Alberto Pilotto1,2, Nicola Veronese1,3, Giacomo Siri1, Stefania Bandinelli4, Toshiko Tanaka5, Alberto Cella1, Luigi Ferrucci5. 1. Geriatrics Unit, Department of Geriatric Care, Orthogeriatrics and Rehabilitation, E.O. Ospedali Galliera, Genova, Italy. 2. Department of Interdisciplinary Medicine, University of Bari Aldo Moro, Italy. 3. Department of Geriatrics, University of Palermo, Italy. 4. Geriatric Unit, Local Health Unit Tuscany Centre, InCHIANTI Study, Florence, Italy. 5. Translational Gerontology Branch, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI) is recognized as a prognostic tool in hospitalized patients, but data on the value of MPI in community-dwelling older persons are limited. Using data from a representative cohort of community-dwelling persons, we tested the hypothesis that MPI explains mortality during 15 years of follow-up. METHODS: A standardized comprehensive geriatric assessment was used to calculate the MPI and to categorize participants in low-, moderate-, and high-risk classes. The results were reported as hazard ratios (HRs) and the accuracy was evaluated with the area under the curve (AUC), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and the C-index. We also reported the median survival time by standard age groups. RESULTS: All 1453 participants (mean age 68.9 years, women = 55.8%) enrolled in the InCHIANTI study at baseline were included. Compared to low-risk group, participants in moderate (HR = 2.10; 95% CI: 1.73-2.55) and high-risk MPI group (HR = 4.94; 95% CI: 3.91-6.24) had significantly higher mortality risk. The C-index of the model containing age, sex, and MPI was 82.1, indicating a very good accuracy of this model in explaining mortality. Additionally, the time-dependent AUC indicated that the accuracy of the model incorporating MPI to age and sex was excellent (>85.0) during the whole follow-up period. Compared to participants in the low-risk MPI group across different age groups, those in moderate- and high-risk groups survived 2.9-7.0 years less and 4.3-8.9 years less, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In community-dwelling individuals, higher MPI values are associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality with a dose-response effect.
BACKGROUND: Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI) is recognized as a prognostic tool in hospitalized patients, but data on the value of MPI in community-dwelling older persons are limited. Using data from a representative cohort of community-dwelling persons, we tested the hypothesis that MPI explains mortality during 15 years of follow-up. METHODS: A standardized comprehensive geriatric assessment was used to calculate the MPI and to categorize participants in low-, moderate-, and high-risk classes. The results were reported as hazard ratios (HRs) and the accuracy was evaluated with the area under the curve (AUC), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and the C-index. We also reported the median survival time by standard age groups. RESULTS: All 1453 participants (mean age 68.9 years, women = 55.8%) enrolled in the InCHIANTI study at baseline were included. Compared to low-risk group, participants in moderate (HR = 2.10; 95% CI: 1.73-2.55) and high-risk MPI group (HR = 4.94; 95% CI: 3.91-6.24) had significantly higher mortality risk. The C-index of the model containing age, sex, and MPI was 82.1, indicating a very good accuracy of this model in explaining mortality. Additionally, the time-dependent AUC indicated that the accuracy of the model incorporating MPI to age and sex was excellent (>85.0) during the whole follow-up period. Compared to participants in the low-risk MPI group across different age groups, those in moderate- and high-risk groups survived 2.9-7.0 years less and 4.3-8.9 years less, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In community-dwelling individuals, higher MPI values are associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality with a dose-response effect.
Authors: Stefano Volpato; Julia Daragjati; Matteo Simonato; Andrea Fontana; Luigi Ferrucci; Alberto Pilotto Journal: Rejuvenation Res Date: 2016-02-23 Impact factor: 4.663
Authors: Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft; Julia Daragjati; Laura Fratiglioni; Stefania Maggi; Arduino A Mangoni; Francesco Mattace-Raso; Marc Paccalin; Maria Cristina Polidori; Eva Topinkova; Luigi Ferrucci; Alberto Pilotto Journal: Aging Clin Exp Res Date: 2020-03-16 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: Sari Stenholm; Luigi Ferrucci; Jussi Vahtera; Emiel O Hoogendijk; Martijn Huisman; Jaana Pentti; Joni V Lindbohm; Stefania Bandinelli; Jack M Guralnik; Mika Kivimäki Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2019-04-23 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Stefano Volpato; Salvatore Bazzano; Andrea Fontana; Luigi Ferrucci; Alberto Pilotto Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2014-09-09 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Alberto Cella; Nicola Veronese; Carlo Custodero; Alberto Castagna; Lisa A Cammalleri; Walter M Capitano; Luisa Solimando; Luca Carruba; Carlo Sabbà; Giovanni Ruotolo; Mario Barbagallo; Alberto Pilotto Journal: Clin Interv Aging Date: 2022-05-12 Impact factor: 3.829
Authors: Alberto Pilotto; Nicola Veronese; Maria Cristina Polidori; Timo Strandberg; Eva Topinkova; Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft; Carlo Custodero; Stefania Maggi Journal: Ann Med Date: 2022-12 Impact factor: 5.348
Authors: Nicola Veronese; Marianna Noale; Alberto Cella; Carlo Custodero; Lee Smith; Marina Barbagelata; Stefania Maggi; Mario Barbagallo; Carlo Sabbà; Luigi Ferrucci; Alberto Pilotto Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2022-05-17 Impact factor: 3.440