A heart failure phenotype stratified model for predicting 1-year mortality in patients admitted with acute heart failure: results from an individual participant data meta-analysis of four prospective European cohorts

• Main Authors: Yuntao Chen, Adriaan A. Voors, Tiny Jaarsma, Chim C. Lang, Iziah E. Sama, K. Martijn Akkerhuis, Eric Boersma, Hans L. Hillege, Douwe Postmus
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2021-01-01
• Series: BMC Medicine
• Subjects: Acute heart failure; Mortality; IPD meta-analysis; Prognostic model
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01894-2

Abstract Background Prognostic models developed in general cohorts with a mixture of heart failure (HF) phenotypes, though more widely applicable, are also likely to yield larger prediction errors in settings where the HF phenotypes have substantially different baseline mortality rates or different predictor-outcome associations. This study sought to use individual participant data meta-analysis to develop an HF phenotype stratified model for predicting 1-year mortality in patients admitted with acute HF. Methods Four prospective European cohorts were used to develop an HF phenotype stratified model. Cox model with two rounds of backward elimination was used to derive the prognostic index. Weibull model was used to obtain the baseline hazard functions. The internal-external cross-validation (IECV) approach was used to evaluate the generalizability of the developed model in terms of discrimination and calibration. Results 3577 acute HF patients were included, of which 2368 were classified as having HF with reduced ejection fraction (EF) (HFrEF; EF < 40%), 588 as having HF with midrange EF (HFmrEF; EF 40–49%), and 621 as having HF with preserved EF (HFpEF; EF ≥ 50%). A total of 11 readily available variables built up the prognostic index. For four of these predictor variables, namely systolic blood pressure, serum creatinine, myocardial infarction, and diabetes, the effect differed across the three HF phenotypes. With a weighted IECV-adjusted AUC of 0.79 (0.74–0.83) for HFrEF, 0.74 (0.70–0.79) for HFmrEF, and 0.74 (0.71–0.77) for HFpEF, the model showed excellent discrimination. Moreover, there was a good agreement between the average observed and predicted 1-year mortality risks, especially after recalibration of the baseline mortality risks. Conclusions Our HF phenotype stratified model showed excellent generalizability across four European cohorts and may provide a useful tool in HF phenotype-specific clinical decision-making.