Validation of a machine learning algorithm for early severe sepsis prediction: a retrospective study predicting severe sepsis up to 48 h in advance using a diverse dataset from 461 US hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Severe sepsis and septic shock are among the leading causes of death in the United States and sepsis remains one of the most expensive conditions to diagnose and treat. Accurate early diagnosis and treatment can reduce the risk of adverse patient outcomes, but the efficacy of traditional rule-based screening methods is limited. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a machine learning algorithm (MLA) for severe sepsis prediction up to 48 h before onset using a diverse patient dataset. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed on datasets composed of de-identified electronic health records collected between 2001 and 2017, including 510,497 inpatient and emergency encounters from 461 health centers collected between 2001 and 2015, and 20,647 inpatient and emergency encounters collected in 2017 from a community hospital. MLA performance was compared to commonly used disease severity scoring systems and was evaluated at 0, 4, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h prior to severe sepsis onset. RESULTS: 270,438 patients were included in analysis. At time of onset, the MLA demonstrated an AUROC of 0.931 (95% CI 0.914, 0.948) and a diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 53.105 on a testing dataset, exceeding MEWS (0.725, P < .001; DOR 4.358), SOFA (0.716; P < .001; DOR 3.720), and SIRS (0.655; P < .001; DOR 3.290). For prediction 48 h prior to onset, the MLA achieved an AUROC of 0.827 (95% CI 0.806, 0.848) on a testing dataset. On an external validation dataset, the MLA achieved an AUROC of 0.948 (95% CI 0.942, 0.954) at the time of onset, and 0.752 at 48 h prior to onset. CONCLUSIONS: The MLA accurately predicts severe sepsis onset up to 48 h in advance using only readily available vital signs extracted from the existing patient electronic health records. Relevant implications for clinical practice include improved patient outcomes from early severe sepsis detection and treatment.

Machine Learning as a Precision-Medicine Approach to Prescribing COVID-19 Pharmacotherapy with Remdesivir or Corticosteroids.

PURPOSE: Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) continues to be a global threat and remains a significant cause of hospitalizations. Recent clinical guidelines have supported the use of corticosteroids or remdesivir in the treatment of COVID-19. However, uncertainty remains about which patients are most likely to benefit from treatment with either drug; such knowledge is crucial for avoiding preventable adverse effects, minimizing costs, and effectively allocating resources. This study presents a machine-learning system with the capacity to identify patients in whom treatment with a corticosteroid or remdesivir is associated with improved survival time. METHODS: Gradient-boosted decision-tree models used for predicting treatment benefit were trained and tested on data from electronic health records dated between December 18, 2019, and October 18, 2020, from adult patients (age ≥18 years) with COVID-19 in 10 US hospitals. Models were evaluated for performance in identifying patients with longer survival times when treated with a corticosteroid versus remdesivir. Fine and Gray proportional-hazards models were used for identifying significant findings in treated and nontreated patients, in a subset of patients who received supplemental oxygen, and in patients identified by the algorithm. Inverse probability-of-treatment weights were used to adjust for confounding. Models were trained and tested separately for each treatment. FINDINGS: Data from 2364 patients were included, with men comprising slightly more than 50% of the sample; 893 patients were treated with remdesivir, and 1471 were treated with a corticosteroid. After adjustment for confounding, neither corticosteroids nor remdesivir use was associated with increased survival time in the overall population or in the subpopulation that received supplemental oxygen. However, in the populations identified by the algorithms, both corticosteroids and remdesivir were significantly associated with an increase in survival time, with hazard ratios of 0.56 and 0.40, respectively (both, P = 0.04). IMPLICATIONS: Machine-learning methods have the capacity to identify hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in whom treatment with a corticosteroid or remdesivir is associated with an increase in survival time. These methods may help to improve patient outcomes and allocate resources during the COVID-19 crisis.

Effect of a sepsis prediction algorithm on patient mortality, length of stay and readmission: a prospective multicentre clinical outcomes evaluation of real-world patient data from US hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Severe sepsis and septic shock are among the leading causes of death in the USA. While early prediction of severe sepsis can reduce adverse patient outcomes, sepsis remains one of the most expensive conditions to diagnose and treat. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a machine learning algorithm for severe sepsis prediction on in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay and 30-day readmission. DESIGN: Prospective clinical outcomes evaluation. SETTING: Evaluation was performed on a multiyear, multicentre clinical data set of real-world data containing 75 147 patient encounters from nine hospitals across the continental USA, ranging from community hospitals to large academic medical centres. PARTICIPANTS: Analyses were performed for 17 758 adult patients who met two or more systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria at any point during their stay ('sepsis-related' patients). INTERVENTIONS: Machine learning algorithm for severe sepsis prediction. OUTCOME MEASURES: In-hospital mortality, length of stay and 30-day readmission rates. RESULTS: Hospitals saw an average 39.5% reduction of in-hospital mortality, a 32.3% reduction in hospital length of stay and a 22.7% reduction in 30-day readmission rate for sepsis-related patient stays when using the machine learning algorithm in clinical outcomes analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Reductions of in-hospital mortality, hospital length of stay and 30-day readmissions were observed in real-world clinical use of the machine learning-based algorithm. The predictive algorithm may be successfully used to improve sepsis-related outcomes in live clinical settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03960203.

A Racially Unbiased, Machine Learning Approach to Prediction of Mortality: Algorithm Development Study.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in health care are well documented in the United States. As machine learning methods become more common in health care settings, it is important to ensure that these methods do not contribute to racial disparities through biased predictions or differential accuracy across racial groups. OBJECTIVE: The goal of the research was to assess a machine learning algorithm intentionally developed to minimize bias in in-hospital mortality predictions between white and nonwhite patient groups. METHODS: Bias was minimized through preprocessing of algorithm training data. We performed a retrospective analysis of electronic health record data from patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at a large academic health center between 2001 and 2012, drawing data from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-III database. Patients were included if they had at least 10 hours of available measurements after ICU admission, had at least one of every measurement used for model prediction, and had recorded race/ethnicity data. Bias was assessed through the equal opportunity difference. Model performance in terms of bias and accuracy was compared with the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS), the Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II), and the Acute Physiologic Assessment and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE). RESULTS: The machine learning algorithm was found to be more accurate than all comparators, with a higher sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic. The machine learning algorithm was found to be unbiased (equal opportunity difference 0.016, P=.20). APACHE was also found to be unbiased (equal opportunity difference 0.019, P=.11), while SAPS II and MEWS were found to have significant bias (equal opportunity difference 0.038, P=.006 and equal opportunity difference 0.074, P<.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates there may be significant racial bias in commonly used severity scoring systems and that machine learning algorithms may reduce bias while improving on the accuracy of these methods.

Is Machine Learning a Better Way to Identify COVID-19 Patients Who Might Benefit from Hydroxychloroquine Treatment?-The IDENTIFY Trial.

Therapeutic agents for the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been proposed, but evidence supporting their use is limited. A machine learning algorithm was developed in order to identify a subpopulation of COVID-19 patients for whom hydroxychloroquine was associated with improved survival; this population might be relevant for study in a clinical trial. A pragmatic trial was conducted at six United States hospitals. We enrolled COVID-19 patients that were admitted between 10 March and 4 June 2020. Treatment was not randomized. The study endpoint was mortality; discharge was a competing event. Hazard ratios were obtained on the entire population, and on the subpopulation indicated by the algorithm as suitable for treatment. A total of 290 patients were enrolled. In the subpopulation that was identified by the algorithm, hydroxychloroquine was associated with a statistically significant (p = 0.011) increase in survival (adjusted hazard ratio 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11-0.75). Adjusted survival among the algorithm indicated patients was 82.6% in the treated arm and 51.2% in the arm not treated. No association between treatment and mortality was observed in the general population. A 31% increase in survival at the end of the study was observed in a population of COVID-19 patients that were identified by a machine learning algorithm as having a better outcome with hydroxychloroquine treatment. Precision medicine approaches may be useful in identifying a subpopulation of COVID-19 patients more likely to be proven to benefit from hydroxychloroquine treatment in a clinical trial.

Prediction of respiratory decompensation in Covid-19 patients using machine learning: The READY trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently, physicians are limited in their ability to provide an accurate prognosis for COVID-19 positive patients. Existing scoring systems have been ineffective for identifying patient decompensation. Machine learning (ML) may offer an alternative strategy. A prospectively validated method to predict the need for ventilation in COVID-19 patients is essential to help triage patients, allocate resources, and prevent emergency intubations and their associated risks. METHODS: In a multicenter clinical trial, we evaluated the performance of a machine learning algorithm for prediction of invasive mechanical ventilation of COVID-19 patients within 24 h of an initial encounter. We enrolled patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis who were admitted to five United States health systems between March 24 and May 4, 2020. RESULTS: 197 patients were enrolled in the REspirAtory Decompensation and model for the triage of covid-19 patients: a prospective studY (READY) clinical trial. The algorithm had a higher diagnostic odds ratio (DOR, 12.58) for predicting ventilation than a comparator early warning system, the Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS). The algorithm also achieved significantly higher sensitivity (0.90) than MEWS, which achieved a sensitivity of 0.78, while maintaining a higher specificity (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In the first clinical trial of a machine learning algorithm for ventilation needs among COVID-19 patients, the algorithm demonstrated accurate prediction of the need for mechanical ventilation within 24 h. This algorithm may help care teams effectively triage patients and allocate resources. Further, the algorithm is capable of accurately identifying 16% more patients than a widely used scoring system while minimizing false positive results.