Comparing Clinician Estimates versus a Statistical Tool for Predicting Risk of Death within 45 Days of Admission for Cancer Patients

Adrianna Z. Herskovits,Tiffanny Newman,Kevin Nicholas,Cesar F. Colorado-Jimenez,Claire E. Perry,Alisa Valentino,Isaac Wagner,Barbara Egan,Dmitriy Gorenshteyn,Andrew J. Vickers,Melissa S. Pessin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1787185
IF: 2.762
2024-06-27
Applied Clinical Informatics
Abstract:Objectives While clinical practice guidelines recommend that oncologists discuss goals of care with patients who have advanced cancer, it is estimated that less than 20% of individuals admitted to the hospital with high-risk cancers have end-of-life discussions with their providers. While there has been interest in developing models for mortality prediction to trigger such discussions, few studies have compared how such models compare with clinical judgment to determine a patient's mortality risk. Methods This study is a prospective analysis of 1,069 solid tumor medical oncology hospital admissions ( n = 911 unique patients) from February 7 to June 7, 2022, at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Electronic surveys were sent to hospitalists, advanced practice providers, and medical oncologists the first afternoon following a hospital admission and they were asked to estimate the probability that the patient would die within 45 days. Provider estimates of mortality were compared with those from a predictive model developed using a supervised machine learning methodology, and incorporated routine laboratory, demographic, biometric, and admission data. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration and decision curves were compared between clinician estimates and the model predictions. Results Within 45 days following hospital admission, 229 (25%) of 911 patients died. The model performed better than the clinician estimates (AUC 0.834 vs. 0.753, p < 0.0001). Integrating clinician predictions with the model's estimates further increased the AUC to 0.853 ( p < 0.0001). Clinicians overestimated risk whereas the model was extremely well-calibrated. The model demonstrated net benefit over a wide range of threshold probabilities. Conclusion The inpatient prognosis at admission model is a robust tool to assist clinical providers in evaluating mortality risk, and it has recently been implemented in the electronic medical record at our institution to improve end-of-life care planning for hospitalized cancer patients. The study was reviewed by the institutional review board of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and is in compliance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki on Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. * Shared first authorship. Received: 15 December 2023 Accepted: 29 April 2024 Article published online: 26 June 2024 © 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
medical informatics
What problem does this paper attempt to address?