D Alexander Perry1,2, Daniel Shirley3, Dejan Micic4, Pratish C Patel5, Rosemary Putler1,2, Anitha Menon2, Vincent B Young1,2,6, Krishna Rao1,2. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 2. University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 3. Division of Infectious Disease, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Chicago Medicine, Chicago, Illinois,USA. 5. Division of Infectious Diseases, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 6. Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many models have been developed to predict severe outcomes from Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). These models are usually developed at a single institution and largely are not externally validated. Our aim in this study was to validate previously published risk scores in a multicenter cohort of patients with CDI. METHODS: This was a retrospective study on 4 inpatient cohorts with CDI from 3 distinct sites: the universities of Michigan (2010-2012 and 2016), Chicago (2012), and Wisconsin (2012). The primary composite outcome was admission to an intensive care unit, colectomy, and/or death attributed to CDI within 30 days of positive testing. Both within each cohort and combined across all cohorts, published CDI severity scores were assessed and compared to each other and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guideline definitions of severe and fulminant CDI. RESULTS: A total of 3646 patients were included for analysis. Including the 2 IDSA guideline definitions, 14 scores were assessed. Performance of scores varied within each cohort and in the combined set (mean area under the receiver operator characteristic curve [AuROC], 0.61; range, 0.53-0.66). Only half of the scores had performance at or better than IDSA severe and fulminant definitions (AuROCs of 0.64 and 0.63, respectively). Most of the scoring systems had more false than true positives in the combined set (mean, 81.5%; range, 0%-91.5%). CONCLUSIONS: No published CDI severity score showed stable, good predictive ability for adverse outcomes across multiple cohorts/institutions or in a combined multicenter cohort.
BACKGROUND: Many models have been developed to predict severe outcomes from Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). These models are usually developed at a single institution and largely are not externally validated. Our aim in this study was to validate previously published risk scores in a multicenter cohort of patients with CDI. METHODS: This was a retrospective study on 4 inpatient cohorts with CDI from 3 distinct sites: the universities of Michigan (2010-2012 and 2016), Chicago (2012), and Wisconsin (2012). The primary composite outcome was admission to an intensive care unit, colectomy, and/or death attributed to CDI within 30 days of positive testing. Both within each cohort and combined across all cohorts, published CDI severity scores were assessed and compared to each other and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guideline definitions of severe and fulminant CDI. RESULTS: A total of 3646 patients were included for analysis. Including the 2 IDSA guideline definitions, 14 scores were assessed. Performance of scores varied within each cohort and in the combined set (mean area under the receiver operator characteristic curve [AuROC], 0.61; range, 0.53-0.66). Only half of the scores had performance at or better than IDSA severe and fulminant definitions (AuROCs of 0.64 and 0.63, respectively). Most of the scoring systems had more false than true positives in the combined set (mean, 81.5%; range, 0%-91.5%). CONCLUSIONS: No published CDI severity score showed stable, good predictive ability for adverse outcomes across multiple cohorts/institutions or in a combined multicenter cohort.
Authors: L Clifford McDonald; Dale N Gerding; Stuart Johnson; Johan S Bakken; Karen C Carroll; Susan E Coffin; Erik R Dubberke; Kevin W Garey; Carolyn V Gould; Ciaran Kelly; Vivian Loo; Julia Shaklee Sammons; Thomas J Sandora; Mark H Wilcox Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2018-03-19 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Catherine Beauregard-Paultre; Claire Nour Abou Chakra; Allison McGeer; Annie-Claude Labbé; Andrew E Simor; Wayne Gold; Matthew P Muller; Jeff Powis; Kevin Katz; Suzanne M Cadarette; Jacques Pépin; Louis Valiquette Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-12-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Eric T Lofgren; Stephen R Cole; David J Weber; Deverick J Anderson; Rebekah W Moehring Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Gregory R Madden; William A Petri; Deiziane V S Costa; Cirle A Warren; Jennie Z Ma; Costi D Sifri Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2022-06-21 Impact factor: 5.938
Authors: Nicholas A Lesniak; Alyxandria M Schubert; Kaitlin J Flynn; Jhansi L Leslie; Hamide Sinani; Ingrid L Bergin; Vincent B Young; Patrick D Schloss Journal: mBio Date: 2022-07-20 Impact factor: 7.786