Eline Vandael1,2, Bert Vandenberk3,4, Joris Vandenberghe5,6, Bart Van den Bosch7, Rik Willems3,4, Veerle Foulon1. 1. Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. 2. Sciensano, Public Health and Surveillance, 1050, Brussels, Belgium. 3. Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. 4. Cardiology, University Hospitals Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. 5. Department of Neurosciences, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. 6. Psychiatry, University Hospitals Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. 7. Informatics Department, University Hospitals Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Abstract
AIMS: QTc prolongation is a complex problem linked with multiple risk factors. The RISQ-PATH score was previously developed to identify high-risk patients for QTc prolongation. The aim of this study was to optimize and validate this risk score in a large patient cohort, and to propose an algorithm to generate smart QT signals in the electronic medical record. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed in the Nexus hospital network (n = 17) in Belgium. All electrocardiograms performed in 2015 in both ambulatory and hospitalized patients were collected together with risk factors for QTc prolongation (training database). Multiple logistic regression was performed to obtain the optimal prediction (RISQ-PATH) model. The model was tested in a validation database (electrocardiograms between January and April 2016). RESULTS: In total, 60 208 patients (52.8% males, mean age 63 ± 18 years) were included; 3543 patients (5.9%) had a QTc ≥ 450(♂)/470(♀) ms and 453 (0.8%) a QTc ≥ 500 ms. The optimized RISQ-PATH model has an area under the ROC-curve of 0.772 [95% CI 0.763-0.780] to predict QTc ≥ 450(♂)/470(♀)ms. A predicted probability of ≥0.035 was set as cutoff for a high risk of QTc prolongation. This cutoff resulted in a sensitivity of 87.4% [95% CI 86.2-88.5] and a specificity of 46.2% [95% CI 45.8-46.6]. These results could be confirmed for QTc ≥ 500 ms and in the validation database (n = 28 400). CONCLUSIONS: The RISQ-PATH model, with a cutoff probability of 0.035, predicted a prolonged QTc interval ≥ 450/470 ms or ≥500 ms with a sensitivity of ±87% and a specificity of ±45%. This RISQ-PATH model can be used in clinical decision support systems to create smart QT alerts.
AIMS: QTc prolongation is a complex problem linked with multiple risk factors. The RISQ-PATH score was previously developed to identify high-risk patients for QTc prolongation. The aim of this study was to optimize and validate this risk score in a large patient cohort, and to propose an algorithm to generate smart QT signals in the electronic medical record. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed in the Nexus hospital network (n = 17) in Belgium. All electrocardiograms performed in 2015 in both ambulatory and hospitalized patients were collected together with risk factors for QTc prolongation (training database). Multiple logistic regression was performed to obtain the optimal prediction (RISQ-PATH) model. The model was tested in a validation database (electrocardiograms between January and April 2016). RESULTS: In total, 60 208 patients (52.8% males, mean age 63 ± 18 years) were included; 3543 patients (5.9%) had a QTc ≥ 450(♂)/470(♀) ms and 453 (0.8%) a QTc ≥ 500 ms. The optimized RISQ-PATH model has an area under the ROC-curve of 0.772 [95% CI 0.763-0.780] to predict QTc ≥ 450(♂)/470(♀)ms. A predicted probability of ≥0.035 was set as cutoff for a high risk of QTc prolongation. This cutoff resulted in a sensitivity of 87.4% [95% CI 86.2-88.5] and a specificity of 46.2% [95% CI 45.8-46.6]. These results could be confirmed for QTc ≥ 500 ms and in the validation database (n = 28 400). CONCLUSIONS: The RISQ-PATH model, with a cutoff probability of 0.035, predicted a prolonged QTc interval ≥ 450/470 ms or ≥500 ms with a sensitivity of ±87% and a specificity of ±45%. This RISQ-PATH model can be used in clinical decision support systems to create smart QT alerts.
Authors: Geert J M G van der Heijden; A Rogier T Donders; Theo Stijnen; Karel G M Moons Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-07-11 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Stephen Ph Alexander; Doriano Fabbro; Eamonn Kelly; Neil V Marrion; John A Peters; Elena Faccenda; Simon D Harding; Adam J Pawson; Joanna L Sharman; Christopher Southan; Jamie A Davies Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Sana M Al-Khatib; William G Stevenson; Michael J Ackerman; William J Bryant; David J Callans; Anne B Curtis; Barbara J Deal; Timm Dickfeld; Michael E Field; Gregg C Fonarow; Anne M Gillis; Christopher B Granger; Stephen C Hammill; Mark A Hlatky; José A Joglar; G Neal Kay; Daniel D Matlock; Robert J Myerburg; Richard L Page Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2018-08-16 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Barbara J Drew; Michael J Ackerman; Marjorie Funk; W Brian Gibler; Paul Kligfield; Venu Menon; George J Philippides; Dan M Roden; Wojciech Zareba Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-03-02 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Miriam Jacoba Warnier; Frans Hendrik Rutten; Patrick Cyriel Souverein; Anthonius de Boer; Arno Wilhelmus Hoes; Marie Louise De Bruin Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2015-05-27 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Jamie I Vandenberg; Matthew D Perry; Mark J Perrin; Stefan A Mann; Ying Ke; Adam P Hill Journal: Physiol Rev Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 37.312
Authors: Erinn D'hulster; Charlotte Quintens; Jeroen Luyten; Raf Bisschops; Rik Willems; Willy E Peetermans; Jan Y Verbakel Journal: Int J Clin Pharm Date: 2022-01-11
Authors: Greet Van De Sijpe; Charlotte Quintens; Karolien Walgraeve; Eva Van Laer; Jens Penny; Greet De Vlieger; Rik Schrijvers; Paul De Munter; Veerle Foulon; Minne Casteels; Lorenz Van der Linden; Isabel Spriet Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2022-02-22 Impact factor: 2.796