Machine Learning Used to Compare the Diagnostic Accuracy of Risk Factors, Clinical Signs and Biomarkers and to Develop a New Prediction Model for Neonatal Early-onset Sepsis

BACKGROUND

Current strategies for risk stratification and prediction of neonatal early-onset sepsis (EOS) are inefficient and lack diagnostic performance. The aim of this study was to use machine learning to analyze the diagnostic accuracy of risk factors (RFs), clinical signs and biomarkers and to develop a prediction model for culture-proven EOS. We hypothesized that the contribution to diagnostic accuracy of biomarkers is higher than of RFs or clinical signs.

STUDY DESIGN

Secondary analysis of the prospective international multicenter NeoPInS study. Neonates born after completed 34 weeks of gestation with antibiotic therapy due to suspected EOS within the first 72 hours of life participated. Primary outcome was defined as predictive performance for culture-proven EOS with variables known at the start of antibiotic therapy. Machine learning was used in form of a random forest classifier.

RESULTS

One thousand six hundred eighty-five neonates treated for suspected infection were analyzed. Biomarkers were superior to clinical signs and RFs for prediction of culture-proven EOS. C-reactive protein and white blood cells were most important for the prediction of the culture result. Our full model achieved an area-under-the-receiver-operating-characteristic-curve of 83.41% (±8.8%) and an area-under-the-precision-recall-curve of 28.42% (±11.5%). The predictive performance of the model with RFs alone was comparable with random.

CONCLUSIONS

Biomarkers have to be considered in algorithms for the management of neonates suspected of EOS. A 2-step approach with a screening tool for all neonates in combination with our model in the preselected population with an increased risk for EOS may have the potential to reduce the start of unnecessary antibiotics.

Cost impact of procalcitonin-guided decision making on duration of antibiotic therapy for suspected early-onset sepsis in neonates

BACKGROUNDS

The large, international, randomized controlled NeoPInS trial showed that procalcitonin (PCT)-guided decision making was superior to standard care in reducing the duration of antibiotic therapy and hospitalization in neonates suspected of early-onset sepsis (EOS), without increased adverse events. This study aimed to perform a cost-minimization study of the NeoPInS trial, comparing health care costs of standard care and PCT-guided decision making based on the NeoPInS algorithm, and to analyze subgroups based on country, risk category and gestational age.

METHODS

Data from the NeoPInS trial in neonates born after 34 weeks of gestational age with suspected EOS in the first 72 h of life requiring antibiotic therapy were used. We performed a cost-minimization study of health care costs, comparing standard care to PCT-guided decision making.

RESULTS

In total, 1489 neonates were included in the study, of which 754 were treated according to PCT-guided decision making and 735 received standard care. Mean health care costs of PCT-guided decision making were not significantly different from costs of standard care (€3649 vs. €3616). Considering subgroups, we found a significant reduction in health care costs of PCT-guided decision making for risk category 'infection unlikely' and for gestational age ≥ 37 weeks in the Netherlands, Switzerland and the Czech Republic, and for gestational age < 37 weeks in the Czech Republic.

CONCLUSIONS

Health care costs of PCT-guided decision making of term and late-preterm neonates with suspected EOS are not significantly different from costs of standard care. Significant cost reduction was found for risk category 'infection unlikely,' and is affected by both the price of PCT-testing and (prolonged) hospitalization due to SAEs.

C-Reactive Protein, Procalcitonin, and White Blood Count to Rule Out Neonatal Early-onset Sepsis Within 36 Hours: A Secondary Analysis of the Neonatal Procalcitonin Intervention Study

BACKGROUND

Neonatal early-onset sepsis (EOS) is one of the main causes of global neonatal mortality and morbidity, and initiation of early antibiotic treatment is key. However, antibiotics may be harmful.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of results from the Neonatal Procalcitonin Intervention Study, a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled intervention study. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of serial measurements of C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), and white blood count (WBC) within different time windows to rule out culture-positive EOS (proven sepsis).

RESULTS

We analyzed 1678 neonates with 10 899 biomarker measurements (4654 CRP, 2047 PCT, and 4198 WBC) obtained within the first 48 hours after the start of antibiotic therapy due to suspected EOS. The areas under the curve (AUC) comparing no sepsis vs proven sepsis for maximum values of CRP, PCT, and WBC within 36 hours were 0.986, 0.921, and 0.360, respectively. The AUCs for CRP and PCT increased with extended time frames up to 36 hours, but there was no further difference between start to 36 hours vs start to 48 hours. Cutoff values at 16 mg/L for CRP and 2.8 ng/L for PCT provided a sensitivity of 100% for discriminating no sepsis vs proven sepsis.

CONCLUSIONS

Normal serial CRP and PCT measurements within 36 hours after the start of empiric antibiotic therapy can exclude the presence of neonatal EOS with a high probability. The negative predictive values of CRP and PCT do not increase after 36 hours.

Procalcitonin-guided decision making for duration of antibiotic therapy in neonates with suspected early-onset sepsis: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial (NeoPIns)

BACKGROUND

Up to 7% of term and late-preterm neonates in high-income countries receive antibiotics during the first 3 days of life because of suspected early-onset sepsis. The prevalence of culture-proven early-onset sepsis is 0·1% or less in high-income countries, suggesting substantial overtreatment. We assess whether procalcitonin-guided decision making for suspected early-onset sepsis can safely reduce the duration of antibiotic treatment.

METHODS

We did this randomised controlled intervention trial in Dutch (n=11), Swiss (n=4), Canadian (n=2), and Czech (n=1) hospitals. Neonates of gestational age 34 weeks or older, with suspected early-onset sepsis requiring antibiotic treatment were stratified into four risk categories by their treating physicians and randomly assigned [1:1] using a computer-generated list stratified per centre to procalcitonin-guided decision making or standard care-based antibiotic treatment. Neonates who underwent surgery within the first week of life or had major congenital malformations that would have required hospital admission were excluded. Only principal investigators were masked for group assignment. Co-primary outcomes were non-inferiority for re-infection or death in the first month of life (margin 2·0%) and superiority for duration of antibiotic therapy. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were done. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00854932.

FINDINGS

Between May 21, 2009, and Feb 14, 2015, we screened 2440 neonates with suspected early-onset sepsis. 622 infants were excluded due to lack of parental consent, 93 were ineligible for reasons unknown (68), congenital malformation (22), or surgery in the first week of life (3). 14 neonates were excluded as 100% data monitoring or retrieval was not feasible, and one neonate was excluded because their procalcitonin measurements could not be taken. 1710 neonates were enrolled and randomly assigned to either procalcitonin-guided therapy (n=866) or standard therapy (n=844). 1408 neonates underwent per-protocol analysis (745 in the procalcitonin group and 663 standard group). For the procalcitonin group, the duration of antibiotic therapy was reduced (intention to treat: 55·1 vs 65·0 h, p<0·0001; per protocol: 51·8 vs 64·0 h; p<0·0001). No sepsis-related deaths occurred, and 9 (<1%) of 1710 neonates had possible re-infection. The risk difference for non-inferiority was 0·1% (95% CI -4·6 to 4·8) in the intention-to-treat analysis (5 [0·6%] of 866 neonates in the procalcitonin group vs 4 [0·5%] of 844 neonates in the standard group) and 0·1% (-5·2 to 5·3) in the per-protocol analysis (5 [0·7%] of 745 neonates in the procalcitonin group vs 4 [0·6%] of 663 neonates in the standard group).

INTERPRETATION

Procalcitonin-guided decision making was superior to standard care in reducing antibiotic therapy in neonates with suspected early-onset sepsis. Non-inferiority for re-infection or death could not be shown due to the low occurrence of re-infections and absence of study-related death.

FUNDING

The Thrasher Foundation, the NutsOhra Foundation, the Sophia Foundation for Scientific research.

Computerized decision support systems in primary care for type 2 diabetes patients only improve patients' outcomes when combined with feedback on performance and case management: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Computerized decision support systems (CDSSs) are often part of a multifaceted intervention to improve diabetes care. We reviewed the effects of CDSSs alone or in combination with other supportive tools in primary care for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted for January 1990-July 2011 in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database and by consulting reference lists. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in general practice were selected if the interventions consisted of a CDSS alone or combined with a reminder system and/or feedback on performance and/or case management. The intervention had to be compared with usual care. Two pairs of reviewers independently abstracted all available data. The data were categorized by process of care and patient outcome measures.

RESULTS

Twenty RCTs met inclusion criteria. In 14 studies a CDSS was combined with another intervention. Two studies were left out of the analysis because of low quality. Four studies with a CDSS alone and four studies with a CDSS and reminders showed improvements of the process of care. CDSS with feedback on performance with or without reminders improved the process of care (one study) and patient outcome (two studies). CDSS with case management improved patient outcome (two studies). CDSS with reminders, feedback on performance, and case management improved both patient outcome and the process of care (two studies).

CONCLUSIONS

CDSSs used by healthcare providers in primary T2DM care are effective in improving the process of care; adding feedback on performance and/or case management may also improve patient outcome.