Yan Andrew T, Jong Philip, Yan Raymond T, Tan Mary, Fitchett David, Chow Chi-Ming, Roe Matthew T, Pieper Karen S, Langer Anatoly, Goodman Shaun G
Terrence Donnelly Heart Centre, Division of Cardiology, St Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Am Heart J. 2004 Dec;148(6):1020-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2004.02.014.
Accurate risk stratification can guide clinical decision-making in the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). However, the applicability of risk models to the general ACS population remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to validate and compare a modified international clinical trial and a registry-based risk model in a contemporary, less selected ACS population.
In the prospective, observational Canadian ACS Registry, 4627 patients with ACS were enrolled from 51 centers. Baseline patient data were recorded on standardized case report forms. We evaluated risk models derived from the Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa in Unstable angina: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin Therapy (PURSUIT) and the Global Registry of Acute Cardiac Events (GRACE) predicting in-hospital death among patients with non-ST-elevation ACS. Model discrimination was measured by the c-statistic, and calibration was assessed graphically and by the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test.
In-hospital mortality rates were 2.4% overall and 1.5% among the patients with non-ST-elevation ACS (n = 2925; 63.2%) in our validation cohort. Both the in-hospital PURSUIT and GRACE risk models showed similar and good prognostic discrimination (c-statistics = 0.84 and 0.83, respectively; P = .69 for difference). The GRACE model also demonstrated good calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow P = .40). In contrast, calibration in the PURSUIT model was poor (Hosmer-Lemeshow P < .001), with consistent overestimation of risks.
Both the PURSUIT and GRACE models demonstrated good discrimination for in-hospital mortality rates in the Canadian ACS Registry. However, the GRACE risk model, derived from a less selected population, provided superior calibration in risk assessment across the spectrum of ACS. Our findings underscore the potential importance of risk model validation in the general ACS population rather than a clinical trial population to establish its generalizability before integration into clinical practice.
准确的风险分层可指导急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)管理中的临床决策。然而,风险模型在一般ACS人群中的适用性仍不明确。本研究的目的是在当代选择较少的ACS人群中验证和比较改良的国际临床试验风险模型和基于注册登记的风险模型。
在加拿大ACS前瞻性观察注册研究中,从51个中心纳入了4627例ACS患者。在标准化病例报告表上记录患者基线数据。我们评估了源自不稳定型心绞痛血小板糖蛋白IIb/IIIa:依替巴肽治疗抑制受体(PURSUIT)试验和急性心脏事件全球注册研究(GRACE)的风险模型,以预测非ST段抬高型ACS患者的院内死亡。通过c统计量测量模型区分度,并通过图形和Hosmer-Lemeshow拟合优度检验评估校准情况。
在我们的验证队列中,总体院内死亡率为2.4%,非ST段抬高型ACS患者(n = 2925;63.2%)的院内死亡率为1.5%。院内PURSUIT和GRACE风险模型均显示出相似且良好的预后区分度(c统计量分别为0.84和0.83;差异P = 0.69)。GRACE模型也显示出良好的校准(Hosmer-Lemeshow P = 0.40)。相比之下,PURSUIT模型的校准较差(Hosmer-Lemeshow P < 0.001),风险一直被高估。
PURSUIT和GRACE模型在加拿大ACS注册研究中对院内死亡率均显示出良好的区分度。然而,源自选择较少人群的GRACE风险模型在ACS全谱风险评估中提供了更好的校准。我们的研究结果强调了在一般ACS人群而非临床试验人群中进行风险模型验证的潜在重要性,以便在纳入临床实践之前确定其可推广性。