Conditional Treatment Effect Analysis of Two Infusion Rates for Fluid Challenges in Critically Ill Patients : A Secondary Analysis of Balanced Solution versus Saline in Intensive Care Study (BaSICS) Trial
Rationale: Optimal infusion rate for fluid challenges in critically ill patients is unknown. A large clinical trial comparing two different infusion rates yielded neutral results. Conditional average treatment effect (CATE) assessment may aid in tailoring therapy. Objectives: To estimate CATE in patients enrolled in the BaSICS trial and to assess the effects of receiving CATE model-recommended treatment in terms of hospital mortality. Methods: Post hoc analysis of the BaSICS trial assessing the effect of two infusion rates for the fluid challenge (fast, 999 ml/h, control group; vs. slow, 333 ml/h, intervention group) on hospital mortality. CATE was estimated as the difference in outcome for treatment arms in counterfactuals obtained from a Bayesian model trained in the first half of the trial adjusted for predictors hypothesized to interact with the intervention. The model recommended slow or fast infusion or made no recommendation in the second half. A threshold greater than 0.90 probability of benefit was considered. Results: A total of 10,465 patients were analyzed. The model was trained in 5,230 patients and tested in 5,235 patients. A recommendation could be made in the test set in 19% of patients (14% were recommended the control group and 5% the treatment group); for 81% of patients, no recommendation could be made. Slow infusion was more frequently recommended in cases of planned admissions in younger patients; fast infusion was recommended for older patients with sepsis. Slow infusion rate in the subgroup of patients in the test set in which slow infusion was recommended by the model was associated with an odds ratio of 0.58 (95% credible interval of 0.32-0.90; 0.99 posterior probability of benefit) for hospital mortality. Fast infusion in the subgroup in which the model recommended fast infusion was associated with an odds ratio of 0.72 (credible intervals from 0.54 to 0.91; probability of benefit >0.99). Conclusions: Estimation of CATEs from counterfactual probabilities in data from BaSICS provided additional information on trial data. Agreement between treatment recommendation and actual treatment was associated with lower hospital mortality. Clinical trial registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02875873).
| Errataetall: |
CommentIn: Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2023 Jun;20(6):794-796. - PMID 37261790 |
|---|---|
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:20 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Annals of the American Thoracic Society - 20(2023), 6 vom: 03. Juni, Seite 872-879 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Zampieri, Fernando G [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Balanced solutions |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 15.06.2023 Date Revised 15.06.2023 published: Print ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02875873 CommentIn: Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2023 Jun;20(6):794-796. - PMID 37261790 Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1513/AnnalsATS.202211-946OC |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM352459581 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM352459581 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226053756.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202211-946OC |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1174.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM352459581 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)36735931 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Zampieri, Fernando G |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Conditional Treatment Effect Analysis of Two Infusion Rates for Fluid Challenges in Critically Ill Patients |b A Secondary Analysis of Balanced Solution versus Saline in Intensive Care Study (BaSICS) Trial |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 15.06.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 15.06.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print | ||
| 500 | |a ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02875873 | ||
| 500 | |a CommentIn: Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2023 Jun;20(6):794-796. - PMID 37261790 | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Rationale: Optimal infusion rate for fluid challenges in critically ill patients is unknown. A large clinical trial comparing two different infusion rates yielded neutral results. Conditional average treatment effect (CATE) assessment may aid in tailoring therapy. Objectives: To estimate CATE in patients enrolled in the BaSICS trial and to assess the effects of receiving CATE model-recommended treatment in terms of hospital mortality. Methods: Post hoc analysis of the BaSICS trial assessing the effect of two infusion rates for the fluid challenge (fast, 999 ml/h, control group; vs. slow, 333 ml/h, intervention group) on hospital mortality. CATE was estimated as the difference in outcome for treatment arms in counterfactuals obtained from a Bayesian model trained in the first half of the trial adjusted for predictors hypothesized to interact with the intervention. The model recommended slow or fast infusion or made no recommendation in the second half. A threshold greater than 0.90 probability of benefit was considered. Results: A total of 10,465 patients were analyzed. The model was trained in 5,230 patients and tested in 5,235 patients. A recommendation could be made in the test set in 19% of patients (14% were recommended the control group and 5% the treatment group); for 81% of patients, no recommendation could be made. Slow infusion was more frequently recommended in cases of planned admissions in younger patients; fast infusion was recommended for older patients with sepsis. Slow infusion rate in the subgroup of patients in the test set in which slow infusion was recommended by the model was associated with an odds ratio of 0.58 (95% credible interval of 0.32-0.90; 0.99 posterior probability of benefit) for hospital mortality. Fast infusion in the subgroup in which the model recommended fast infusion was associated with an odds ratio of 0.72 (credible intervals from 0.54 to 0.91; probability of benefit >0.99). Conclusions: Estimation of CATEs from counterfactual probabilities in data from BaSICS provided additional information on trial data. Agreement between treatment recommendation and actual treatment was associated with lower hospital mortality. Clinical trial registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02875873) | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Clinical Trial | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S. | |
| 650 | 4 | |a balanced solutions | |
| 650 | 4 | |a critical care | |
| 650 | 4 | |a personalized medicine | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Damiani, Lucas P |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bagshaw, Sean M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Semler, Matthew W |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Churpek, Matthew |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Azevedo, Luciano C P |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Figueiredo, Rodrigo C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Veiga, Viviane C |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Biondi, Rodrigo |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Freitas, Flavio R |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Machado, Flavia R |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Cavalcanti, Alexandre B |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 0 | |a BRICNet |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Annals of the American Thoracic Society |d 2013 |g 20(2023), 6 vom: 03. Juni, Seite 872-879 |w (DE-627)NLM225943336 |x 2325-6621 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:20 |g year:2023 |g number:6 |g day:03 |g month:06 |g pages:872-879 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1513/AnnalsATS.202211-946OC |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 20 |j 2023 |e 6 |b 03 |c 06 |h 872-879 | ||