National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network Research Articles

A large, multi-center survey assessing health, social support, literacy, and self-management resources in patients with heart failure

BackgroundMost patients with heart failure (HF) have multimorbidity which may cause difficulties with self-management. Understanding the resources patients draw upon to effectively manage their health is fundamental to designing new practice models to improve outcomes in HF. We describe the rationale, conceptual framework, and implementation of a multi-center survey of HF patients, characterize differences between responders and non-responders, and summarize patient characteristics and responses to the survey constructs among responders.MethodsThis was a multi-center cross-sectional survey study with linked electronic health record (EHR) data. Our survey was guided by the Chronic Care Model to understand the distribution of patient-centric factors, including health literacy, social support, self-management, and functional and mental status in patients with HF. Most questions were from existing validated questionnaires. The survey was administered to HF patients aged ≥ 30 years from 4 health systems in PCORnet® (the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network): Essentia Health, Intermountain Health, Mayo Clinic, and The Ohio State University. Each health system mapped their EHR data to a standardized PCORnet Common Data Model, which was used to extract demographic and clinical data on survey responders and non-responders.ResultsAcross the 4 sites, 10,662 patients with HF were invited to participate, and 3330 completed the survey (response rate: 31%). Responders were older (74 vs. 71 years; standardized difference (95% CI): 0.18 (0.13, 0.22)), less racially diverse (3% vs. 12% non-White; standardized difference (95% CI): -0.32 (-0.36, -0.28)), and had higher prevalence of many chronic conditions than non-responders, and thus may not be representative of all HF patients. The internal reliability of the validated questionnaires in our survey was good (range of Cronbach’s alpha: 0.50–0.96). Responders reported their health was generally good or fair, they frequently had cardiovascular comorbidities, > 50% had difficulty climbing stairs, and > 10% reported difficulties with bathing, preparing meals, and using transportation. Nearly 80% of patients had family or friends sit with them during a doctor visit, and 54% managed their health by themselves. Patients reported generally low perceived support for self-management related to exercise and diet.ConclusionsMore than half of patients with HF managed their health by themselves. Increased understanding of self-management resources may guide the development of interventions to improve HF outcomes.

Making progress against rare cancers: A case study on neuroendocrine tumors.

In April 2023, the National Cancer Institute offered a roadmap for cancer research to achieve Cancer Moonshot goals. To reach these goals requires making progress for all cancers, not just those that are most common. Achieving progress against rare cancers, as well as common cancers, requires involvement of large clinical research networks. In 2020, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) launched an initiative on Conducting Rare Disease Research using PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. The purpose of this commentary is to introduce the broader community of cancer researchers to the PCORnet NET-PRO study (comparing the effects of different treatment approaches for neuroendocrine tumors on patient-reported outcomes) thereby demonstrating how researchers can use the PCORnet infrastructure to conduct large-scale patient-centered studies of rare cancers.

Exploring the Relation between Contextual Social Determinants of Health and COVID-19 Occurrence and Hospitalization

It is prudent to take a unified approach to exploring how contextual social determinants of health (SDoH) relate to COVID-19 occurrence and outcomes. Poor geographically represented data and a small number of contextual SDoH examined in most previous research studies have left a knowledge gap in the relationships between contextual SDoH and COVID-19 outcomes. In this study, we linked 199 contextual SDoH factors covering 11 domains of social and built environments with electronic health records (EHRs) from a large clinical research network (CRN) in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) to explore the relation between contextual SDoH and COVID-19 occurrence and hospitalization. We identified 15,890 COVID-19 patients and 63,560 matched non-COVID-19 patients in Florida between January 2020 and May 2021. We adopted a two-phase multiple linear regression approach modified from that in the exposome-wide association (ExWAS) study. After removing the highly correlated SDoH variables, 86 contextual SDoH variables were included in the data analysis. Adjusting for race, ethnicity, and comorbidities, we found six contextual SDoH variables (i.e., hospital available beds and utilization, percent of vacant property, number of golf courses, and percent of minority) related to the occurrence of COVID-19, and three variables (i.e., farmers market, low access, and religion) related to the hospitalization of COVID-19. To our best knowledge, this is the first study to explore the relationship between contextual SDoH and COVID-19 occurrence and hospitalization using EHRs in a major PCORnet CRN. As an exploratory study, the causal effect of SDoH on COVID-19 outcomes will be evaluated in future studies.

Developing an Algorithm to Better Identify Pregnant Women with Inherited Bleeding Disorders within Electronic Health Records

Background: When using electronic health records (EHRs) to conduct population-based studies on inherited bleeding disorders (IBDs), multiple studies demonstrated that using diagnoses codes alone result in a high number of false positive identifications (J Blood Med. 2017 Aug 30;8:131-139). To improve data integrity, in-depth chart reviews are often required which typically can only be done from a local institutional level. This limits the potential to use national research infrastructure such as the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) which draws its data from millions of EHRs across healthcare institutions in the United States. Objective: The objective of this study was to test the diagnostic accuracy of an algorithm that utilized common data definitions and multiple data elements in EHR to identify pregnant women with IBDs. Methods: We used data for pregnant women with IBDs who delivered at our institution from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020 to test the accuracy of the algorithm. Women with IBD included those with the following diagnoses: hemophilia and hemophilia carriers, von Willebrand disease and rarer bleeding disorders including factor II, V, VII, X, XI and XIII deficiencies. We did not include the following diagnoses: Platelet function disorder, fibrinogen disorder or hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia. We used EHR data elements from EPIC Clarity data model that conformed to those from the PCORnet Common Data Model (CDM). The PCORnet CDM can help ensure consistent data definitions and formats across multiple sites to facilitate large-scale patient-centered research. The original version of our algorithm included the following: (i) ICD-9/10 codes for an inherited bleeding disorder (Table 1) based on discharge diagnosis of any patient encounter visit types including inpatient, outpatient and emergency visits (criterion 1); (ii) Medications used for management of IBD (criterion 2); and (iii) Coagulation factor test and results (criterion 3). A validated diagnosis of IBD required fulfilling either criteria (1) and (2) or criteria (1) and (3). To develop our algorithm in an iterative fashion, we ran sequential queries (queries 1.0-1.1) with revisions to our initial criteria. The results of our retrospective queries were confirmed to have an IBD (true positive) using our local registry and by manual chart review. The local registry is a clinical database that is housed with EPIC and includes accurate demographic, phenotypic, and laboratory data of all persons with a confirmed diagnosis of IBD seen at our federally-funded adult hemophilia treatment center. Sensitivity and the positive predictive value of the algorithm to identify pregnant women with IBDs were calculated. Results: Using our original algorithm (query 1.0), there were 301 pregnant women who fulfilled criterion 1 and had at least one live birth or fetal death (>20 weeks gestation) at our institution during the study period. Of these, only 25 fulfilled criteria 2 and/or criteria 3. For the 276 cases that did not fulfill criteria 2 or 3, we verified the diagnosis through our local registry or through a manual review of the charts. We found that the following ICD-diagnosis codes for IBD - Z14.8; 286.9/D68.8/D68.9; 286.3/D68.2 - resulted in contamination and could not be used to diagnose carriers of IBD or the rarer bleeding disorders. These diagnoses codes were removed and we added a fourth criteria in our revised algorithm (Table 2). For cases that did not fulfill criteria 2 or 3, a case was considered as having a diagnosis of IBD if they had at least two identical ICD diagnosis code for an IBD in at least 2 separate patient encounter visit types (criterion 4). The revised algorithm (query 1.1) identified 35 pregnant women with IBD, of which 32 were confirmed to be true positive. The 3 women incorrectly identified (false positive) by our revised algorithm had seen a hematologist for work-up for a possible IBD which was eventually ruled out. From the original cohort of 301 pregnant women who had an ICD diagnosis code of an IBD, one patient who was a carrier for hemophilia A was missed (false negative) by our revised algorithm. The sensitivity of the revised algorithm was 97.0% and the PPV was 91.4% Conclusion: This study demonstrates the feasibility of an algorithm to accurately identify pregnant women with specific types of IBD within an EHR.

Avenues for Strengthening PCORnet's Capacity to Advance Patient-Centered Economic Outcomes in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR).

PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, provides the ability to conduct prospective and observational pragmatic research by leveraging standardized, curated electronic health records data together with patient and stakeholder engagement. PCORnet is funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) and is composed of 8 Clinical Research Networks that incorporate at total of 79 health system "sites." As the network developed, linkage to commercial health plans, federal insurance claims, disease registries, and other data resources demonstrated the value in extending the networks infrastructure to provide a more complete representation of patient's health and lived experiences. Initially, PCORnet studies avoided direct economic comparative effectiveness as a topic. However, PCORI's authorizing law was amended in 2019 to allow studies to incorporate patient-centered economic outcomes in primary research aims. With PCORI's expanded scope and PCORnet's phase 3 beginning in January 2022, there are opportunities to strengthen the network's ability to support economic patient-centered outcomes research. This commentary will discuss approaches that have been incorporated to date by the network and point to opportunities for the network to incorporate economic variables for analysis, informed by patient and stakeholder perspectives. Topics addressed include: (1) data linkage infrastructure; (2) commercial health plan partnerships; (3) Medicare and Medicaid linkage; (4) health system billing-based benchmarking; (5) area-level measures; (6) individual-level measures; (7) pharmacy benefits and retail pharmacy data; and (8) the importance of transparency and engagement while addressing the biases inherent in linking real-world data sources.

Association Between Hypertension and Diabetes Control and COVID-19 Severity: National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, United States, March 2020 to February 2022.

Background Hypertension and diabetes are associated with increased COVID-19 severity. The association between level of control of these conditions and COVID-19 severity is less well understood. Methods and Results This retrospective cohort study identified adults with COVID-19, March 2020 to February 2022, in 43 US health systems in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. Hypertension control was categorized as blood pressure (BP) <130/80, 130 to 139/80 to 89, 140 to 159/90 to 99, or ≥160/100 mm Hg, and diabetes control as glycated hemoglobin <7%, 7% to <9%, ≥9%. Adjusted, pooled logistic regression assessed associations between hypertension and diabetes control and severe COVID-19 outcomes. Among 1 494 837 adults with COVID-19, 43% had hypertension and 12% had diabetes. Among patients with hypertension, the highest baseline BP was associated with greater odds of hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.30 [95% CI, 1.23-1.37] for BP ≥160/100 versus BP <130/80), critical care (aOR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.21-1.40]), and mechanical ventilation (aOR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.17-1.50]) but not mortality (aOR, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.98-1.12]). Among patients with diabetes, the highest glycated hemoglobin was associated with greater odds of hospitalization (aOR, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.47-1.76] for glycated hemoglobin ≥9% versus <7%), critical care (aOR, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.31-1.54]), mechanical ventilation (aOR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.02-1.23]), and mortality (aOR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.09-1.27]). Black and Hispanic adults were more likely than White adults to experience severe COVID-19 outcomes, independent of comorbidity score and control of hypertension or diabetes. Conclusions Among 1.5 million patients with COVID-19, higher BP and glycated hemoglobin were associated with more severe COVID-19 outcomes. Findings suggest that adults with poorest control of hypertension or diabetes might benefit from efforts to prevent and initiate early treatment of COVID-19.

Effectiveness and Safety of Enteric-Coated vs Uncoated Aspirin in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease

Clinicians recommend enteric-coated aspirin to decrease gastrointestinal bleeding in secondary prevention of coronary artery disease even though studies suggest platelet inhibition is decreased with enteric-coated vs uncoated aspirin formulations. To assess whether receipt of enteric-coated vs uncoated aspirin is associated with effectiveness or safety outcomes. This is a post hoc secondary analysis of ADAPTABLE (Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-Centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-term Effectiveness), a pragmatic study of 15 076 patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease having data in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. Patients were enrolled from April 19, 2016, through June 30, 2020, and randomly assigned to receive high (325 mg) vs low (81 mg) doses of daily aspirin. The present analysis assessed the effectiveness and safety of enteric-coated vs uncoated aspirin among those participants who reported aspirin formulation at baseline. Data were analyzed from November 11, 2019, to July 3, 2023. ADAPTABLE participants were regrouped according to aspirin formulation self-reported at baseline, with a median (IQR) follow-up of 26.2 (19.8-35.4) months. The primary effectiveness end point was the cumulative incidence of the composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death from any cause, and the primary safety end point was major bleeding events (hospitalization for a bleeding event with use of a blood product or intracranial hemorrhage). Cumulative incidence at median follow-up for primary effectiveness and primary safety end points was compared between participants taking enteric-coated or uncoated aspirin using unadjusted and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. All analyses were conducted for the intention-to-treat population. Baseline aspirin formulation used in ADAPTABLE was self-reported for 10 678 participants (median [IQR] age, 68.0 [61.3-73.7] years; 7285 men [68.2%]), of whom 7366 (69.0%) took enteric-coated aspirin and 3312 (31.0%) took uncoated aspirin. No significant difference in effectiveness (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.94; 95% CI, 0.80-1.09; P = .40) or safety (AHR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.49-1.37; P = .46) outcomes between the enteric-coated aspirin and uncoated aspirin cohorts was found. Within enteric-coated aspirin and uncoated aspirin, aspirin dose had no association with effectiveness (enteric-coated aspirin AHR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.88-1.45 and uncoated aspirin AHR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.83-1.18; interaction P = .41) or safety (enteric-coated aspirin AHR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.02-5.50 and uncoated aspirin AHR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.49-1.64; interaction P = .07). In this post hoc secondary analysis of the ADAPTABLE randomized clinical trial, enteric-coated aspirin was not associated with significantly higher risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, or death or with lower bleeding risk compared with uncoated aspirin, regardless of dose, although a reduction in bleeding with enteric-coated aspirin cannot be excluded. More research is needed to confirm whether enteric-coated aspirin formulations or newer formulations will improve outcomes in this population. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02697916.

The Preserving Kidney Function in Children With CKD (PRESERVE) Study: Rationale, Design, and Methods

PRESERVE seeks to provide new knowledge to inform shared decision-making regarding blood pressure (BP) management for pediatric chronic kidney disease (CKD). PRESERVE will compare the effectiveness of alternative strategies for monitoring and treating hypertension on preserving kidney function; expand the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) common data model by adding pediatric- and kidney-specific variables and linking electronic health record data to other kidney disease databases; and assess the lived experiences of patients related to BP management. Multicenter retrospective cohort study (clinical outcomes) and cross-sectional study (patient-reported outcomes [PROs]). PRESERVE will include approximately 20,000 children between January 2009-December 2022 with mild-moderate CKDfrom 15 health care institutions that participate in6 PCORnet Clinical Research Networks (PEDSnet, STAR, GPC, PaTH, CAPRiCORN, and OneFlorida+). The inclusion criteria were≥1 nephrologist visit and≥2 estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) values in the range of 30 to<90mL/min/1.73m2 separated by≥90 days without an intervening value≥90mL/min/1.73m2 and no prior dialysis or kidney transplant. BP measurements (clinic-based and 24-hour ambulatory BP); urine protein; and antihypertensive treatment by therapeutic class. The primary outcome is a composite event of a 50% reduction in eGFR, eGFR of<15mL/min/1.73m2, long-term dialysis or kidney transplant. Secondary outcomes include change in eGFR, adverse events, and PROs. Longitudinal models for dichotomous (proportional hazards or accelerated failure time) and continuous (generalized linear mixed models) clinical outcomes; multivariable linear regression for PROs. We will evaluate heterogeneity of treatment effect by CKD etiology and degree of proteinuria and will examine variation in hypertension management and outcomes based on socio-demographics. Causal inference limited by observational analyses. PRESERVE will leverage the PCORnet infrastructure to conduct large-scale observational studies that address BP management knowledge gaps for pediatric CKD, focusing on outcomes that are meaningful to patients. Hypertension is a major modifiable contributor to loss of kidney function in chronic kidney disease (CKD). The purpose of PRESERVE is to provide evidence to inform shared decision-making regarding blood pressure management for children with CKD. PRESERVE is a consortium of 16 health care institutions in PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, and includes electronic health record data for>19,000 children with CKD. PRESERVE will (1) expand the PCORnet infrastructure for research in pediatric CKD by adding kidney-specific variables and linking electronic health record data to other kidney disease databases; (2) compare the effectiveness of alternative strategies for monitoring and treating hypertension on preserving kidney function; and (3) assess the lived experiences of patients and caregivers related to blood pressure management.

Racial and Ethnic Distribution of Rheumatic Diseases in Health Systems of the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network.

To evaluate the relative prevalence of 8 rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) across racial and ethnic groups within the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet). Electronic health records from participating PCORnet institutions and systems from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2018, were used to identify adult patients with ≥ 2 diagnosis codes for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), osteoporosis (OP), granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), microscopic polyangiitis (MPA), eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA), giant cell arteritis (GCA), and Takayasu arteritis (TAK). Among those with race and ethnicity data available, we compared prevalence of RMDs by race and ethnicity. Data from 28,059,546 patients were available for analysis. RA was more common in patients who were American Indian or Alaska Native vs White, with a prevalence of 11.57 vs 10.11/1000 (odds ratio [OR] 1.15, 95% CI 1.09-1.22). SLE was more common in patients who were Black or African American (6.73/1000), American Indian or Alaska Native (3.82/1000), and Asian (3.39/1000) vs White (2.80/1000; OR 2.43, 95% CI 2.39-2.46; OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.25-1.53; OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.21-1.31, respectively). SLE was more common in patients who were Hispanic vs non-Hispanic (prevalence 3.93 vs 3.45/1000, OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.12-1.16). TAK was more common in patients who were Asian vs White (prevalence 0.05 vs 0.04/1000, OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.00-2.03). OP, RA, and the vasculitides were all more common in patients who were White vs Black or African American. These data provide important information on the prevalence of RMDs by race and ethnicity in the United States. PCORnet can be used as a reliable data source to study RMDs within a large representative population.

Telemedicine Impact on the Patient-Provider Relationship in Primary Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated a rapid uptake of telemedicine in primary care requiring both patients and providers to learn how to navigate care remotely. This change can impact the patient-provider relationship that often defines care, especially in primary care. This study aims to provide insight into the experiences of patients and providers with telemedicine during the pandemic, and the impact it had on their relationship. A qualitative study using thematic analysis of semistructured interviews. Primary care providers (n=21) and adult patients (n=65) with chronic disease across primary care practices in 3 National Patient-centered Clinical Research Network sites in New York City, North Carolina, and Florida. Experiences with telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic in primary care. Codes related to the patient-provider relationship were analyzed for this study. A recurrent theme was the challenge telemedicine posed on rapport building and alliance. Patients felt that telemedicine affected provider's attentiveness in varying ways, whereas providers appreciated that telemedicine provided unique insight into patients' lives and living situations. Finally, both patients and providers described communication challenges. Telemedicine has altered structure and process aspects of primary health care such as the physical spaces of encounters, creating a new setting to which both patients and providers must adjust. It is important to recognize the opportunities and limits that this new technology has to help providers maintain the type of one-on-one attention that patients expect and that contributes to relationship building.

Patient and Provider Recommendations for Improved Telemedicine User Experience in Primary Care: A Multi-Center Qualitative Study.

The purpose of this study was to explore telemedicine use and obtain actionable recommendations to improve telemedicine user experience from a diverse group of patients and providers. We interviewed adult patients and primary care providers (PCPs) across three National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) sites in New York City, North Carolina, and Florida. Both patients and providers could participate via phone or videoconferencing; patients could complete the interview in English or Spanish. Spanish interviews were conducted by a member of the research team who spoke Spanish fluently. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and when necessary, professionally translated. We interviewed 21 PCPs and 65 patients between March and October 2021. We found that patients' and providers' perspectives on ways to improve the telemedicine experience focused on three recommendation themes: (1) expectations of care provided via telemedicine, (2) innovations to support usability, and (3) alleviation of physician burden. Key recommendations were related to expectations regarding (1) care provided, for example, adding educational content for the patients, and clarity about long-term payment models; (2) support innovation to improve telemedicine usability, for example, providing patients with remote monitoring devices, integrating in-home testing and nursing evaluation; (3) and reduce physician burden, for example, virtual rooming, reimbursement of time spent outside of the telemedicine encounter. Primary care patients and providers see merit in telemedicine. However, both groups recommended novel ways to improve the quality of care and user experience. Findings from this article suggest that policymakers would be best served by addressing current gaps in patient digital literacy by creating technical support strategies, and gaps in telemedicine reimbursement to present an equitable form of payment.

Contemporary patterns of lipoprotein(a) testing and associated clinical care and outcomes

ObjectiveElevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, yet little is known about Lp(a) testing patterns in real-world practice. The objective of this analysis was to determine how Lp(a) testing is used in clinical practice in comparison with low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) testing alone, and to determine whether elevated Lp(a) level is associated with subsequent initiation of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) and incident cardiovascular (CV) events. MethodsThis is an observational cohort study, based on lab tests administered between Jan 1, 2015 and Dec 31, 2019. We used electronic health record (EHR) data from 11 United States health systems participating in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet). We created two cohorts for comparison: 1) the Lp(a) cohort, of adults with an Lp(a) test and 2) the LDL-C cohort, of 4:1 date- and site-matched adults with an LDL-C test, but no Lp(a) test. The primary exposure was the presence of an Lp(a) or LDL-C test result. In the Lp(a) cohort, we used logistic regression to assess the relationship between Lp(a) results in mass units (< 50, 50-100, and > 100mg/dL) and molar units (<125, 125-250, > 250nmol/L) and initiation of LLT within 3 months. We used multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression to evaluate these Lp(a) levels and time to composite CV hospitalization, including hospitalization for myocardial infarction, revascularization and ischemic stroke. ResultsOverall, 20,551 patients had Lp(a) test results and 2,584,773 patients had LDL-C test results (82,204 included in the matched LDL-C cohort). Compared with the LDL-C cohort, the Lp(a) cohort more frequently had prevalent ASCVD (24.3% vs. 8.5%) and multiple prior CV events (8.6% vs. 2.6%). Elevated Lp(a) was associated with greater odds of subsequent LLT initiation. Elevated Lp(a) reported in mass units was also associated with subsequent composite CV hospitalization [aHR (95% CI): Lp(a) 50-100mg/dL 1.25 (1.02-1.53), p<0.03, Lp(a) > 100mg/dL 1.23 (1.08-1.40), p<0.01]. ConclusionLp(a) testing is relatively infrequent in health systems across the U.S. As new therapies for Lp(a) emerge, improved patient and provider education is needed to increase awareness of the utility of this risk marker.

Outcomes Database to Prospectively Assess the Changing Therapy Landscape in Renal Cell Carcinoma (ODYSSEY RCC).

TPS739 Background: The landscape for treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has changed dramatically over the past 7 years with the approvals of tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immune-oncology (IO) agents alone or in combination for untreated mRCC. However, multiple knowledge gaps remain. While active surveillance remains an option for selected pts, prospective evidence on selection of and outcomes for pts is limited. Recent phase III trials all used a common comparator, sunitinib, so no comparative effectiveness data on the new IO-based regimens exists. There are also no routinely used predictive biomarkers in mRCC pt management. Therefore, a better understanding of the biologic determinants associated with cancer heterogeneity and clinical outcomes through blood, tumor, and radiographic based assessments is needed. Importantly, longitudinal changes in health-related quality of life (QOL) and symptom burden of patients with mRCC initiated on new IO–based regimens outside of an interventional clinical trial are poorly understood. Pt reported outcomes (PRO) are rarely captured in a systematic manner. Addressing the evidence gap for how real world pts symptomatically change with treatment combinations and sequences over time is a pressing unmet need. Methods: This is a prospective, observational cohort, phase IV study of 800 mRCC pts in the US. Pts must: be age ≥19 at informed consent; have a diagnosis of mRCC (any histology) with no prior systemic therapy for mRCC (surgery and radiation therapy, prior neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy for non-mRCC, and pts currently not on systemic therapy and being observed are all permitted); and be able to comply with completion of PROs. Those being treated for active malignancies other than mRCC or not intending to undergo follow up care at a study site within PCORnet are excluded. Pts will undergo consent and baseline assessments, including research blood collection and processing, by the study site team. A novel aspect of this study is the use of PCORnet and Medicare data to minimize data collection burden on sites. PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, is a network of networks that curates EHR data from multiple health systems using a common data model. This allows subsequent follow up to be centrally coordinated by the coordinating center. PRO will be collected at baseline (pre-treatment), every 3 mos for 2 yrs, and then every 6 mos until end of follow up (minimum 18 mos follow-up; maximum 36 mos follow-up). The primary objective is to determine distinct patterns of change in QOL and symptom burden of mRCC pts receiving therapy. Secondary objectives include quantifying the time to treatment discontinuation of pts, identifying patterns of clinical management in the real world setting of mRCC pts on various treatment regimens, and evaluating overall survival of mRCC pts. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04919122 Clinical trial information: NCT04919122 .

Disruption in Blood Pressure Control With the COVID-19 Pandemic: The PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory

ObjectiveTo explore trends in blood pressure (BP) control before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients and MethodsHealth systems participating in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Blood Pressure Control Laboratory Surveillance System responded to data queries, producing 9 BP control metrics. Averages of the BP control metrics (weighted by numbers of observations in each health system) were calculated and compared between two 1-year measurement periods (January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, and January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020). ResultsAmong 1,770,547 hypertensive persons in 2019, BP control to <140/<90 mm Hg varied across 24 health systems (range, 46%-74%). Reduced BP control occurred in most health systems with onset of the COVID-19 pandemic; the weighted average BP control was 60.5% in 2019 and 53.3% in 2020. Reductions were also evident for BP control to <130/<80 mm Hg (29.9% in 2019 and 25.4% in 2020) and improvement in BP (reduction of 10 mm Hg in systolic BP or achievement of systolic BP <140 mm Hg; 29.7% in 2019 and 23.8% in 2020). Two BP control process metrics exhibited pandemic-associated disruption: repeat visit in 4 weeks after a visit with uncontrolled hypertension (36.7% in 2019 and 31.7% in 2020) and prescription of fixed-dose combination medications among those with 2 or more drug classes (24.6% in 2019 and 21.5% in 2020). ConclusionBP control decreased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a corresponding reduction in follow-up health care visits among persons with uncontrolled hypertension. It is unclear whether the observed decline in BP control during the pandemic will contribute to future cardiovascular events.

Data-driven identification of post-acute SARS-CoV-2 infection subphenotypes

The post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) refers to a broad spectrum of symptoms and signs that are persistent, exacerbated or newly incident in the period after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most studies have examined these conditions individually without providing evidence on co-occurring conditions. In this study, we leveraged the electronic health record data of two large cohorts, INSIGHT and OneFlorida+, from the national Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. We created a development cohort from INSIGHT and a validation cohort from OneFlorida+ including 20,881 and 13,724 patients, respectively, who were SARS-CoV-2 infected, and we investigated their newly incident diagnoses 30–180 days after a documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Through machine learning analysis of over 137 symptoms and conditions, we identified four reproducible PASC subphenotypes, dominated by cardiac and renal (including 33.75% and 25.43% of the patients in the development and validation cohorts); respiratory, sleep and anxiety (32.75% and 38.48%); musculoskeletal and nervous system (23.37% and 23.35%); and digestive and respiratory system (10.14% and 12.74%) sequelae. These subphenotypes were associated with distinct patient demographics, underlying conditions before SARS-CoV-2 infection and acute infection phase severity. Our study provides insights into the heterogeneity of PASC and may inform stratified decision-making in the management of PASC conditions.

Assessing the impact of privacy-preserving record linkage on record overlap and patient demographic and clinical characteristics in PCORnet®, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network.

This article describes the implementation of a privacy-preserving record linkage (PPRL) solution across PCORnet®, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. Using a PPRL solution from Datavant, we quantified the degree of patient overlap across the network and report a de-duplicated analysis of the demographic and clinical characteristics of the PCORnet population. There were ∼170M patient records across the responding Network Partners, with ∼138M (81%) of those corresponding to a unique patient. 82.1% of patients were found in a single partner and 14.7% were in 2. The percentage overlap between Partners ranged between 0% and 80% with a median of 0%. Linking patients' electronic health records with claims increased disease prevalence in every clinical characteristic, ranging between 63% and 173%. The overlap between Partners was variable and depended on timeframe. However, patient data linkage changed the prevalence profile of the PCORnet patient population. This project was one of the largest linkage efforts of its kind and demonstrates the potential value of record linkage. Linkage between Partners may be most useful in cases where there is geographic proximity between Partners, an expectation that potential linkage Partners will be able to fill gaps in data, or a longer study timeframe.

ODP233 Predicting Hospital Readmission for Patients with Diabetes: A Comparison of Models

Abstract In patients with diabetes, current models for predicting the risk of readmission within 30 days of hospital discharge vary in performance. We previously published the Diabetes Early Readmission Risk Indicator (DERRI TM), a logistic regression (LR) model based on 10 simple features with modest predictive performance (C-statistic 0.69). The current study aims to develop a more accurate model using deep learning on electronic health record (EHR) data. We electronically abstracted data from 36,563 patients with diabetes and at least 1 hospitalization at an urban, academic medical center between 7/1/2010 and 12/31/2020. One hospitalization per patient (index hospitalization) was randomly selected for analysis. A deep learning long short-term memory Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) was developed and compared to traditional linear and non-linear models: LR, AdaBoost, and Random Forest (RF). Models to predict unplanned, all-cause readmission were developed using demographics, vital signs, diagnostic and procedure codes, medications, laboratory tests, and administrative data as defined by the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Common Data Model. Unplanned readmissions were identified according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) definition. A look-back time of 1 year before the index hospitalization and up to 60 previous ambulatory and hospital visits were used for learning and inference. Data dimensionality was reduced to 3,000 features by Singular Value Decomposition. The RNN model C-statistic is significantly greater than those of the traditional models (RNN 0.78, AdaBoost 0.71, RF 0.73, and LR 0.71, p&amp;lt;0. 0001). Likewise, the F1-score is numerically greater for the RNN model (RNN 0.76, AdaBoost 0.75, RF 0.75, LR 0.72). Direct comparison to the DERRI TM is limited by lack of EHR data on two of the component variables (employment status and zip code). The deep learning RNN model outperforms the DERRI TM and is based on more generalizable EHR data. This new model may provide the basis for a more useful readmission risk prediction tool for patients with diabetes. Deep learning models may outperform traditional models at predicting readmission risk in this population. Presentation: No date and time listed

Incidence and risk factors for major bleeding events in atrial fibrillation patients on direct oral anticoagulant therapy: data from the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network

Abstract Background Direct oral anticoagulation (DOACs) prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and have a superior safety profile compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKA). Yet, better definition of incidence and risk factors for major bleeding associated with DOACs in clinical practice may be important given emerging stroke prevention technologies, both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic. Purpose To describe the incidence of and risk factors for major bleeding in individuals with AF on DOAC therapy. Methods We reviewed electronic health record data for two patient cohorts with AF prescribed DOACs: (1) Duke University Health System (DUHS) (2010–2018) and (2) Sites within the Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) (2015–2019) which had ≥6 years assimilated data from both inpatient and outpatient encounters (7 sites). In each cohort, we assessed the 5-year incidence of major bleeding events defined as hospitalization for intracranial hemorrhage, or hospitalization for gastro-intestinal bleeding or procedure to control bleeding accompanied by transfusion within ±7 days or death within 30 days. Multivariable Fine-Gray proportional hazards modeling in each cohort was performed to evaluate independent risk factors for major bleeding on DOAC therapy. Results The cohorts included 10,625 patients (DUHS) and 58,321 patients (PCORnet) with AF. Major bleeding events occurred within 5 years of diagnosis in 639 (7.9%) of DUHS patients and 2568 (6.6%) of PCORnet patients (Table 1). The DUHS model predicted time to first major bleeding event with a C-index of 0.756 (95% CI 0.737, 0.775) and the PCORNet model had a c-index of 0.745 (0.736, 0.755) (Table 2). Independent factors associated with major bleeding consistent across both models (p&amp;lt;0.001 in PCORnet for all unless noted) were higher CHA2DS2-VASc scores, lower eGFR, anemia (HR per 1-point increase in hemoglobin up to 12 g/dL 0.79 [0.76, 0.82]), prior major bleeding (HR 2.70 [2.22, 3.30]), cancer (HR 1.23 [1.12, 1.36]), recent cardiac surgery (HR 0.70 [0.51, 0.97]; p=0.030), alcohol use (HR 1.56 [1.29, 1.88]), aspirin use (HR 1.44 [1.32, 1.57]), and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor use (HR 1.30 [1.19, 1.42]). Conclusions Across a large and geographically diverse contemporary population, risk of bleeding on DOAC for stroke prevention in AF remains a frequent and important clinical problem. There is an unmet need for stroke prevention therapies with improved safety profiles. We identified risk factors for major bleeding events on DOAC therapy, some of which are not represented in traditional risk scores, which may inform shared decision making for stroke prevention. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Bayer Pharmaceuticals

Comparative Safety and Effectiveness of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy for Weight Loss and Type 2 Diabetes Across Race and Ethnicity in the PCORnet Bariatric Study Cohort

Bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for severe obesity; yet it is unclear whether the long-term safety and comparative effectiveness of these operations differ across racial and ethnic groups. To compare outcomes of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) across racial and ethnic groups in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Bariatric Study. This was a retrospective, observational, comparative effectiveness cohort study that comprised 25 health care systems in the PCORnet Bariatric Study. Patients were adults and adolescents aged 12 to 79 years who underwent a primary (first nonrevisional) RYGB or SG operation between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2015, at participating health systems. Patient race and ethnicity included Black, Hispanic, White, other, and unrecorded. Data were analyzed from July 1, 2021, to January 17, 2022. RYGB or SG. Percentage total weight loss (%TWL); type 2 diabetes remission, relapse, and change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level; and postsurgical safety and utilization outcomes (operations, interventions, revisions/conversions, endoscopy, hospitalizations, mortality, 30-day major adverse events) at 1, 3, and 5 years after surgery. A total of 36 871 patients (mean [SE] age, 45.0 [11.7] years; 29 746 female patients [81%]) were included in the weight analysis. Patients identified with the following race and ethnic categories: 6891 Black (19%), 8756 Hispanic (24%), 19 645 White (53%), 826 other (2%), and 783 unrecorded (2%). Weight loss and mean reductions in HbA1c level were larger for RYGB than SG in all years for Black, Hispanic, and White patients (difference in 5-year weight loss: Black, -7.6%; 95% CI, -8.0 to -7.1; P < .001; Hispanic, -6.2%; 95% CI, -6.6 to -5.9; P < .001; White, -5.9%; 95% CI, -6.3 to -5.7; P < .001; difference in change in year 5 HbA1c level: Black, -0.29; 95% CI, -0.51 to -0.08; P = .009; Hispanic, -0.45; 95% CI, -0.61 to -0.29; P < .001; and White, -0.25; 95% CI, -0.40 to -0.11; P = .001.) The magnitude of these differences was small among racial and ethnic groups (1%-3% of %TWL). Black and Hispanic patients had higher risk of hospitalization when they had RYGB compared with SG (hazard ratio [HR], 1.45; 95% CI, 1.17-1.79; P = .001 and 1.48; 95% CI, 1.22-1.79; P < .001, respectively). Hispanic patients had greater risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.24-4.70; P = .01) and higher odds of a 30-day major adverse event (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.38-2.68; P < .001) for RYGB compared with SG. There was no interaction between race and ethnicity and operation type for diabetes remission and relapse. Variability of the comparative effectiveness of operations for %TWL and HbA1c level across race and ethnicity was clinically small; however, differences in safety and utilization outcomes were clinically and statistically significant for Black and Hispanic patients who had RYGB compared with SG. These findings can inform shared decision-making regarding bariatric operation choice for different racial and ethnic groups of patients.

Effectiveness of Standard vs Enhanced Self-measurement of Blood Pressure Paired With a Connected Smartphone Application

Self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) with commercially available connected smartphone applications may help patients effectively use SMBP measurements. To determine if enhanced SMBP paired with a connected smartphone application was superior to standard SMBP for blood pressure (BP) reduction or patient satisfaction. This randomized clinical trial was conducted among 23 health systems participating in PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, and included patients who reported having uncontrolled BP at their last clinic visit, a desire to lower their BP, and a smartphone. Enrollment and randomization occurred from August 3, 2019, to December 31, 2020, which was followed by 6 months of follow-up for each patient. Analysis commenced shortly thereafter. Eligible participants were randomly assigned to enhanced SMBP using a device that paired with a connected smartphone application (enhanced) or a standard device (standard). Participants received their device in the mail, along with web-based educational materials and phone-based support as needed. No clinician engagement was undertaken, and the study provided no special mechanisms for delivering measurements to clinicians for use in BP management. Reduction in systolic BP, defined as the difference between clinic BP at baseline and the most recent clinic BP extracted from electronic health records at 6 months. Enrolled participants (1051 enhanced [50.0%] vs 1050 standard [50.0%]; 1191 women [56.7%]) were mostly middle-aged or older (mean [SD] age, 58 [13] years), nearly a third were Black or Hispanic (645 [31%]), and most were relatively comfortable using technology (mean [SD], 4.1 [1.1] of 5). The mean (SD) change in systolic BP from baseline to 6 months was -10.8 (18) mm Hg vs -10.6 (18) mm Hg (enhanced vs standard: adjusted difference, -0.19 mm Hg; 95% CI, -1.83 to 1.44; P = .81). Secondary outcomes were mostly null, except for documented attainment of BP control to lower than 140/<90 mm Hg, which occurred in 32% enhanced vs 29% standard groups (odds ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.01-1.34). Most participants were very likely to recommend their SMBP device to a friend (70% vs 69%). This randomized clinical trial found that enhanced SMBP paired with a smartphone application is not superior to standard SMBP for BP reduction or patient satisfaction. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03796689.