MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2984888430 · doi:10.1182/blood-2019-130087

Prediction of Risk for Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes in Women with Sickle Cell Disease

2019· article· en· W2984888430 sur OpenAlexaff
Ann Kinga Malinowski, Kevin H.M. Kuo, George Tomlinson, Richard Ward, Nadine Shehata

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Établissements canadiensUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkToronto General HospitalCanadian Blood ServicesLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicinePregnancyObstetricsAdverse effectRetrospective cohort studyGestational ageAnemiaGestational hypertensionPediatricsDiseaseAcute chest syndromePreeclampsiaSickle cell anemiaSurgeryInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: Pregnancies in women with Sickle Cell Disease (SCD) are at risk of adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. There are no studies characterizing features predictive of pregnancy-related complications that would enable targeted interventions towards those at high-risk, whilst avoiding exposure of those at low risk to the potential intervention-associated complications. Objective: To explore risk factors associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with SCD and to develop a prediction rule identifying women at different levels of risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of pregnant women with SCD at a tertiary care center. Maternal composite outcome (MCO) includes any of the following: severe, complicated anemia, multi-organ failure, venous thromboembolism, vaso-occlusive episodes requiring admission, blood transfusion, maternal mortality, hypertensive disorder of pregnancy (HDP), cardiac, pulmonary, hepatobiliary, MSK/skin, splenic, neurologic, or renal complication. Fetal composite outcome (FCO) includes any of the following: perinatal mortality, preterm birth, or small for gestational age size. Both composite outcomes were defined a priori. SCD-associated MCO were defined based on a published classification of SCD manifestations. HDP were divided to include gestational hypertension or pre-eclampsia, as noted in the health record. For twin pregnancies, the FCO was considered present if either infant met criteria. Predictor variables included SCD-related and non-SCD related maternal factors, which have been shown in the literature and through clinical experience to potentially result in adverse pregnancy outcomes. For a variable to be interpreted as a potential cause of an adverse outcome, it must have been present before the outcome and must not have been part of the outcome definition. Regression models for MCO and FCO were constructed using generalized estimation equation (GEE) logistic regression with clustering by woman to account for non-independence of outcomes in women with several pregnancies during the study period. From a set of 21 potential predictors for MCO and 26 potential predictors for FCO, those with univariate p-values <0.2 in GEE were included in a multivariable GEE regression model. Using cross-validation, predictive performance of the fitted model was evaluated using the concordance statistic and accuracy of prediction using a calibration curve; for each of 10 90%:10% splits of the dataset, a model was fitted on the 90% and used to obtain predicted probabilities on the 10%. Results: Of 199 pregnancies in 131 women between 1990 and 2016, MCO and FCO occurred in 71% and 45% of pregnancies, respectively. Risk for MCO was predicted by low maternal BMI, low first-trimester hemoglobin, VOE in the year preceding pregnancy, high LDH in pregnancy, history of multiple transfusions, and history of cardiac complications (heart failure, cardiomyopathy, or cardiomegaly). While presence of MCO was not part of the model given the inability to include it in a prediction rule for primiparous women, its manifestation was a risk factor for recurrence in subsequent pregnancies. FCO risk was predicted by older maternal age, high LDH in pregnancy, and maternal composite outcome during pregnancy. The model was discriminative for (a) MCO with a concordance statistic of 0.84 (se=0.03) on the observed data, and a cross-validated value of 0.80 (se=0.03), and (b) FCO with a concordance statistic of 0.72 (se=0.04) on the observed data, and a cross-validated value of 0.69 (se=0.04). Except at the extremes, predicted risk agreed well with observed risk for both the MCO and the FCO (Figure 1). Predicted risk of the MCO, separated pregnancies into groups having as low as a 35% to as high as a 95% chance, while predicted risk of FCO separated pregnancies into groups as low as 10% to as high as 70% (Figure 1). Conclusions: Our study shows that readily available clinical and laboratory variables can predict the degree of risk for an adverse pregnancy outcome in women with SCD. In our models, SCD genotype itself does not predict adverse maternal or fetal outcome, while presence of MCO or FCO are important predictors alongside other prespecified variables. The prediction rules will enable identification of sub-groups of women at higher risk of adverse events, allowing for consideration of targeted interventions such as prophylactic transfusion. Disclosures Malinowski: Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kuo:Agios: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; Bioverativ: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Pfizer: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,006

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,006
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,005
Tête enseignante GPT0,198
Écart entre enseignants0,193 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetHemoglobinopathies and Related DisordersTravaux en français237 207