Key result
SHFM outperforms MAGGIC for predicting 1-year mortality in elderly Chinese HF patients.
Why the study?
Elderly heart failure patients have distinct clinical features and poorer prognosis, but prognostic risk scores have not been well validated in this population.
Does the SHFM perform better than the MAGGIC score for predicting 1-year mortality in elderly Chinese patients with heart failure?
Cohort (n=675)
No
Does the SHFM perform better than the MAGGIC score for predicting 1-year mortality in elderly Chinese patients with heart failure?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.72% vs 0.67%
p-value: p=0.05
The SHFM outperforms the MAGGIC score in predicting 1-year mortality among elderly Chinese patients with heart failure.
May support preferring SHFM for mortality prediction in elderly Chinese HF; leaves open external validation before wider adoption.
Purpose: Elderly heart failure (HF) patients have different clinical characteristics and poorer prognosis compared with younger patients. Prognostic risk scores for HF have not been validated well in elderly patients. We aimed to validate the Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM) and the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) score in an elderly Chinese HF cohort. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study enrolled 675 elderly HF patients (age≥ 70 years) discharged from our hospital between 2012 and 2017. The performance of the two risk scores was evaluated in terms of discrimination, using receiver-operating characteristic analysis, and calibration using a calibration plot and Hosmer–Lemeshow (H-L) test. Absolute risk reclassification was used to compare the two scores. Results: During the mean follow-up time of 32.6 months, 193 patients (28.6%) died, and 1-year mortality was 10.5%. The predicted median 1-year mortality was 8% for the SHFM and 18% for the MAGGIC score. A Kaplan–Meier survival curve demonstrated that event rates of all-cause mortality significantly increased with increasing SHFM and MAGGIC scores. The discriminatory capacity of the SHFM was greater than that of the MAGGIC score (c-statistics were 0.72 and 0.67, respectively; P = 0.05). The calibration plot for the SHFM was better than that for MAGGIC score for 1-year mortality (SHFM: H-L χ 2 =8.2, P = 0.41; MAGGIC: H-L χ 2 =18.8, P =0.02). Compared with the MAGGIC score, the net reclassification index (NRI) of the SHFM was 2.96% (Z=5.88, P< 0.0001). Conclusion: The SHFM performs better than MAGGIC score, having good discrimination, calibration and risk classification for the prediction of 1-year mortality in elderly Chinese HF patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cheng et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Heart failure (n=675). Seattle Heart Failure Model (SHFM) vs. Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) score was evaluated on Discrimination for 1-year mortality (c-statistic) (p=0.05). The Seattle Heart Failure Model demonstrated better discrimination for 1-year mortality than the MAGGIC score (c-statistic 0.72 vs 0.67; P=0.05) in elderly Chinese patients with heart failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: