive a set of new Swiss Elixhauser comorbidity weightings, to validate and compare them against those of the Charlson and Elixhauser-based van Walraven weights in an adult in-patient population-based cohort of general hospitals.MethodsRetrospective analysis was conducted with routine data of 102 Swiss general hospitals (2012-2017) for 6.09 million inpatient cases. To derive the Swiss weightings for the Elixhauser comorbidity index, we randomly halved the inpatient data and validated the results of part 1 alongside the established weighting systems in part 2, to predict in-hospital mortality. Charlson and van Walraven weights were applied to Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity indices. Derivation and validation of weightings were conducted with generalized additive models adjusted for age, gender and hospital types.ResultsOverall, the Elixhauser indices, c-statistic with Swiss weights (0.867, 95% CI, 0.865-0.868) and van Walraven's weights (0.863, 95% CI, 0.862-0.864) had substantial advantage over Charlson's weights (0.850, 95% CI, 0.849-0.851) and in the derivation and validation groups. The net reclassification improvement of new Swiss weights improved the predictive performance by 1.6% on the Elixhauser-van Walraven and 4.9% on the Charlson weights.ConclusionsAll weightings confirmed previous results with the national dataset. The new Swiss weightings model improved slightly the prediction of in-hospital mortality in Swiss hospitals. The newly derive weights support patient population-based analysis of in-hospital mortality and seek country or specific cohort-based weightings.

Project description:BackgroundSeveral different indices summarize patient comorbidity using health care data. An accurate index can be used to describe the risk profile of patients, and as an adjustment factor in analyses. How well these indices perform in persons with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is not well known.ObjectiveAssess the performance of 5 comorbidity indices at predicting mortality in 3 different patient groups with CKD: incident kidney transplant recipients, maintenance dialysis patients, and individuals with low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR).DesignPopulation-based retrospective cohort study.SettingOntario, Canada, between 2004 and 2014.PatientsIndividuals at the time they first received a kidney transplant, received maintenance dialysis, or were confirmed to have an eGFR less than 45 mL/min per 1.73m2.MeasurementsFive comorbidity indices: Charlson comorbidity index, end-stage renal disease-modified Charlson comorbidity index, Johns Hopkins' Aggregated Diagnosis Groups score, Elixhauser score, and Wright-Khan index. Our primary outcome was 1-year all-cause mortality.MethodsComorbidity indices were estimated using information in the prior 2 years. Each group was randomly divided 100 times into derivation and validation samples. Model discrimination was assessed using median c-statistics from logistic regression models, and calibration was evaluated graphically.ResultsWe identified 4111 kidney transplant recipients, 23 897 individuals receiving maintenance dialysis, and 181 425 individuals with a low eGFR. Within 1 year, 108 (2.6%), 4179 (17.5%), and 17 898 (9.9%) in each group had died, respectively. In the validation sample, model discrimination was inadequate with median c-statistics less than 0.7 for all 5 comorbidity indices for all 3 groups. Calibration was also poor for all models.LimitationsThe study used administrative health care data so there is the potential for misclassification. Indices were modeled as continuous scores as opposed to indicators for individual conditions to limit overfitting.ConclusionsExisting comorbidity indices do not accurately predict 1-year mortality in patients with CKD. Current indices could be modified with additional risk factors to improve their performance in CKD, or a new index could be developed for this population.

Project description:The polygenic risk score (PRS) can help to identify individuals' genetic susceptibility for various diseases by combining patient genetic profiles and identified single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from genome-wide association studies. Although multiple diseases will usually afflict patients at once or in succession, conventional PRSs fail to consider genetic relationships across multiple diseases. Even multi-trait PRSs, which take into account genetic effects for more than one disease at a time, fail to consider a sufficient number of phenotypes to accurately reflect the state of disease comorbidity in a patient, or are biased in terms of the traits that are selected. Thus, we developed novel network-based comorbidity risk scores to quantify associations among multiple phenotypes from phenome-wide association studies (PheWAS). We first constructed a disease-SNP heterogeneous multi-layered network (DS-Net), which consists of a disease network (disease-layer) and SNP network (SNP-layer). The disease-layer describes the population-level interactome from PheWAS data. The SNP-layer was constructed according to linkage disequilibrium. Both layers were attached to transform the information from a population-level interactome to individual-level inferences. Then, graph-based semi-supervised learning was applied to predict possible comorbidity scores on disease-layer for each subject. The SNP-layer serves as receiving individual genotyping data in the scoring process, and the disease-layer serves as the propagated output for an individual's multiple disease comorbidity scores. The possible comorbidity scores were combined by logistic regression, and it is denoted as netCRS. The DS-Net was constructed from UK Biobank PheWAS data, and the individual genetic profiles were collected from the Penn Medicine Biobank. As a proof-of-concept study, myocardial infarction (MI) was selected to compare netCRS with the PRS with pruning and thresholding (PRS-PT). The combined model (netCRS + PRS-PT + covariates) achieved an AUC improvement of 6.26% compared to the (PRS-PT + covariates) model. In terms of risk stratification, the combined model was able to capture the risk of MI up to approximately eight-fold higher than that of the low-risk group. The netCRS and PRS-PT complement each other in predicting high-risk groups of patients with MI. We expect that using these risk prediction models will allow for the development of prevention strategies and reduction of MI morbidity and mortality.

Dataset Information

Mortality Risk Prediction: Can Comorbidity Indices Be Improved With Psychosocial Data?

Publications

Mortality Risk Prediction: Can Comorbidity Indices Be Improved With Psychosocial Data?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets