Comparison of scoring methods for ACE-27: Simpler is better

Dorina Kallogjeri, Jay F. Piccirillo, Edward L. Spitznagel, Ewout W. Steyerberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

51 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: To examine the prognostic value of different comorbidity coding schemes for predicting survival of newly diagnosed elderly cancer patients. Materials and methods: We analyzed data from 8867 patients aged 65 years of age or older, newly diagnosed with cancer. Comorbidities present at the time of diagnosis were collected using the Adult Comorbidity Evaluation-27 index (ACE-27). We examined multiple scoring schemes based on the individual comorbidity ailments, and their severity rating. Harrell's c index and Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) were used to evaluate the performance of the different comorbidity models. Results: Comorbidity led to an increase in c index from 0.771 for the base model to 0.782 for a model that included indicator variables for every ailment. The prognostic value was however much higher for prostate and breast cancer patients. A simple model which considered linear scores from 0 to 3 per ailment, controlling for cancer type, was optimal according to AIC. Conclusion: The presence of comorbidity impacts on the survival of elderly cancer patients, especially for less lethal cancers, such as prostate and breast cancers. Different ailments have different impacts on survival, necessitating the use of different weights per ailment in a simple summary score of the ACE-27.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)238-245
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Geriatric Oncology
Volume3
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2012

Keywords

  • Cancer patients
  • Comorbidity comorbid ailment
  • Elderly
  • Prognostic
  • Survival

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of scoring methods for ACE-27: Simpler is better'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this