We have located links that may give you full text access.
A validation study of the CirCom comorbidity score in an English cirrhosis population using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.
Purpose: The CirCom score has been developed from Danish data as a specific measure of comorbidity for cirrhosis to predict all-cause mortality. We compared its performance with the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) in an English cirrhosis population.
Patients and methods: We used comorbidity scores in a survival model to predict mortality in a cirrhosis cohort in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. The discrimination of each score was compared by age, gender, socioeconomic status, cirrhosis etiology, cirrhosis stage, and year after cirrhosis diagnosis. We also measured their ability to predict liver-related versus non-liver-related death.
Results: There was a small improvement in the C statistic from the model using the CirCom score (C=0.63) compared to the CCI (C=0.62), and there was an overall improvement in the net reclassification index of 1.5%. The improvement was more notable in younger patients, those with an alcohol etiology, and those with compensated cirrhosis. Both scores performed better (C statistic >0.7) for non-liver-related deaths than liver-related deaths (C statistic <0.6), as comorbidity was only weakly predictive of liver-related death.
Conclusion: The CirCom score provided a small improvement in performance over the CCI in the prediction of all-cause and non-liver mortality, but not liver-related mortality. Therefore, it is important to include a measure of comorbidity in studies of cirrhosis survival, alongside a measure of cirrhosis severity.
Patients and methods: We used comorbidity scores in a survival model to predict mortality in a cirrhosis cohort in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. The discrimination of each score was compared by age, gender, socioeconomic status, cirrhosis etiology, cirrhosis stage, and year after cirrhosis diagnosis. We also measured their ability to predict liver-related versus non-liver-related death.
Results: There was a small improvement in the C statistic from the model using the CirCom score (C=0.63) compared to the CCI (C=0.62), and there was an overall improvement in the net reclassification index of 1.5%. The improvement was more notable in younger patients, those with an alcohol etiology, and those with compensated cirrhosis. Both scores performed better (C statistic >0.7) for non-liver-related deaths than liver-related deaths (C statistic <0.6), as comorbidity was only weakly predictive of liver-related death.
Conclusion: The CirCom score provided a small improvement in performance over the CCI in the prediction of all-cause and non-liver mortality, but not liver-related mortality. Therefore, it is important to include a measure of comorbidity in studies of cirrhosis survival, alongside a measure of cirrhosis severity.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app