External Prognostic Validations and Comparisons of Age- and Gender-Adjusted Exercise Capacity Predictions

Esther S H Kim, Hemant Ishwaran, Eugene Blackstone, Michael S. Lauer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

49 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to externally validate the prognostic value of age- and gender-based nomograms and categorical definitions of impaired exercise capacity (EC). Background: Exercise capacity predicts death, but its use in routine clinical practice is hampered by its close correlation with age and gender. Methods: For a median of 5 years, we followed 22,275 patients without known heart disease who underwent symptom-limited stress testing. Models for predicted or impaired EC were identified by literature search. Gender-specific multivariable proportional hazards models were constructed. Four methods were used to assess validity: Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), right-censored c-index in 100 out-of-bootstrap samples, the Nagelkerke Index R2, and calculation of calibration error in 100 bootstrap samples. Results: There were 646 and 430 deaths in 13,098 men and 9,177 women, respectively. Of the 7 models tested in men, a model based on a Veterans Affairs cohort (predicted metabolic equivalents [METs] = 18 - [0.15 × age]) had the highest AIC and R2. In women, a model based on the St. James Take Heart Project (predicted METs = 14.7 - [0.13 × age]) performed best. Categorical definitions of fitness performed less well. Even after accounting for age and gender, there was still an important interaction with age, whereby predicted EC was a weaker predictor in older subjects (p for interaction <0.001 in men and 0.003 in women). Conclusions: Several methods describe EC accounting for age and gender-related differences, but their ability to predict mortality differ. Simple cutoff values fail to fully describe EC's strong predictive value.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1867-1875
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume50
Issue number19
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 6 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Exercise
Metabolic Equivalent
Nomograms
Veterans
Proportional Hazards Models
Calibration
Heart Diseases
Mortality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

External Prognostic Validations and Comparisons of Age- and Gender-Adjusted Exercise Capacity Predictions. / Kim, Esther S H; Ishwaran, Hemant; Blackstone, Eugene; Lauer, Michael S.

In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 50, No. 19, 06.11.2007, p. 1867-1875.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1014db25c6594f06af9cd2c3581645cf,
title = "External Prognostic Validations and Comparisons of Age- and Gender-Adjusted Exercise Capacity Predictions",
abstract = "Objectives: The purpose of this study was to externally validate the prognostic value of age- and gender-based nomograms and categorical definitions of impaired exercise capacity (EC). Background: Exercise capacity predicts death, but its use in routine clinical practice is hampered by its close correlation with age and gender. Methods: For a median of 5 years, we followed 22,275 patients without known heart disease who underwent symptom-limited stress testing. Models for predicted or impaired EC were identified by literature search. Gender-specific multivariable proportional hazards models were constructed. Four methods were used to assess validity: Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), right-censored c-index in 100 out-of-bootstrap samples, the Nagelkerke Index R2, and calculation of calibration error in 100 bootstrap samples. Results: There were 646 and 430 deaths in 13,098 men and 9,177 women, respectively. Of the 7 models tested in men, a model based on a Veterans Affairs cohort (predicted metabolic equivalents [METs] = 18 - [0.15 × age]) had the highest AIC and R2. In women, a model based on the St. James Take Heart Project (predicted METs = 14.7 - [0.13 × age]) performed best. Categorical definitions of fitness performed less well. Even after accounting for age and gender, there was still an important interaction with age, whereby predicted EC was a weaker predictor in older subjects (p for interaction <0.001 in men and 0.003 in women). Conclusions: Several methods describe EC accounting for age and gender-related differences, but their ability to predict mortality differ. Simple cutoff values fail to fully describe EC's strong predictive value.",
author = "Kim, {Esther S H} and Hemant Ishwaran and Eugene Blackstone and Lauer, {Michael S.}",
year = "2007",
month = "11",
day = "6",
doi = "10.1016/j.jacc.2007.08.003",
language = "English",
volume = "50",
pages = "1867--1875",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Cardiology",
issn = "0735-1097",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "19",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - External Prognostic Validations and Comparisons of Age- and Gender-Adjusted Exercise Capacity Predictions

AU - Kim, Esther S H

AU - Ishwaran, Hemant

AU - Blackstone, Eugene

AU - Lauer, Michael S.

PY - 2007/11/6

Y1 - 2007/11/6

N2 - Objectives: The purpose of this study was to externally validate the prognostic value of age- and gender-based nomograms and categorical definitions of impaired exercise capacity (EC). Background: Exercise capacity predicts death, but its use in routine clinical practice is hampered by its close correlation with age and gender. Methods: For a median of 5 years, we followed 22,275 patients without known heart disease who underwent symptom-limited stress testing. Models for predicted or impaired EC were identified by literature search. Gender-specific multivariable proportional hazards models were constructed. Four methods were used to assess validity: Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), right-censored c-index in 100 out-of-bootstrap samples, the Nagelkerke Index R2, and calculation of calibration error in 100 bootstrap samples. Results: There were 646 and 430 deaths in 13,098 men and 9,177 women, respectively. Of the 7 models tested in men, a model based on a Veterans Affairs cohort (predicted metabolic equivalents [METs] = 18 - [0.15 × age]) had the highest AIC and R2. In women, a model based on the St. James Take Heart Project (predicted METs = 14.7 - [0.13 × age]) performed best. Categorical definitions of fitness performed less well. Even after accounting for age and gender, there was still an important interaction with age, whereby predicted EC was a weaker predictor in older subjects (p for interaction <0.001 in men and 0.003 in women). Conclusions: Several methods describe EC accounting for age and gender-related differences, but their ability to predict mortality differ. Simple cutoff values fail to fully describe EC's strong predictive value.

AB - Objectives: The purpose of this study was to externally validate the prognostic value of age- and gender-based nomograms and categorical definitions of impaired exercise capacity (EC). Background: Exercise capacity predicts death, but its use in routine clinical practice is hampered by its close correlation with age and gender. Methods: For a median of 5 years, we followed 22,275 patients without known heart disease who underwent symptom-limited stress testing. Models for predicted or impaired EC were identified by literature search. Gender-specific multivariable proportional hazards models were constructed. Four methods were used to assess validity: Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), right-censored c-index in 100 out-of-bootstrap samples, the Nagelkerke Index R2, and calculation of calibration error in 100 bootstrap samples. Results: There were 646 and 430 deaths in 13,098 men and 9,177 women, respectively. Of the 7 models tested in men, a model based on a Veterans Affairs cohort (predicted metabolic equivalents [METs] = 18 - [0.15 × age]) had the highest AIC and R2. In women, a model based on the St. James Take Heart Project (predicted METs = 14.7 - [0.13 × age]) performed best. Categorical definitions of fitness performed less well. Even after accounting for age and gender, there was still an important interaction with age, whereby predicted EC was a weaker predictor in older subjects (p for interaction <0.001 in men and 0.003 in women). Conclusions: Several methods describe EC accounting for age and gender-related differences, but their ability to predict mortality differ. Simple cutoff values fail to fully describe EC's strong predictive value.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=35548988391&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=35548988391&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.08.003

DO - 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.08.003

M3 - Article

C2 - 17980254

AN - SCOPUS:35548988391

VL - 50

SP - 1867

EP - 1875

JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

SN - 0735-1097

IS - 19

ER -