Automatic covariate selection in logistic models for chest pain diagnosis: A new approach

A newly established method for optimizing logistic models via a minorization-majorization procedure is applied to the problem of diagnosing acute coronary syndromes (ACS). The method provides a principled approach to the selection of covariates which would otherwise require the use of a suboptimal method owing to the size of the covariate set. A strategy for building models is proposed and two models optimized for performance and for simplicity are derived via ten-fold cross-validation. These models confirm that a relatively small set of covariates including clinical and electrocardiographic features can be used successfully in this task. The performance of the models is comparable with previously published models using less principled selection methods. The models prove to be portable when tested on data gathered from three other sites. Whilst diagnostic accuracy and calibration diminishes slightly for these new settings, it remains satisfactory overall. The prospect of building predictive models that are as simple as possible for a required level of performance is valuable if data-driven decision aids are to gain wide acceptance in the clinical situation owing to the need to minimize the time taken to gather and enter data at the bedside

Heterogeneous treatment effects of therapeutic-dose heparin in patients hospitalized for COVID-19

Importance Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of therapeutic-dose heparin in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 produced conflicting results, possibly due to heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) across individuals. Better understanding of HTE could facilitate individualized clinical decision-making. Objective To evaluate HTE of therapeutic-dose heparin for patients hospitalized for COVID-19 and to compare approaches to assessing HTE. Design, Setting, and Participants Exploratory analysis of a multiplatform adaptive RCT of therapeutic-dose heparin vs usual care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in 3320 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 enrolled in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia between April 2020 and January 2021. Heterogeneity of treatment effect was assessed 3 ways: using (1) conventional subgroup analyses of baseline characteristics, (2) a multivariable outcome prediction model (risk-based approach), and (3) a multivariable causal forest model (effect-based approach). Analyses primarily used bayesian statistics, consistent with the original trial. Exposures Participants were randomized to therapeutic-dose heparin or usual care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. Main Outcomes and Measures Organ support–free days, assigning a value of −1 to those who died in the hospital and the number of days free of cardiovascular or respiratory organ support up to day 21 for those who survived to hospital discharge; and hospital survival. Results Baseline demographic characteristics were similar between patients randomized to therapeutic-dose heparin or usual care (median age, 60 years; 38% female; 32% known non-White race; 45% Hispanic). In the overall multiplatform RCT population, therapeutic-dose heparin was not associated with an increase in organ support–free days (median value for the posterior distribution of the OR, 1.05; 95% credible interval, 0.91-1.22). In conventional subgroup analyses, the effect of therapeutic-dose heparin on organ support–free days differed between patients requiring organ support at baseline or not (median OR, 0.85 vs 1.30; posterior probability of difference in OR, 99.8%), between females and males (median OR, 0.87 vs 1.16; posterior probability of difference in OR, 96.4%), and between patients with lower body mass index (BMI 90% for all comparisons). In risk-based analysis, patients at lowest risk of poor outcome had the highest propensity for benefit from heparin (lowest risk decile: posterior probability of OR >1, 92%) while those at highest risk were most likely to be harmed (highest risk decile: posterior probability of OR <1, 87%). In effect-based analysis, a subset of patients identified at high risk of harm (P = .05 for difference in treatment effect) tended to have high BMI and were more likely to require organ support at baseline. Conclusions and Relevance Among patients hospitalized for COVID-19, the effect of therapeutic-dose heparin was heterogeneous. In all 3 approaches to assessing HTE, heparin was more likely to be beneficial in those who were less severely ill at presentation or had lower BMI and more likely to be harmful in sicker patients and those with higher BMI. The findings illustrate the importance of considering HTE in the design and analysis of RCTs. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02735707, NCT04505774, NCT04359277, NCT0437258

Once-yearly zoledronic acid and days of disability, bed rest, and back pain: Randomized, controlled HORIZON Pivotal Fracture Trial

The objective of this study was to determine the effect of once-yearly zoledronic acid on the number of days of back pain and the number of days of disability (ie, limited activity and bed rest) owing to back pain or fracture in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 240 clinical centers in 27 countries. Participants included 7736 postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. Patients were randomized to receive either a single 15-minute intravenous infusion of zoledronic acid (5 mg) or placebo at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months. The main outcome measures were self-reported number of days with back pain and the number of days of limited activity and bed rest owing to back pain or a fracture, and this was assessed every 3 months over a 3-year period. Our results show that although the incidence of back pain was high in both randomized groups, women randomized to zoledronic acid experienced, on average, 18 fewer days of back pain compared with placebo over the course of the trial (p = .0092). The back pain among women randomized to zoledronic acid versus placebo resulted in 11 fewer days of limited activity (p = .0017). In Cox proportional-hazards models, women randomized to zoledronic acid were about 6% less likely to experience 7 or more days of back pain [relative risk (RR) = 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90–0.99] or limited activity owing to back pain (RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.87–1.00). Women randomized to zoledronic acid were significantly less likely to experience 7 or more bed-rest days owing to a fracture (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.47–0.72) and 7 or more limited-activity days owing to a fracture (RR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.58–0.78). Reductions in back pain with zoledronic acid were independent of incident fracture. Our conclusion is that in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis, a once-yearly infusion with zoledronic acid over a 3-year period significantly reduced the number of days that patients reported back pain, limited activity owing to back pain, and limited activity and bed rest owing to a fracture