Dataset Information

Primary Care Prognostic (PCP) Index of 11-Year Mortality Risk: Development and Validation of a Brief Prognostic Tool.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Healthcare providers use a life expectancy of at least 5 to 10 years in shared clinical decision-making with older adults about cancer screening, major surgeries, and disease prevention interventions. At present, few prognostic indexes predict long-term mortality beyond 10 years or are suited for use in primary care settings.

Objective

We developed and validated an 8-item multidimensional index predicting 11-year mortality for use in primary care.

Design, setting, and participants

Using data from the Singapore Longitudinal Ageing Studies (SLAS), we developed a Primary Care Prognostic (PCP) Index for predicting 11-year mortality risk in a development cohort (n = 1550) and validated it in a geographically different cohort (n = 928).

Main measures

The PCP Index was derived from eight indicators (body mass loss, weakness, slow gait, comorbidity, polypharmacy, IADL/BADL dependency, low albumin, low total cholesterol, out of 25 candidate indicators) using stepwise Cox proportional hazard models.

Key results

In the developmental cohort, the mortality hazard ratio increased by 53% per PCP point score increase, independent of age and sex. Across risk categories, absolute risks of mortality increased from 5% (score 0) to 67.9% (scores 7-9), with area under curve (AUC = 0.77 (95% CI 0.73-0.80)). The PCP Index also predicted mortality in the validation cohort, with AUC = 0.70 (95% CI 0.64-0.75).

Conclusions

The PCP Index using simple clinical assessments and point scoring is a potentially useful prognostic tool for predicting long-term mortality and is well suited for risk stratification and shared clinical decision-making with older adults in primary care.

SUBMITTER: Chiang GSH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7858716 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Integrating care for common mental disorders (CMDs) such as depression, anxiety and alcohol abuse into primary healthcare (PHC) should assist in reducing South Africa (SA)'s quadruple burden of disease. CMDs compromise treatment adherence, health behaviour change and self-management of illnesses. Appropriate identification of mental disorders in primary care can be facilitated by brief, easy-to-administer screening that promotes high specificity. OBJECTIVES:To establish the criterion-based validity of a seven-item Brief Mental Health (BMH) screening tool for assessing positive symptoms of CMDs in primary care patients. METHODS:A total of 1 214 participants were recruited from all patients aged ?18 years visiting 10 clinics as part of routine care in the Newcastle subdistrict of Amajuba District in KwaZulu-Natal Province, SA, over a period of 2 weeks. Consenting patients provided basic biographical information prior to screening with the BMH tool. PHC nurses remained blind to this assessment. PHC nurse-initiated assessment using the Adult Primary Care (APC) guidelines was the gold standard against which the performance of the BMH tool was compared. A specificity standard of 80% was used to establish cut-points. Specificity was favoured over sensitivity to ensure that those who did not have CMD symptoms were excluded, as well as to reduce over-referrals. RESULTS:Of the participants, 72% were female. The AUD-C (alcohol abuse) performed well (area under the curve (AUC) 0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 - 0.95), cut-point ?4, Cronbach alpha 0.87); PHQ-2 (depression) performed reasonably well (AUC 0.72 (95% CI 0.65 - 0.78), cut-point ?3, alpha 0.71); and GAD-2 (anxiety) performance was acceptable (AUC 0.69 (95% CI 0.58 - 0.80), cut-point ?3, alpha 0.62). Using the higher cut-off scores, patients who truly did not have CMD symptoms had negative predictive values (NPVs) of >90%. Overall, 26% of patients had CMD positive symptoms relative to 8% using the APC guidelines. CONCLUSIONS:Using a higher specificity index, the positive predictive value and NPV show that at higher cut-point values the BMH not only helps identify individuals with alcohol misuse, depression and anxiety symptoms but also identifies a majority of those who do not have symptoms (true negatives), thus not overburdening nurses with false positives needing assessment. Research is needed to assess whether use of such a short and valid screening tool is generalisable to other clinic contexts as well as how mental health screening should best be introduced into routine clinic functioning and practice.

Project description:ContextMultimorbidity is highly prevalent among older adults and associated with a high mortality. Prediction of mortality in multimorbid people would be clinically useful but there is no mortality risk index designed for this population. Our objective was therefore to develop and internally validate a 1-year mortality prognostic index for older multimorbid adults.MethodsWe analysed data of the OPERAM cohort study in Bern, Switzerland, including 822 adults aged 70 years or more with multimorbidity (3 or more chronic medical conditions) and polypharmacy (use of 5 drugs or more for >30 days). Time to all-cause mortality was assessed up to 1 year of follow-up. We performed a parametric Weibull regression model with backward stepwise selection to identify mortality risk predictors. The model was internally validated and optimism corrected using bootstrapping techniques. We derived a point-based risk score from the regression coefficients. Calibration and discrimination were assessed by the calibration slope and C statistic.Results805 participants were included in the analysis. During 1-year of follow-up, 158 participants (20%) had died. Age, Charlson-Comorbidity-Index, number of drugs, body mass index, number of hospitalizations, Barthel-Index (functional impairment), and nursing home residency were predictors of 1-year mortality in a multivariable model. Using these variables, the 1-year probability of dying could be predicted with an optimism-corrected C statistic of 0.70. The optimism-corrected calibration slope was 0.93. Based on the derived point-based risk score to predict mortality risk, 7% of the patients classified at low-risk of mortality, 19% at moderate-risk, and 37% at high-risk died after one year of follow-up. A simpler mortality score, without the Charlson-Comorbidity-Index and Barthel-Index, showed reduced discriminative power (optimism-corrected C statistic: 0.59) compared to the full score.ConclusionWe developed and internally validated a mortality risk index including for the first-time specific predictors for multimorbid adults. This new 1-year mortality prediction point-based score allowed to classify multimorbid older patients into three categories of increasing risk of mortality. Further validation of the score among various populations of multimorbid patients is needed before its implementation into practice.

Project description:Background/objectivesPrognostic indices rarely include cognition. We determined if a comprehensive cognitive screen or brief individual items were associated with improved mortality predictions of a widely used prognostic index.Design, setting, and participantsThe National Social Life Health and Aging Project Wave 2, a nationally representative, cross-sectional, in-home survey conducted in 2010 to 2011 on 3,199 community-dwelling adults aged 60 to 99 years.MeasurementsCognition was measured using a Survey-Adapted Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA-SA) grouped into three screened categories: screen normal (≥24 points), screen positive for mild cognitive impairment (18-23 points), and screen positive for dementia (<18 points). Single-item cognitive measures included clock-draw and five-word delayed recall. We constructed a modified Lee Prognostic Index (range = 0-18 points) based on age, behavior, function, and comorbidities shown to predict long-term mortality. We used logistic regression and the fraction of new information provided to determine if each cognitive measure improved the Lee index's 5-year mortality prediction.ResultsThe sample was 54% female and had a mean age of 72 years, MoCA-SA score of 22 (SD = 4.5), and Lee index of 7 (SD = 3). Regression analysis indicated the MoCA-SA modestly improved the Lee index's mortality prediction (P < .001; fraction of new information provided = 0.06); for low Lee index scores (<4 points), the absolute mortality rate difference was 7% by cognitive status; and for higher Lee index scores (4-7 points or 8-12 points), the absolute mortality rate difference was 15% by cognitive status. The clock-draw and delayed-recall items added similar value to mortality predictions as the longer MoCA-SA. Cognition had the third highest fraction of new information of all 13 Lee index items.ConclusionIncorporating a brief measure of cognition into a modified Lee index, even with single items, resulted in more accurate 5-year mortality risk predictions. Cognition should be included in prognostic calculators in older adults given its independent association with mortality risk. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1796-1802, 2020.

Project description:BackgroundChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of mortality. Patients with advanced disease often have a poor quality of life, such that guidelines recommend providing palliative care in their last year of life. Uptake and use of palliative care in advanced COPD is low; difficulty in predicting 1-year mortality is thought to be a major contributing factor.MethodsWe identified two primary care COPD cohorts using UK electronic healthcare records (Clinical Practice Research Datalink). The first cohort was randomised equally into training and test sets. An external dataset was drawn from a second cohort. A risk model to predict mortality within 12 months was derived from the training set using backwards elimination Cox regression. The model was given the acronym BARC based on putative prognostic factors including body mass index and blood results (B), age (A), respiratory variables (airflow obstruction, exacerbations, smoking) (R) and comorbidities (C). The BARC index predictive performance was validated in the test set and external dataset by assessing calibration and discrimination. The observed and expected probabilities of death were assessed for increasing quartiles of mortality risk (very low risk, low risk, moderate risk, high risk). The BARC index was compared to the established index scores body mass index, obstructive, dyspnoea and exacerbations (BODEx), dyspnoea, obstruction, smoking and exacerbations (DOSE) and age, dyspnoea and obstruction (ADO).ResultsFifty-four thousand nine hundred ninety patients were eligible from the first cohort and 4931 from the second cohort. Eighteen variables were included in the BARC, including age, airflow obstruction, body mass index, smoking, exacerbations and comorbidities. The risk model had acceptable predictive performance (test set: C-index = 0.79, 95% CI 0.78-0.81, D-statistic = 1.87, 95% CI 1.77-1.96, calibration slope = 0.95, 95% CI 0.9-0.99; external dataset: C-index = 0.67, 95% CI 0.65-0.7, D-statistic = 0.98, 95% CI 0.8-1.2, calibration slope = 0.54, 95% CI 0.45-0.64) and acceptable accuracy predicting the probability of death (probability of death in 1 year, n high-risk group, test set: expected = 0.31, observed = 0.30; external dataset: expected = 0.22, observed = 0.27). The BARC compared favourably to existing index scores that can also be applied without specialist respiratory variables (area under the curve: BARC = 0.78, 95% CI 0.76-0.79; BODEx = 0.48, 95% CI 0.45-0.51; DOSE = 0.60, 95% CI 0.57-0.61; ADO = 0.68, 95% CI 0.66-0.69, external dataset: BARC = 0.70, 95% CI 0.67-0.72; BODEx = 0.41, 95% CI 0.38-0.45; DOSE = 0.52, 95% CI 0.49-0.55; ADO = 0.57, 95% CI 0.54-0.60).ConclusionThe BARC index performed better than existing tools in predicting 1-year mortality. Critically, the risk score only requires routinely collected non-specialist information which, therefore, could help identify patients seen in primary care that may benefit from palliative care.

Project description:BACKGROUND: A breast cancer prognostic tool should ideally be applicable to all types of invasive breast lesions. A number of studies have shown histopathological grade to be an independent prognostic factor in breast cancer, adding prognostic power to nodal stage and tumour size. The Nottingham Prognostic Index has been shown to accurately predict patient outcome in stratified groups with a follow-up period of 15 years after primary diagnosis of breast cancer. Clinically, breast tumours that lack the expression of Oestrogen Receptor, Progesterone Receptor and Human Epidermal growth factor Receptor 2 (HER2) are identified as presenting a "triple-negative" phenotype or as triple-negative breast cancers. These poor outcome tumours represent an easily recognisable prognostic group of breast cancer with aggressive behaviour that currently lack the benefit of available systemic therapy. There are conflicting results on the prevalence of lymph node metastasis at the time of diagnosis in triple-negative breast cancer patients but it is currently accepted that triple-negative breast cancer does not metastasize to axillary nodes and bones as frequently as the non-triple-negative carcinomas, favouring instead, a preferentially haematogenous spread. Hypothetically, this particular tumour dissemination pattern would impair the reliability of using Nottingham Prognostic Index as a tool for triple-negative breast cancer prognostication. METHODS: The present study tested the effectiveness of the Nottingham Prognostic Index in stratifying breast cancer patients of different subtypes with special emphasis in a triple-negative breast cancer patient subset versus non- triple-negative breast cancer. RESULTS: We demonstrated that besides the fact that TNBC disseminate to axillary lymph nodes as frequently as luminal or HER2 tumours, we also showed that TNBC are larger in size compared with other subtypes and almost all grade 3. Additionally, survival curves demonstrated that these prognostic factors are equally important to stratify different survival outcomes in non-TNBC as in TNBC. We also showed that the NPI retains the ability to stratify and predict survival of TNBC patients. CONCLUSION: The importance of this study relies on the need of prognostication improvements on TNBC, showing, at a clinical standpoint, that Nottingham Prognostic Index is as a truthful prognostic tool in TNBC.

Project description:STUDY OBJECTIVE:The goal of this study is to create a predictive, interpretable model of early hospital respiratory failure among emergency department (ED) patients admitted with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS:This was an observational, retrospective, cohort study from a 9-ED health system of admitted adult patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (COVID-19) and an oxygen requirement less than or equal to 6 L/min. We sought to predict respiratory failure within 24 hours of admission as defined by oxygen requirement of greater than 10 L/min by low-flow device, high-flow device, noninvasive or invasive ventilation, or death. Predictive models were compared with the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, quick Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment, and the CURB-65 pneumonia severity score. RESULTS:During the study period, from March 1 to April 27, 2020, 1,792 patients were admitted with COVID-19, 620 (35%) of whom had respiratory failure in the ED. Of the remaining 1,172 admitted patients, 144 (12.3%) met the composite endpoint within the first 24 hours of hospitalization. On the independent test cohort, both a novel bedside scoring system, the quick COVID-19 Severity Index (area under receiver operating characteristic curve mean 0.81 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.73 to 0.89]), and a machine-learning model, the COVID-19 Severity Index (mean 0.76 [95% CI 0.65 to 0.86]), outperformed the Elixhauser mortality index (mean 0.61 [95% CI 0.51 to 0.70]), CURB-65 (0.50 [95% CI 0.40 to 0.60]), and quick Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment (0.59 [95% CI 0.50 to 0.68]). A low quick COVID-19 Severity Index score was associated with a less than 5% risk of respiratory decompensation in the validation cohort. CONCLUSION:A significant proportion of admitted COVID-19 patients progress to respiratory failure within 24 hours of admission. These events are accurately predicted with bedside respiratory examination findings within a simple scoring system.

Project description:The Nottingham Prognostic Index Plus (NPI+) is a clinical decision making tool in breast cancer (BC) that aims to provide improved patient outcome stratification superior to the traditional NPI. This study aimed to validate the NPI+ in an independent series of BC. Eight hundred and eighty five primary early stage BC cases from Edinburgh were semi-quantitatively assessed for 10 biomarkers [Estrogen Receptor (ER), Progesterone Receptor (PgR), cytokeratin (CK) 5/6, CK7/8, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), HER2, HER3, HER4, p53, and Mucin 1] using immunohistochemistry and classified into biological classes by fuzzy logic-derived algorithms previously developed in the Nottingham series. Subsequently, NPI+ Prognostic Groups (PGs) were assigned for each class using bespoke NPI-like formulae, previously developed in each NPI+ biological class of the Nottingham series, utilising clinicopathological parameters: number of positive nodes, pathological tumour size, stage, tubule formation, nuclear pleomorphism and mitotic counts. Biological classes and PGs were compared between the Edinburgh and Nottingham series using Cramer's V and their role in patient outcome prediction using Kaplan-Meier curves and tested using Log Rank. The NPI+ biomarker panel classified the Edinburgh series into seven biological classes similar to the Nottingham series (p?>?0.01). The biological classes were significantly associated with patient outcome (p?<?0.001). PGs were comparable in predicting patient outcome between series in Luminal A, Basal p53 altered, HER2+/ER+ tumours (p?>?0.01). The good PGs were similarly validated in Luminal B, Basal p53 normal, HER2+/ER- tumours and the poor PG in the Luminal N class (p?>?0.01). Due to small patient numbers assigned to the remaining PGs, Luminal N, Luminal B, Basal p53 normal and HER2+/ER- classes could not be validated. This study demonstrates the reproducibility of NPI+ and confirmed its prognostic value in an independent cohort of primary BC. Further validation in large randomised controlled trial material is warranted.