Cargando…

Improved Landmark Dynamic Prediction Model to Assess Cardiovascular Disease Risk in On-Treatment Blood Pressure Patients: A Simulation Study and Post Hoc Analysis on SPRINT Data

Landmark model (LM) is a dynamic prediction model that uses a longitudinal biomarker in time-to-event data to make prognosis prediction. This study was designed to improve this model and to apply it to assess the cardiovascular risk in on-treatment blood pressure patients. A frailty parameter was us...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sayadi, Mehrab, Zare, Najaf, Attar, Armin, Ayatollahi, Seyyed Mohammad Taghi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7195630/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32382541
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/2905167
_version_ 1783528574599299072
author Sayadi, Mehrab
Zare, Najaf
Attar, Armin
Ayatollahi, Seyyed Mohammad Taghi
author_facet Sayadi, Mehrab
Zare, Najaf
Attar, Armin
Ayatollahi, Seyyed Mohammad Taghi
author_sort Sayadi, Mehrab
collection PubMed
description Landmark model (LM) is a dynamic prediction model that uses a longitudinal biomarker in time-to-event data to make prognosis prediction. This study was designed to improve this model and to apply it to assess the cardiovascular risk in on-treatment blood pressure patients. A frailty parameter was used in LM, landmark frailty model (LFM), to account the frailty of the patients and measure the correlation between different landmarks. The proposed model was compared with LM in different scenarios respecting data missing status, sample size (100, 200, and 400), landmarks (6, 12, 24, and 48), and failure percentage (30, 50, and 100%). Bias of parameter estimation and mean square error as well as deviance statistic between models were compared. Additionally, discrimination and calibration capability as the goodness of fit of the model were evaluated using dynamic concordance index (DCI), dynamic prediction error (DPE), and dynamic relative prediction error (DRPE). The proposed model was performed on blood pressure data, obtained from systolic blood pressure intervention trial (SPRINT), in order to calculate the cardiovascular risk. Dynpred, coxme, and coxphw packages in the R.3.4.3 software were used. It was proved that our proposed model, LFM, had a better performance than LM. Parameter estimation in LFM was closer to true values in comparison to that in LM. Deviance statistic showed that there was a statistically significant difference between the two models. In the landmark numbers 6, 12, and 24, the LFM had a higher DCI over time and the three landmarks showed better performance in discrimination. Both DPE and DRPE in LFM were lower in comparison to those in LM over time. It was indicated that LFM had better calibration in comparison to its peer. Moreover, real data showed that the structure of prognostic process was predicted better in LFM than in LM. Accordingly, it is recommended to use the LFM model for assessing cardiovascular risk due to its better performance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7195630
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71956302020-05-07 Improved Landmark Dynamic Prediction Model to Assess Cardiovascular Disease Risk in On-Treatment Blood Pressure Patients: A Simulation Study and Post Hoc Analysis on SPRINT Data Sayadi, Mehrab Zare, Najaf Attar, Armin Ayatollahi, Seyyed Mohammad Taghi Biomed Res Int Research Article Landmark model (LM) is a dynamic prediction model that uses a longitudinal biomarker in time-to-event data to make prognosis prediction. This study was designed to improve this model and to apply it to assess the cardiovascular risk in on-treatment blood pressure patients. A frailty parameter was used in LM, landmark frailty model (LFM), to account the frailty of the patients and measure the correlation between different landmarks. The proposed model was compared with LM in different scenarios respecting data missing status, sample size (100, 200, and 400), landmarks (6, 12, 24, and 48), and failure percentage (30, 50, and 100%). Bias of parameter estimation and mean square error as well as deviance statistic between models were compared. Additionally, discrimination and calibration capability as the goodness of fit of the model were evaluated using dynamic concordance index (DCI), dynamic prediction error (DPE), and dynamic relative prediction error (DRPE). The proposed model was performed on blood pressure data, obtained from systolic blood pressure intervention trial (SPRINT), in order to calculate the cardiovascular risk. Dynpred, coxme, and coxphw packages in the R.3.4.3 software were used. It was proved that our proposed model, LFM, had a better performance than LM. Parameter estimation in LFM was closer to true values in comparison to that in LM. Deviance statistic showed that there was a statistically significant difference between the two models. In the landmark numbers 6, 12, and 24, the LFM had a higher DCI over time and the three landmarks showed better performance in discrimination. Both DPE and DRPE in LFM were lower in comparison to those in LM over time. It was indicated that LFM had better calibration in comparison to its peer. Moreover, real data showed that the structure of prognostic process was predicted better in LFM than in LM. Accordingly, it is recommended to use the LFM model for assessing cardiovascular risk due to its better performance. Hindawi 2020-04-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7195630/ /pubmed/32382541 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/2905167 Text en Copyright © 2020 Mehrab Sayadi et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Sayadi, Mehrab
Zare, Najaf
Attar, Armin
Ayatollahi, Seyyed Mohammad Taghi
Improved Landmark Dynamic Prediction Model to Assess Cardiovascular Disease Risk in On-Treatment Blood Pressure Patients: A Simulation Study and Post Hoc Analysis on SPRINT Data
title Improved Landmark Dynamic Prediction Model to Assess Cardiovascular Disease Risk in On-Treatment Blood Pressure Patients: A Simulation Study and Post Hoc Analysis on SPRINT Data
title_full Improved Landmark Dynamic Prediction Model to Assess Cardiovascular Disease Risk in On-Treatment Blood Pressure Patients: A Simulation Study and Post Hoc Analysis on SPRINT Data
title_fullStr Improved Landmark Dynamic Prediction Model to Assess Cardiovascular Disease Risk in On-Treatment Blood Pressure Patients: A Simulation Study and Post Hoc Analysis on SPRINT Data
title_full_unstemmed Improved Landmark Dynamic Prediction Model to Assess Cardiovascular Disease Risk in On-Treatment Blood Pressure Patients: A Simulation Study and Post Hoc Analysis on SPRINT Data
title_short Improved Landmark Dynamic Prediction Model to Assess Cardiovascular Disease Risk in On-Treatment Blood Pressure Patients: A Simulation Study and Post Hoc Analysis on SPRINT Data
title_sort improved landmark dynamic prediction model to assess cardiovascular disease risk in on-treatment blood pressure patients: a simulation study and post hoc analysis on sprint data
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7195630/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32382541
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/2905167
work_keys_str_mv AT sayadimehrab improvedlandmarkdynamicpredictionmodeltoassesscardiovasculardiseaseriskinontreatmentbloodpressurepatientsasimulationstudyandposthocanalysisonsprintdata
AT zarenajaf improvedlandmarkdynamicpredictionmodeltoassesscardiovasculardiseaseriskinontreatmentbloodpressurepatientsasimulationstudyandposthocanalysisonsprintdata
AT attararmin improvedlandmarkdynamicpredictionmodeltoassesscardiovasculardiseaseriskinontreatmentbloodpressurepatientsasimulationstudyandposthocanalysisonsprintdata
AT ayatollahiseyyedmohammadtaghi improvedlandmarkdynamicpredictionmodeltoassesscardiovasculardiseaseriskinontreatmentbloodpressurepatientsasimulationstudyandposthocanalysisonsprintdata