F-4 HARNESSING THE POWER OF BAYESIAN STATISTICS AND PATIENT-LEVEL DATA TO PREDICT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATOR (ICD) THERAPY IN PATIENT SUBGROUPS

Monday, October 21, 2013: 3:15 PM
Key Ballroom 3-4 (Hilton Baltimore)
Quantitative Methods and Theoretical Developments (MET)

Gillian D. Sanders, PhD1, Lurdes Inoue, PhD2, Rex Edwards3, Sana M. Al-Khatib, MD, MHS3, Joo Y. Han2, Gust H. Bardy, MD2, J. Thomas Bigger, MD4, Alfred E. Buxton, MD5, Arthur J. Moss, MD6, Kerry L. Lee, PhD3, Richard Steinman4, Paul Dorian, MD7, Al Hallstrom, PhD2, Riccardo Cappato, MD8, Alan H. Kadish, MD9, Peter J. Kudenchuk, MD2 and Daniel B. Mark, MD, MPH3, (1)Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, (2)University of Washington, Seattle, WA, (3)Duke University, Durham, NC, (4)Columbia University, New York, NY, (5)Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, (6)University of Rochester School of Medicine, Rochester, NY, (7)University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, (8)IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Milan, Italy, (9)Northwestern Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL
Purpose: Although the ICD has been shown to be effective in preventing mortality in several large randomized controlled trials (RCTs), its effectiveness in specific populations is uncertain. We combined data from 7 RCTs to develop, calibrate, and validate a prediction model that estimated survival over time in subgroups of interest.

Methods: Using patient-level data from 7 RCTs representing 4455 patients, we developed a Bayesian hierarchical Weibull regression model to combine data while allowing for trial-specific baseline hazard functions and treatment effects. The final model, derived from backwards elimination, included the main effects of treatment, covariates and the interaction between age and treatment. We performed frequentist evaluation of our prediction model using calibration and discrimination statistics. We performed internal validation using bootstrap samples of the combined data set and external validation using registry data. The model explored patients in 192 subgroups stratified by treatment, age, ejection fraction (EF), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, QRS, and presence of ischemic disease.

Results: With the borrowing of strength between covariate categories and across trials, our Bayesian hierarchical model allows predictions even for subgroups with small sizes (subgroup sample size ranged from 0 to 200) though with increased uncertainty in such cases. The prediction model had a C-statistic of 0.72 (se=0.01) at year 1 indicating good discrimination and was well calibrated (p=0.99).  The C-statistic was slightly smaller at years 2-5 (range: 0.67,0.70), but the model predictions were also calibrated. The same general conclusions were obtained using either internal or external validation data sets. At 5 years, the model predicts the ICD to be more effective in all subgroups. Predicted 5-yr survival with an ICD varied from 29.6% (75+y, NYHAIII, EF<30, QRS>=120, ischemia) to 90% (<65y, NYHAI, EF>=30, QRS>=120, no ischemia), while survival in the control group varied from 20% (75+y, NYHAIII, EF<30, QRS>=120, ischemia) to 84.2% (<65y, NYHAII, EF>=30, QRS<120, no ischemia). The absolute survival benefit ranged from 0.6% to 21.6% across subgroups.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest that over time ICD treatment is more effective in most subgroups relative to non-ICD. Incorporation of this prediction model into a decision-analytic framework will allow exploration of harms/benefits of ICD use in specific subgroups of interest, while also exploring the uncertainty of these findings and the value of additional data acquisition.