Dataset Information

Predicting 5-Year Risk of RRT in Stage 3 or 4 CKD: Development and External Validation.

ABSTRACT:

Background and objectives

Only a minority of patients with CKD progress to renal failure. Despite the potential benefits of risk stratification in the CKD population, risk prediction models are not routinely used. Our objective was to develop and externally validate a clinically useful and pragmatic prediction model for the 5-year risk of progression to RRT in stage 3 or 4 CKD.

Design, setting, participants, & measurements

We used a retrospective cohort design. The development cohort consisted of 22,460 Kaiser Permanente Northwest members with stage 3 or 4 CKD (baseline 2002-2008). The validation cohort consisted of 16,553 Kaiser Permanente Colorado members with stage 3-4 CKD (baseline 2006-2008). The final model included eight predictors: age, sex, eGFR, hemoglobin, proteinuria/albuminuria, systolic BP, antihypertensive medication use, and diabetes and its complications.

Results

In the Northwest and Colorado cohorts, there were 737 and 360 events, and observed 5-year Kaplan-Meier risks of 4.72% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 4.38 to 5.06) and 2.57% (95% CI, 2.30 to 2.83), respectively. Our prediction model performed extremely well in the development cohort, with a c-statistic of 0.96, an R² of 79.7%, and good calibration. We had similarly good performance in the external validation cohort, with a c-statistic of 0.95, R² of 81.2%, and good calibration. In the external validation cohort, the observed risk was slightly lower than the predicted risk in the highest-risk quintile. Using the top quintile of predicted risk as a cutpoint gave a sensitivity of 92.2%.

Conclusions

We developed a pragmatic prediction model and risk score for predicting the 5-year RRT risk in stage 3 and 4 CKD. This model uses variables that are typically available in routine primary care settings, and can be used to help guide important decisions such as timing of referral to nephrology and fistula placement.

SUBMITTER: Schroeder EB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5220646 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Predicting 5-Year Risk of RRT in Stage 3 or 4 CKD: Development and External Validation.

Schroeder Emily B EB Yang Xiuhai X Thorp Micah L ML Arnold Brent M BM Tabano David C DC Petrik Amanda F AF Smith David H DH Platt Robert W RW Johnson Eric S ES

Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN 20161227 1

<h4>Background and objectives</h4>Only a minority of patients with CKD progress to renal failure. Despite the potential benefits of risk stratification in the CKD population, risk prediction models are not routinely used. Our objective was to develop and externally validate a clinically useful and pragmatic prediction model for the 5-year risk of progression to RRT in stage 3 or 4 CKD.<h4>Design, setting, participants, & measurements</h4>We used a retrospective cohort design. The development coh ...[more]

PMID: 28028051

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe kidney failure risk equation (KFRE) predicts the 2- and 5-year risk of needing kidney replacement therapy (KRT) using four risk factors - age, sex, urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR) and creatinine-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Although the KFRE has been recalibrated in a UK cohort, this did not consider minority ethnic groups. Further validation of the KFRE in different ethnicities is a research priority. The KFRE also does not consider the competing risk of death, which may lead to overestimation of KRT risk. This study externally validates the KFRE for patients of South Asian ethnicity and compares methods for accounting for ethnicity and the competing event of death.MethodsData were gathered from an established UK cohort containing 35,539 individuals diagnosed with chronic kidney disease. The KFRE was externally validated and updated in several ways taking into account ethnicity, using recognised methods for time-to-event data, including the competing risk of death. A clinical impact assessment compared the updated models through consideration of referrals made to secondary care.ResultsThe external validation showed the risk of KRT differed by ethnicity. Model validation performance improved when incorporating ethnicity and its interactions with ACR and eGFR as additional risk factors. Furthermore, accounting for the competing risk of death improved prediction. Using criteria of 5 years ≥ 5% predicted KRT risk, the competing risks model resulted in an extra 3 unnecessary referrals (0.59% increase) but identified an extra 1 KRT case (1.92% decrease) compared to the previous best model. Hybrid criteria of predicted risk using the competing risks model and ACR ≥ 70 mg/mmol should be used in referrals to secondary care.ConclusionsThe accuracy of KFRE prediction improves when updated to consider South Asian ethnicity and to account for the competing risk of death. This may reduce unnecessary referrals whilst identifying risks of KRT and could further individualise the KFRE and improve its clinical utility. Further research should consider other ethnicities.

Project description:We propose a cost-effective sampling design and estimating procedure for validating personal risk models using right-censored cohort data. Validation involves using each subject's covariates, as ascertained at cohort entry, in a risk model (specified independently of the data) to assign him/her a probability of an adverse outcome within a future time period. Subjects are then grouped according to the magnitudes of their assigned risks, and within each group, the mean assigned risk is compared with the probability of outcome occurrence as estimated using the follow-up data. Such validation presents two complications. First, in the presence of right-censoring, estimating the probability of developing the outcomes before death requires competing risk analysis. Second, for rare outcomes, validation using the full cohort requires assembling covariates and assigning risks to thousands of subjects. This can be costly when some covariates involve analyzing biological specimens. A two-stage sampling design addresses this problem by assembling covariates and assigning risks only to those subjects most informative for estimating key parameters. We use this design to estimate the outcome probabilities needed to evaluate model performance and we provide theoretical and bootstrap estimates of their variances. We also describe how to choose two-stage designs with minimal efficiency loss for a parameter of interest when the quantities determining optimality are unknown at the time of design. We illustrate these methods by using subjects in the California Teachers Study to validate ovarian cancer risk models. We find that a design with optimal efficiency for one performance parameter need not be so for others, and trade-offs will be required. A two-stage design that samples all outcome-positive subjects and more outcome-negative than censored subjects will perform well in most circumstances. The methods are implemented in Risk Model Assessment Program, an R program freely available at http://med.stanford.edu/epidemiology/two-stage.html.

Project description:BackgroundPneumonia is the leading infectious cause of under-5 mortality in sub-Saharan Africa. Clinical prediction tools may aide case classification, triage, and allocation of hospital resources. We performed an external validation of two published prediction tools and compared this to a locally developed tool to identify children admitted with pneumonia at increased risk for in-hospital mortality in Malawi.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the performance of the Respiratory Index of Severity in Children (RISC) and modified RISC (mRISC) scores in a child pneumonia dataset prospectively collected during routine care at seven hospitals in Malawi between 2011-2014. RISC has both an HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected tool. A local score (RISC-Malawi) was developed using multivariable logistic regression with missing data multiply imputed using chained equations. Score performances were assessed using c-statistics, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and likelihood statistics.Results16,475 in-patient pneumonia episodes were recorded (case-fatality rate (CFR): 3.2%), 9,533 with complete data (CFR: 2.0%). The c-statistic for the RISC (HIV-uninfected) score, used to assess its ability to differentiate between children who survived to discharge and those that died, was 0.72. The RISC-Malawi score, using mid-upper arm circumference as an indicator of malnutrition severity, had a c-statistic of 0.79. We were unable to perform a comprehensive external validation of RISC (HIV-infected) and mRISC as both scores include parameters that were not routinely documented variables in our dataset.ConclusionIn our population of Malawian children with WHO-defined pneumonia, the RISC (HIV-uninfected) score identified those at high risk for in-hospital mortality. However the refinement of parameters and resultant creation of RISC-Malawi improved performance. Next steps include prospectively studying both scores to determine if incorporation into routine care delivery can have a meaningful impact on in-hospital CFRs of children with WHO-defined pneumonia.

Project description:BackgroundSeizures are the main cause of maternal death in women with epilepsy, but there are no tools for predicting seizures in pregnancy. We set out to develop and validate a prognostic model, using information collected during the antenatal booking visit, to predict seizure risk at any time in pregnancy and until 6 weeks postpartum in women with epilepsy on antiepileptic drugs.Methods and findingsWe used datasets of a prospective cohort study (EMPiRE) of 527 pregnant women with epilepsy on medication recruited from 50 hospitals in the UK (4 November 2011-17 August 2014). The model development cohort comprised 399 women whose antiepileptic drug doses were adjusted based on clinical features only; the validation cohort comprised 128 women whose drug dose adjustments were informed by serum drug levels. The outcome was epileptic (non-eclamptic) seizure captured using diary records. We fitted the model using LASSO (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) regression, and reported the performance using C-statistic (scale 0-1, values > 0.5 show discrimination) and calibration slope (scale 0-1, values near 1 show accuracy) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We determined the net benefit (a weighted sum of true positive and false positive classifications) of using the model, with various probability thresholds, to aid clinicians in making individualised decisions regarding, for example, referral to tertiary care, frequency and intensity of monitoring, and changes in antiepileptic medication. Seizures occurred in 183 women (46%, 183/399) in the model development cohort and in 57 women (45%, 57/128) in the validation cohort. The model included age at first seizure, baseline seizure classification, history of mental health disorder or learning difficulty, occurrence of tonic-clonic and non-tonic-clonic seizures in the 3 months before pregnancy, previous admission to hospital for seizures during pregnancy, and baseline dose of lamotrigine and levetiracetam. The C-statistic was 0.79 (95% CI 0.75, 0.84). On external validation, the model showed good performance (C-statistic 0.76, 95% CI 0.66, 0.85; calibration slope 0.93, 95% CI 0.44, 1.41) but with imprecise estimates. The EMPiRE model showed the highest net proportional benefit for predicted probability thresholds between 12% and 99%. Limitations of this study include the varied gestational ages of women at recruitment, retrospective patient recall of seizure history, potential variations in seizure classification, the small number of events in the validation cohort, and the clinical utility restricted to decision-making thresholds above 12%. The model findings may not be generalisable to low- and middle-income countries, or when information on all predictors is not available.ConclusionsThe EMPiRE model showed good performance in predicting the risk of seizures in pregnant women with epilepsy who are prescribed antiepileptic drugs. Integration of the tool within the antenatal booking visit, deployed as a simple nomogram, can help to optimise care in women with epilepsy.

Project description:ObjectivesPulmonary complications remain a frequent cause of morbidity in patients undergoing oesophagectomy. Risk screening tools assist in patient stratification. Ferguson proposed a risk score system to predict major pulmonary complications after oesophagectomy. Our objective was to externally validate this risk score system.MethodsWe analysed our institutional database for patients undergoing oesophagectomy for cancer from August 2009 to December 2012. We analysed patients who had complete documentation of variables used in the Ferguson risk score calculation: forced expiratory volume in the 1 s, diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide, performance status and age. One hundred and thirty-six patients qualified for analysis in the validation study. Outcome variables measured included major pulmonary complications, defined as need for reintubation for respiratory failure and pneumonia. The risk score was then calculated for each individual based on the model. Incidence of major pulmonary events was assessed in the five risk class groupings to assess the discriminative ability of the Ferguson score.ResultsMajor pulmonary complications occurred in 35% of patients (47/136). Overall mortality was 6% (8/136). Patients were grouped into five risk categories according to their Ferguson pulmonary risk score: 0-2, 8 patients (6%); 3-4, 24 patients (18%); 5-6, 49 patients (36%); 29 patients (21%); 9-14, 26 patients (19%). The incidence of major pulmonary complications in these categories was 0, 17, 20, 41 and 77%, respectively. The accuracy of the risk score system for predicting major pulmonary complications was 76% (P < 0.0001).ConclusionsThis pulmonary risk scoring system is a reliable instrument to be used during the preoperative phase to differentiate patients who may be at higher risk for pulmonary complications after oesophagectomy. These data can assist in patient selection, and in patient education/informed consent and can guide postoperative management.

Project description:BackgroundMany patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) do not appreciate how their survival may differ if treated with a kidney transplant compared with dialysis. A risk calculator (iChoose Kidney) developed and validated in the United States provides individualized mortality estimates for different treatment options (dialysis vs living or deceased donor kidney transplantation). The calculator can be used with patients and families to help patients make more educated treatment decisions.ObjectiveTo validate the iChoose Kidney risk calculator in Ontario, Canada.DesignExternal validation study.SettingWe used several linked administrative health care databases from Ontario, Canada.PatientsWe included 22 520 maintenance dialysis patients and 4505 kidney transplant recipients. Patients entered the cohort between 2004 and 2014.MeasurementsThree-year all-cause mortality.MethodsWe assessed model discrimination using the C-statistic. We assessed model calibration by comparing the observed versus predicted mortality risk and by using smoothed calibration plots. We used multivariable logistic regression modeling to recalibrate model intercepts using a correction factor, when appropriate.ResultsIn our final version of the iChoose Kidney model, we included the following variables: age (18-80 years), sex (male, female), race (white, black, other), time on dialysis (<6 months, 6-12 months, >12 months), and patient comorbidities (hypertension, diabetes, and/or cardiovascular disease). Over the 3-year follow-up period, 33.3% of dialysis patients and 6.2% of kidney transplant recipients died. The discriminatory ability was moderate (C-statistic for dialysis: 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-0.70, and C-statistic for transplant: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.69-0.75). The 3-year observed and predicted mortality estimates were comparable and even more so after we recalibrated the intercepts in 2 of our models (dialysis and deceased donor kidney transplantation). As done in the United States, we developed a Canadian Web site and an iOS application called Dialysis vs. Kidney Transplant- Estimated Survival in Ontario.LimitationsMissing data in our databases precluded the inclusion of all variables that were in the original iChoose Kidney (ie, patient ethnicity and low albumin). We were unable to perform all preplanned analyses due to the limited sample size.ConclusionsThe original iChoose Kidney risk calculator was able to adequately predict mortality in this Canadian (Ontario) cohort of ESKD patients. After minor modifications, the predictive accuracy improved. The Dialysis vs. Kidney Transplant- Estimated Survival in Ontario risk calculator may be a valuable resource to help ESKD patients make an informed decision on pursuing kidney transplantation.

Dataset Information

Predicting 5-Year Risk of RRT in Stage 3 or 4 CKD: Development and External Validation.

Background and objectives

Design, setting, participants, & measurements

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Predicting 5-Year Risk of RRT in Stage 3 or 4 CKD: Development and External Validation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets