Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2020 Jan;26(1):52-60.
doi: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2019.11.016. Epub 2019 Nov 18.

Risk Prediction in Transition: MAGGIC Score Performance at Discharge and Incremental Utility of Natriuretic Peptides

Alexander Michaels  1 , Lindsey Aurora  1 , Edward Peterson  2 , Bin Liu  2 , Yigal M Pinto  3 , Hani N Sabbah  1 , Keoki Williams  4 , David E Lanfear  5
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Risk Prediction in Transition: MAGGIC Score Performance at Discharge and Incremental Utility of Natriuretic Peptides

Alexander Michaels et al. J Card Fail. 2020 Jan.

Abstract

Background: Risk stratification for hospitalized patients with heart failure (HF) remains a critical need. The Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) score is a robust model derived from patients with ambulatory HF. Its validity at the time of discharge and the incremental value of natriuretic peptides (NPs) in this setting is unclear.

Methods: This was a single-center study examining a total of 4138 patients with HF from 2 groups; hospital discharge patients from administrative data (n = 2503, 60.5%) and a prospective registry of patients with ambulatory HF (n = 1635, 39.5%). The ambulatory registry patients underwent N-terminal pro-B-type NP (BNP) measurement at enrollment, and in the hospitalize discharge cohort clinical BNP levels were abstracted. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 1 year. MAGGIC score performance was compared between cohorts utilizing Cox regression and calibration plots. The incremental value of NPs was assessed using calculated area under the curve and net reclassification improvement (NRI).

Results: The hospitalized and ambulatory cohorts differed with respect to primary outcome (777 and 100 deaths, respectively), sex (52.1% vs 41.7% female) and race (35% vs 49.5% African American). The MAGGIC score showed poor discrimination of mortality risk in the hospital discharge (C statistic: 0.668, hazard ratio [HR]: 1.1 per point, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.652, 0.684) but fair discrimination in the ambulatory cohorts (C statistic: 0.784, HR: 1.16 per point, 95% CI: 0.74, 0.83), respectively, a difference that was statistically significant (P = .001 for C statistic, 0.002 for HR). Calibration assessment indicated that the slope and intercept (of MAGGIC-predicted to observed mortality) did not statistically differ from ideal in either cohort and did not differ between the cohorts (all P > .1). NP levels did not significantly improve prediction in the hospitalized cohort (P = .127) but did in the ambulatory cohort (C statistic: 0.784 [95% CI: 0.74, 0.83] vs 0.82 [95% CI: 0.78, 0.85]; P = .018) with a favorable NRI of 0.354 (95% CI: 0.202-0.469; P = .002).

Conclusion: The MAGGIC score showed poor discrimination when used in patients with HF at hospital discharge, which was inferior to its performance in patients with ambulatory HF. Discrimination within the hospital discharge group was not improved by including hospital NP levels.

Keywords: Heart failure; mortality; risk prediction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Patient and cohort flow diagram
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
Kaplan Meier Survival Curves by Cohort and Predicted Risk Category
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Observed vs. Expected 1-Year Mortality by Risk Quintile in the Hospital and Ambulatory Cohorts; MAGGIC, Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves for MAGGIC score with and without Natriuretic Peptides in the Hospital and Ambulatory Cohorts; MAGGIC, Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure, MAGGIC+, Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure with inclusion of natriuretic peptide
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Lindenauer PK, Remus D, Roman S, Rothberg MB, Benjamin EM, Ma A, et al. Public reporting and pay for performance in hospital quality improvement. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:486–96. - PubMed
    1. Rosamond W, Flegal K, Furie K, Go A, Greenlund K, Haase N, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics−-2008 update: a report from the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Circulation. 2008;117:e25–146. - PubMed
    1. Cleland JG, Chiswell K, Teerlink JR, Stevens S, Fiuzat M, Givertz MM, et al. Predictors of postdischarge outcomes from information acquired shortly after admission for acute heart failure: a report from the Placebo-Controlled Randomized Study of the Selective A1 Adenosine Receptor Antagonist Rolofylline for Patients Hospitalized With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure and Volume Overload to Assess Treatment Effect on Congestion and Renal Function (PROTECT) Study. Circulation Heart failure. 2014;7:76–87. - PubMed
    1. Ross JS, Chen J, Lin Z, Bueno H, Curtis JP, Keenan PS, et al. Recent national trends in readmission rates after heart failure hospitalization. Circulation Heart failure. 2010;3:97–103. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Joynt KE, Jha AK. Who has higher readmission rates for heart failure, and why? Implications for efforts to improve care using financial incentives. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2011;4:53–9. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types