Dynamic near-term risk prediction of clinically significant immune-related adverse events using longitudinal electronic health records
Gong, L.; Agyekum, A.; Aswani, N.; Nieva, H. R.; Hur, C.
Show abstract
Objective: To develop and evaluate a dynamic model that repeatedly estimates the 30-day risk of a first grade [≥]2 immune-related adverse event (irAE) during immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. Materials and Methods: Adults initiating ICI therapy during 2015-2022 comprised the development cohort; 2023 initiators formed a nonoverlapping internal temporal evaluation cohort. Every 21 days during the first treatment year, models used available EHR information to predict a first structured phenotype-defined above Grade 2 irAE during the next 30 days. Evaluation included pooled and within-landmark discrimination, precision-recall performance, calibration, and patient-clustered bootstrap confidence intervals. Feature-state ablations and alternative update schedules examined the contribution of dynamic information. Results: Development included 1,522 patients and 18,744 evaluable landmarks; temporal evaluation included 526 patients and 6,263 landmarks, of which 184 were positive (2.94%). The multiscale XGBoost model achieved pooled AUROC 0.716 (95% CI, 0.676-0.755), AUPRC 0.067, within-landmark AUROC 0.672 (95% CI, 0.631-0.716), Brier score 0.0281, and log loss 0.1245. The time-aware baseline achieved AUROC 0.631 and within-landmark AUROC 0.536. Updated treatment exposure and laboratory trajectories accounted for most of the gain. A complete-state extension achieved AUROC 0.719 and AUPRC 0.073. The 21-day schedule had the highest discrimination among tested cadences. Conclusion: Longitudinal EHR updating improved near-term irAE prediction beyond pretreatment characteristics and treatment time. Phenotype adjudication and independent evaluation of calibration, transportability, and clinical utility are needed before implementation
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- International Electronic Health Record-Derived COVID-19 Clinical Course Profiles: The 4CE Consortium 91%
- A Scoping Review of Artificial Intelligence Applications in Clinical Trial Risk Assessment 90%
- Predicting critical state after COVID-19 diagnosis: Model development using a large US electronic health record dataset 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- KMSubtraction: Reconstruction of unreported subgroup survival data utilizing published Kaplan-Meier survival curves 90%
- A Comparative Analysis in a Clinical Cohort: Multiple Imputation by Chained Equations and a Novel Super Learner-Based Imputation Approach 90%
- Quantifying selection bias due to unobserved patients in pharmacoepidemiologic studies of severe COVID-19 cohorts. 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- An Interpretable Machine Learning Framework for Accurate Severe vs Non-severe COVID-19 Clinical Type Classification 90%
- Optimal policy determination in sequential systemic and locoregional therapy of oropharyngeal squamous carcinomas: A patient-physician digital twin dyad with deep Q-learning for treatment selection 90%
- Machine Learning to Predict Mortality and Critical Events in COVID-19 Positive New York City Patients 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Trialstreamer: a living, automatically updated database of clinical trial reports 90%
- Collaborative Large Language Models for Automated Data Extraction in Living Systematic Reviews 89%
- Development and validation of a machine learning model for predicting illness trajectory and hospital resource utilization of COVID-19 hospitalized patients - a nationwide study 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Knowledge Connector: Decision support system for multiomics-based precision oncology 92%
- A Standardized Metric to Enhance Clinical Trial Design and Outcome Interpretation in Type 1 Diabetes 91%
- Adjuvant nivolumab, capecitabine or the combination in patients with residual triple-negative breast cancer: the OXEL randomized phase II study 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.