Improving the Likelihood of Identifying Alpha-1 Antitrypsin Deficiency Among Patients With COPD: A Novel Predictive Model Using Real-World Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Despite guideline recommendations, most patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) do not undergo alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD) testing and approximately 90% of people with AATD in the United States remain undiagnosed. This study sought to develop a predictive model using real-world data to improve detection of AATD-positive patients in the general COPD population. Methods: A predictive model using extreme gradient boosting was developed using the EVERSANA database, including longitudinal, patient-level medical claims, prescription claims, AATD-specific testing data, and electronic health records (EHR). The model was trained and then validated to predict AATD-positive status. Patients were coded as AATD positive based on the presence of any of the following criteria: (1) ≥2 AATD diagnosis codes in claims; (2) an AATD diagnosis code in the EHR; (3) a positive laboratory test for AATD; or (4) use of AATD-related medication. Over 500 variables were used to train the predictive model and >20 models were run to optimize the predictive power. Results: A total of 13,585 AATD-positive patients and 7796 AATD-negative patients were included in the model. The inclusion of non-AATD laboratory test results was critical for defining cohorts and optimizing model prediction (e.g., respiratory comorbidities, and calcium, glucose, hemoglobin, and bilirubin levels). The final model yielded high predictive power, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.9. Conclusion: Predictive modeling using real-world data is a sound approach for assessing AATD risk and useful for identifying COPD patients who should be confirmed by genetic testing. External validation is warranted to further assess the generalizability of these results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".