320 likes | 449 Views
SCreening for Occult REnal Disease (SCORED) Simple Algorithms to Predict Kidney Disease: ready to be used in the real world?. Heejung Bang, PhD & Madhu Mazumdar, PhD Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology Department of Public Health Weill Medical College of Cornell University.
E N D
SCreening for Occult REnal Disease (SCORED)Simple Algorithms to Predict Kidney Disease: ready to be used in the real world? Heejung Bang, PhD & Madhu Mazumdar, PhD Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology Department of Public Health Weill Medical College of Cornell University
Overview • Background • Objectives • Methods: model development and validation • Results • Discussion
Background Prevalence of Kidney Disease (1999-2004) Stages 1 and 2 with kidney damage
Background End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) Counts
Background Total Cost of Medicare for ESRD (in billions)
Background • Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a global health problem. Low-awareness and late detection are common problems. • It is progressive disease. Yet, most affected individuals are asymptomatic with known risk factors and are not routinely tested. • Identifying individuals with CKD should be ‘simple’ with serum creatinine concentration that is widely available and inexpensive ($10-20), in combination with urinalysis. • Systematic methods to predict disease in other chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease (e.g., Framingham, Reynolds scores, stroke instrument), cancer (e.g., Gail model), diabetes exist but not for CKD.
Objectives • To develop risk prediction model for prevalent CKD • Important prerequisites in our investigation: • Easy to use but accurate • Cumulative effects of concurrent risk factors • Demographic + medical history + modifiable risk factors • To test the validity of the model internally as well as using independent large databases (i.e., external validation) • To compare the performance of the model with the current clinical practice guidelines • To develop risk prediction model for incident CKD
Kidney Early Evaluation Program (KEEP) by the National Kidney Foundation if a persons is ≥ 18 years old and has one or more of the following: 1. diabetes 2. high blood pressure 3. a family history of diabetes, high blood pressure or kidney disease http://www.kidney.org/news/keep/
SCreening for Occult REnal Disease (SCORED)Bang et al. (2007)
Methods • Cross-sectional analysis of a nationally representative population based survey, the National Health and Nutritional Examination Surveys (NHANES) 1999-2002 • Adult subjects only (≥20 years old) • Potential risk factors searched from literature • Endpoint: CKD stage 3 or higher, i.e., glomerular filtration rate (GFR) < 60 ml/min/1.73m2 (using the MDRD formula)
Methods (Cont’d) • Split-sample method to create a development and validation dataset using a 2:1 ratio. • Standard diagnostic characteristics: # at high risk, sensitivity, specificity, positive & negative predictive values, area under ROC curve • Multiple logistic regression model (with proper weighting and complex survey design) e.g., proc surveylogistic in SAS.
Methods (Cont’d) • ‘Categorical scoring system’ derived by assigning an integer for the regression coefficients • ‘Continuous probability’ of having CKD from the fitted regression model • External validation using the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study, Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS) and NHANES 2003-2004. • Comparison between SCORED vs. KEEP using standard diagnostic measures • A number of sensitivity analyses (e.g., missing info, different definitions) --- important to be used in the real world!
Results • NHANES 1999-2002 gave 10,291 individuals • After exclusions (based on unmeasured or missing data, etc.), dataset included 8,530 observations • A total of 601 individuals had CKD (5.4% weighted proportion)
Diagnostic characteristics of SCORED in internal validation dataset (N=2,864) (cutpoint ≥4 to define high risk group)
Advantages of SCORED • Estimate the cumulative likelihood of having disease with multiple risk factors • Accuracy and high sensitivity. • Simple to use (implemented by the pen & pencil method) so foresee a variety of uses e.g., mass screenings public education initiatives, health fair medical emergency departments web-based medical information sites patient waiting room in clinics
Limitations of SCORED • Inability to assess family history of kidney disease -- many large national and community studies do not enquire about history of kidney disease. • For prevalent disease, not incident disease (a new risk score is needed, later in this talk) • Some variables may be commonly missing (e.g. proteinuria) • Low PPV (but prediction is HARD!) • Kidney disease: multiple definitions, different stages
Diagnostic performance of SCORED vs. KEEP using external validation data (Bang, Mazumdar et al. 2008) * some sensitivity analyses
A simple algorithm to predict incident kidney disease (aka, SCORED II) by Kshirsagar, Bang et al. In Press
Prediction is very hard, especially about the future - Yogi Berra
Background • Another important issue is to predict a new disease in disease-free population. • In many asymptomatic diseases, both prevalent and incident diseases are important. (in contrast, for hard outcomes such as heart attack, only incident disease makes sense) • Incident disease is less urgent so less user-friendliness is acceptable. --- 3 different models developed: 1) best-fitting continuous, 2) best-fitting categorical, 3) simplified categorical. • Beyond AUC. We also used AIC/BIC.
Background (Conti’) • We need prospective studies to develop the models. • Internal validation only using Split-sample, no external validation. • Same logistic regression --- so observed outcome among survivors. • Cutpoint for high risk group might be less important.
Discussion • Evidence-based medicine = Science (theory) + Data + Statistics. • Risk score = Statistics + Art + Reality --- SCORED is a good example.☺ • Performed well in a variety of different settings. • Seems to provide the enhanced guidelines upon the current clinical practice guidelines. • It started be utilized in the ‘real world’. • SCORED II yet to be validated but strong consistency/ similarities observed in SCORED I and II.
Discussion (Conti’) • Categorization can be a bad idea (Royston et al. 2005; Greenland 1995) but is crucial for risk scoring algorithms to be useful in the real world. • More than 1 model may be justified and we can let consumers/users to choose because All models are wrong, but some are useful ---George Box • Relying on only 1 measure (e.g., AUC) can be problematic (Cook et al. 2006; Cook 2007). • Trade-offs between accurate vs. easy medical terms. • Risk scores for internet vs. physician’s office vs. Walmart can be different.
Current and future research • Evaluation of SCORED in vascular patients because detection of CKD in patients with or at increased risk of CVD was emphasized by a science advisory from the American Heart Association and National Kidney Foundation (2006). • Relationships SCORED with other risk scores • Testing SCORED in community settings
References • Bang, Vupputuri, Shoham et al. (2007). SCreening for Occult REnal Disease (SCORED). A simple prediction model for chronic kidney disease. Archives of Internal Medicine. • Bang, Mazumdar, Kern et al. (2008). Validation and Comparison of a novel prediction rule for kidney disease: KEEPing SCORED. Arch Int Med. • Kshirsagar, Bang, Bomback et al . A simple algorithm to predict incident kidney disease. In Press. Arch Int Med. • Bang, Mazumdar, Newman et al. Screening for kidney disease in vascular patients. Submitted. • Building and Using Disease Prediction Models in the Real World. Roundtable discussion led by H. Bang at JSM, Utah, 2007. Slides at: http://www.med.cornell.edu/public.health/conference_presentations.htm
Exposed to and used by public • Covered by the CBS Early Show (on World Kidney Day 2007) • SCORED questionnaire is posted in some health information websites • Distributed by ESRD network, KidneyTrust, Am Kidney Fund, UK Dept of Health, and UNC Kidney Center for Kidney Education Outreach Program • “Research Highlights” in Nature Clinical Practice Nephrology (2007) • Lead Story in Physician’s Weekly (2007)