Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Unsupervised Machine learning to subtype Sepsis-Associated Acute Kidney Injury

Kumardeep Chaudhary, Aine Duffy, Priti Poojary, Aparna Saha, Kinsuk Chauhan, Ron Do, Tielman Van Vleck, Steven G. Coca, Lili Chan, Girish N. Nadkarni
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/447425
Kumardeep Chaudhary
2Department of Genetics and Genomic Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Aine Duffy
2Department of Genetics and Genomic Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Priti Poojary
1Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Aparna Saha
2Department of Genetics and Genomic Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kinsuk Chauhan
1Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ron Do
2Department of Genetics and Genomic Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tielman Van Vleck
2Department of Genetics and Genomic Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Steven G. Coca
1Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lili Chan
1Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Girish N. Nadkarni
1Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
2Department of Genetics and Genomic Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Objective Acute kidney injury (AKI) is highly prevalent in critically ill patients with sepsis. Sepsis-associated AKI is a heterogeneous clinical entity, and, like many complex syndromes, is composed of distinct subtypes. We aimed to agnostically identify AKI subphenotypes using machine learning techniques and routinely collected data in electronic health records (EHRs).

Design Cohort study utilizing the MIMIC-III Database.

Setting ICUs from tertiary care hospital in the U.S.

Patients Patients older than 18 years with sepsis and who developed AKI within 48 hours of ICU admission.

Interventions Unsupervised machine learning utilizing all available vital signs and laboratory measurements.

Measurements and Main Results We identified 1,865 patients with sepsis-associated AKI. Ten vital signs and 691 unique laboratory results were identified. After data processing and feature selection, 59 features, of which 28 were measures of intra-patient variability, remained for inclusion into an unsupervised machine-learning algorithm. We utilized k-means clustering with k ranging from 2 – 10; k=2 had the highest silhouette score (0.62). Cluster 1 had 1,358 patients while Cluster 2 had 507 patients. There were no significant differences between clusters on age, race or gender. We found significant differences in comorbidities and small but significant differences in several laboratory variables (hematocrit, bicarbonate, albumin) and vital signs (systolic blood pressure and heart rate). In-hospital mortality was higher in cluster 2 patients, 25% vs. 20%, p=0.008. Features with the largest differences between clusters included variability in basophil and eosinophil counts, alanine aminotransferase levels and creatine kinase values.

Conclusions Utilizing routinely collected laboratory variables and vital signs in the EHR, we were able to identify two distinct subphenotypes of sepsis-associated AKI with different outcomes. Variability in laboratory variables, as opposed to their actual value, was more important for determination of subphenotypes. Our findings show the potential utility of unsupervised machine learning to better subtype AKI.

Introduction

Acute kidney injury (AKI) occurs in up to a quarter of hospitalized patients and has been repeatedly shown to be associated with increased morbidity and mortality.(1–4) Sepsis is the most common cause of AKI in critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care units (ICU). It was initially thought that sepsis-associated AKI is due to systemic hypotension leading to a decrease in renal perfusion resulting in renal ischemia and acute tubular necrosis (ATN). However, there is growing evidence of different mechanisms of sepsis-associated AKI with potentially different clinical characteristics and outcomes.(5)

Thus, AKI is not likely a single clinical entity, but likely a clinical syndrome comprised of several different subtypes. However, there has not been any investigation into identifying these subphenotypes, which are all labeled sepsis-associated AKI. Electronic health records (EHRs) especially in the ICU setting, collect thousands of data points per individual patient. While there have been previous studies showing that machine learning approaches using EHR data identify distinct subtypes in chronic disease, there have not been any studies in acute disease.(6)

Our primary aim was to determine if we could identify subphenotypes of sepsis-associated AKI utilizing measurements done as part of patients’ routine care outside of traditional features such as age, gender, race, and comorbidities. We sought to incorporate hundreds of data features collected routinely in the EHR using unsupervised machine learning to identify subphenotypes of AKI in patients admitted to the intensive care unit with sepsis and explore differences in patient outcomes between the clusters.

Methods

Study Population

We utilized the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC-III) database to identify patients with sepsis-induced AKI. MIMIC-III is a freely accessible critical care database of patients from a large, single center tertiary care hospital (Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Massachusetts) from 2001 to 2012.(7) This database includes patient demographics, vital signs, laboratory results, billing codes, and notes. We included patients in the analyses if they had AKI within 48 hours of ICU admission as per Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Guidelines.(8) We then defined sepsis with the Clinical Classification Software (CCS) which groups discharges into mutually exclusive categories utilizing International Classification of Diagnosis – Ninth Revision Codes (ICD-9).(9) We defined patient co-morbidities using the Elixhauser Comorbidity Software, which identifies comorbidities by grouping ICD-9-CM codes from hospital discharge records.(10) We excluded patients if they were less than 18 years old, admitted for ≤24 hours, end stage renal disease (ESRD), or missing vital signs. A study flow diagram is included in Supplemental Figure S1. As patients could be admitted several times during the 11 year period and develop AKI, we considered only the data from the first admission with AKI per person.

Data Processing

We utilized laboratory values and vital sign measurements to identify the clusters and considered all labs and vitals from admission to 48 hours after the diagnosis of AKI for inclusion. We excluded data features which were missing in > 70% of patients. As there are fundamental differences in the measurements of the laboratory tests and vital signs features, they were processed separately. For vital signs, we had a feature space of 30 (including median, SD and count). The laboratory results feature space was much larger with 691 unique features with at least one value. We removed the median features with >70% missing values; corresponding SD and count were added later to the remaining lab features. For both class of features, we used k-nearest neighbor (knn)-based imputation method using 2 neighbors. impute.knn function was used in the impute R package.(11)

Since the laboratory results and vital signs have a different range of values, we used YeoJohnson (YJ) normalization separately to normalize the feature space.(12) For each class, features that were highly correlated (correlation coefficient >0.50) were excluded. The absolute values of pair-wise correlations were considered. If two variables have a high correlation, the function looks at the mean absolute correlation of each variable and removes the variable with the largest mean absolute correlation. This step was done to remove redundant features that added no additional information to the downstream clustering method. Subsequently, the features from labs and vitals were combined together and subjected to Box-Cox normalization to bring all features to a comparable scale.(12) Finally, the data were translated and transformed at log scale just prior to actual k-means clustering. Throughout the data processing steps, laboratory features derived from albumin, bicarbonate, and potassium were kept as we clinically adjudicated them to be meaningful.(13, 14) Selected features contributed to the final unsupervised clustering.

Clustering

With the final feature matrix of combined labs and vitals for all the samples, we performed unsupervised clustering using k-means. We opted to generate 25 initial configurations for a range of cluster numbers (k=2 to k=10). We calculated the silhouette score in order to select the best cluster (k). Apart from that, we performed a 10-fold cross-validation using the features among the clusters corresponding to the final selected k. We used the random forest algorithm implemented in the caret package. We opted for 5 variables to be randomly sampled as candidates at each split and used 5 trees to grow in the 10-fold cross validation. Further, we picked each of the features and measured the difference in means between the two clusters. This was done to see the feature importance in each cluster with respect to each other. After obtaining the cluster labels, we used t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding (tSNE) technique to reduce data to three dimensions for better visualization. We used the default parameters in the Rtsne package with perplexity=40.(15) Finally, clusters were visualized in 3D space using the scatterplot3d package in R.(16)

Statistical Analysis

After cluster identification, we conducted analysis to explore differences between clusters. We used t-test for continuous variables, and Fisher’s exact test or chi-Square for categorical variables. We included need for renal replacement therapy, mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality as outcomes of interest. We used log binomial regression to determine the association between cluster and adverse outcomes while accounting for patient characteristics that were significantly different on univariate analysis. We chose log binomial regression instead of logistic regression due to the high rates of in-hospital mortality. As this study was done on publically available, de-identified data, it was considered IRB exempt. Analysis was done using SAS 9.4 and R 3.4.3 software.

Results

Clinical Features of Patients with Sepsis-associated AKI

We identified 1,865 patients who had sepsis-associated AKI. Patients had a mean age of 66.3±15 years; 57% were men, and 75% were white. Most patients were admitted to the medical intensive care unit (MICU) (70%). Patients had a high prevalence of hypertension (51%), cardiac arrhythmias (38%), and diabetes mellitus (34%).

Feature selection

Ten vital signs were available in the MIMIC-III database. Each vital sign was included as a median, SD, and count (number of times measured) for a total of 30 features. We identified 691 unique features corresponding to laboratory results, the total feature space including median, SD, and count was 2,073. After implementing data preprocessing (see Methods), total feature space after combining these vitals and labs contained 135 features. The feature selection step further reduced the number of features to 59 (9 vitals and 50 labs). Missingness of the original features and final features are presented in Supplemental Figure 2 and 3 respectively.

Unsupervised Clustering to identify Subphenotypes

From these combined features with transformed values, we implemented the k-means clustering ranging from k=2 to k=10. We relied on silhouette score for the independent assessment and selection of the cluster selection. We found k=2 with maximum silhouette score of 0.62; which was highest among the other cluster runs (Supplementary Figure 4). Cluster 1 had 1,358 patients while cluster 2 had 507 patients. (Figure 1) To assess robustness of clusters, we performed 10-fold cross-validation after we identified cluster labels. We obtained an average of 97.6% accuracy using the random forest algorithm.

Figure 1:
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 1:

3-D Representation of clusters utilizing t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding (t-SNE) method. This method condenses the 59 features into 3 transformed values which allows for 3-D representation. Each dot represents a single patient. The separation between two dots represents differences of features between two patients. Cluster 1 is represented in blue while Cluster 2 is represented in green.

Clinical and Biological Characteristics of Each Phenotype

We identified several patient and admission characteristics that were significantly different between clusters. (Supplemental Table 1) Cluster 1 patients had higher prevalence of congestive heart failure (CHF) (37% vs. 31%, p=0.009) and lower prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) (36% vs. 39%, p=0.01). Mean Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II scores were lower in Cluster 1, 45±15 vs. 47.6±16, p=0.002. Patients in cluster 1 were less likely to be admitted to the MICU (68% vs 76%, p=0.001) and less likely to have urgent/emergency admissions (97% vs 99%, P=0.02). There were statistically significant differences in several laboratory features such as hemoglobin, platelets, sodium, bicarbonate, and albumin however the absolute differences were relatively small. Cluster 1 had significantly higher systolic blood pressure (SBP), lower heart rate, and lower respiratory rate.

To determine the importance of each feature on clustering, we determined the mean difference between two clusters at the log scale (Figure 2). The largest differences were seen in basophil variability, eosinophil variability, creatine kinase and ALT variability. Features such as sodium, temperature, and pH level were not substantially different between clusters and likely had a smaller effect on cluster determination.

Figure 2:
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 2:

Mean Difference of Normalized Features between Cluster 1 and Cluster 2.

Association between Phenotype and Outcomes

There was no difference in dialysis need between the two clusters (Table 1). However, Cluster 2 had lower proportion of patients requiring mechanical ventilation (49% vs. 54%, P=0.03) and higher rates of in-hospital mortality (25% vs. 20%, P=0.008). 30-day mortality was also higher in Cluster 2, however this was not statistically significant (30% vs 26%, P=0.11). Patients in Cluster 2 had a 40% higher risk of in-hospital mortality after adjustment for age, gender, ethnicity, CHF, DM, hematologic malignancy, and first ICU care unit with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.8.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 1:

Differences in outcomes by cluster

Discussion

We identified two distinct clusters of patients from patients within the larger syndrome of sepsis-associated AKI using unsupervised machine learning on routinely measured laboratory measurements and vital signs. Measures of variability were important to the identification of clusters. Clusters were significantly different in regards to comorbidities, laboratory measurements, and vital signs. We also found that these subphenotypes differed significantly in terms of mortality and mechanical ventilation.

There has been speculation that AKI in the ICU is not a single clinical entity but likely a complex syndrome comprising of several different subtypes.(17) Due to widespread use of EHRs, granular data are collected as part of routine clinical care on every ICU patient. These massive troves of data provide us with the opportunity to investigate this hypothesis in a data-driven manner. Subendophenotyping in chronic disease, such as diabetes has been conducted using similar EHR data with great success, and patient subgroups are found to have differing outcomes and genetic pathways.(6) Previous work, using trial data from an acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) clinical trial has shown that there exist different subtypes with differing outcomes.(18) However, to the best of our knowledge this is the first instance of utilizing routinely collected EHR data from the ICU setting for subphenotyping of sepsis-associated AKI. Thus, this reinforces the concept, that even acute derangements may have distinct clinical types, an important implication for personalizing care to each individual.

We found that in-hospital mortality was 25% higher in patients in cluster 2. Cluster 2 patients had similar demographics and co-morbidities as Cluster 1 patients which indicate the clustering was not driven by these features. Additionally although features included in most ICU prediction models for mortality were also included as features in our clustering model, they likely played a small role in clustering as differences between the clusters on these variables were small.(19, 20) Of note, there was no difference in renal function parameters of KDIGO AKI stages, creatinine, or blood urea nitrogen (BUN) levels. Additionally, there was no difference in dialysis need or continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) need. This was surprising as there is abundant literature stating that severity of AKI, especially the need for dialysis, is associated with high morbidity and mortality.(21, 22) This may be partially explained by our time restriction of including labs only prior to AKI diagnosis and within 48 hours after AKI diagnosis.(23) These findings together highlight that individual features that are traditionally associated with differences in mortality in critically ill patients were not sufficient to identify the subphenotypes we have found here.

The purpose of this study was to agnostically identify subphenotypes within a larger clinical syndrome in a data driven manner. Thus, all laboratory features and vital signs were considered for potential inclusion into the analysis. The only limitations were to exclude features that were missing in >70% of patients (since they were unlikely to be informative) and highly correlated features. Additionally, we included measurements related to potassium, bicarbonate, and albumin into the model as these were considered clinically relevant features. We felt that it was not only important to include actual values but also the frequency and variability of continuous variables; and in fact 28 of the 59 features selected for inclusion were measures of variability and 9 of the 59 were counts. This is a significant advancement compared to previous models of clustering, where only summary measures of the predictors (mean/median) are used for either predictive modeling or clustering.

Through this inclusive data-driven approach, we included several features/factors that are not traditionally considered as related to ICU mortality into our clustering method including variability in key laboratory parameters. There is growing data that variability in values are important predictors of adverse events that should be considered in the clinical care of critically ill patients.(24–26) Eosinophil variability was among the factors with the largest difference between clusters. It has been established that eosinopenia occurs during an acute infection.(27) Several studies have found that eosinopenia can be used as a marker of sepsis on admission to MICU and is a significant predictor of ICU 28-day all-cause mortality.(28, 29) However, no studies have evaluated eosinophil variability and the association with outcomes in AKI. Creatine kinase was also higher in cluster 2 patients, who had higher mortality. Creatine kinase elevations can be seen in rhabdomyolysis, acute myocardial infarctions, and strokes. The etiology of creatine kinase measurements in this cohort of patients is currently unclear. However, it has been documented that hospitalized patients with fevers, especially those with bacteremia have been found to have elevated creatine kinase.(30) Additionally, observational data suggests an association between creatine kinase elevations and adverse outcomes. (31, 32) Thus, our data suggest, that creatine kinase may be an unexplored biomarker of risk in patients with septic AKI.

The results of our study should be considered in light of some limitations. We used the CCS category of septicemia to define our sepsis population; therefore we are unable to determine the timing of sepsis diagnosis and AKI diagnosis. However, this was mitigated by limiting AKI diagnosis to within 48 hours of ICU admissions and thus identifying patients with sepsis-associated AKI at the expense of a smaller sample size. We only included laboratory results and vital signs into our clustering algorithm. We decided not to include demographics and comorbidities, since we wanted to explore whether unbiased biochemical and biometric measurements could lead to viable clustering approaches. Indeed, the absolute difference in clusters on the basis of demographics and comorbidities was small and did not explain the difference in mortality. As to be expected, a majority of patients in both clusters was admitted to the MICU as their first ICU service. However, there was a notable difference between clusters on ICU first service, with more Cluster 2 patients being admitted to the MICU. There are inherent differences between patients admitted to different specialty units on admission diagnoses, nosocomial infection rates, and mortality. (33–35) Unfortunately, we are unable to identify medical patients who were boarded in non-medical ICUs as this may have an impact on mortality. Finally, while the MIMIC-III database is a large, granular, ICU database; it is a single center database. Although, we did cross-fold validation to ensure the clusters were robust, external validation in ICU databases from different centers is needed.

In conclusion, we were able to identify two distinct subphenotypes of sepsis-associated AKI using multidimensional biochemical and biometric data. These subphenotypes had similar baseline demographics, comorbidities, and AKI severity; however Cluster 2 patients had worse in-hospital mortality. Several factors which are not classically associated with adverse outcomes in sepsis-induced AKI were important contributors to the identification of subphenotypes. This approach could serve as a first step to identify clinical subtypes within the septic AKI syndrome and when combined with other –omics data, could help identify dysregulated pathways which could be targeted for therapeutic intervention.

Acknowledgements

None

Footnotes

  • Funding/Support: L.C. is supported in part by the NIH (5T32DK007757 – 18); GNN is supported in part by the NIH (1K23DK107908-01A1)

References

  1. 1.↵
    Chertow GM, Levy EM, Hammermeister KE, et al: Independent association between acute renal failure and mortality following cardiac surgery. Am J Med 1998; 104:343–348
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  2. 2.
    de Mendonça A, Vincent JL, Suter PM, et al: Acute renal failure in the ICU: risk factors and outcome evaluated by the SOFA score. [Internet]. Intensive Care Med 2000; 26:915–21 [cited 2018 Apr 3] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10990106
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  3. 3.
    Chertow GM, Burdick E, Honour M, et al: Acute kidney injury, mortality, length of stay, and costs in hospitalized patients. J Am Soc Nephrol 2005; 16:3365–3370
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    Mansuri U, Patel A, Shah H, et al: Trends and outcomes of sepsis hospitalizations complicated by acute kidney injury requiring hemodialysis. J Crit Care 2017; 38
  5. 5.↵
    Prowle JR, Ishikawa K, May CN, et al: Renal blood flow during acute renal failure in man. [Internet]. Blood Purif 2009; 28:216–25 [cited 2018 Apr 3] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19648741
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. 6.↵
    Li L, Cheng W-Y, Glicksberg BS, et al: Identification of type 2 diabetes subgroups through topological analysis of patient similarity. [Internet]. Sci Transl Med 2015; 7:311ra174 [cited 2018 May 21] Available from: http://stm.sciencemag.org/lookup/doi/10.1126/scitranslmed.aaa9364
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    Johnson AEW, Pollard TJ, Shen L, et al: MIMIC-III, a freely accessible critical care database [Internet]. Sci Data 2016; 3:160035 [cited 2018 Mar 7] Available from: http://www.nature.com/articles/sdata201635
    OpenUrl
  8. 8.↵
    Kellum J a, Lameire N, Aspelin P, et al: KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute Kidney Injury [Internet]. Kidney Int Suppl 2012; 2:1–138Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=4089764&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract%5Cnhttp://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=4089619&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract%5Cnhttp://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    HCUP CCS. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). May 2016. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. www.hcupus.ahrq.gov/toolssoftware/ccs/ccs.jsp. Accessed October 3, 2016.
  10. 10.↵
    HCUP: Elixhauser Comorbidity Software, Version 3.7 [Internet]. [cited 2017 Jan 1] Available from: https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/toolssoftware/comorbidity/comorbidity.jsp
  11. 11.↵
    Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Narasimhan B, Chu G (2018). impute: impute: Imputation for microarray data. R package version 1.54.0.
  12. 12.↵
    Kuhn M: Building Predictive Models in R Using the caret Package [Internet]. J Stat Softw 2008; 28:1–26[cited 2018 May 10] Available from: http://www.jstatsoft.org/v28/i05/
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    Wiedermann CJ, Wiedermann W, Joannidis M: Hypoalbuminemia and acute kidney injury: a meta-analysis of observational clinical studies [Internet]. Intensive Care Med 2010; 36:1657–1665[cited 2018 May 14] Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00134-010-1928-z
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  14. 14.↵
    Khanagavi J, Gupta T, Aronow WS, et al: Hyperkalemia among hospitalized patients and association between duration of hyperkalemia and outcomes [Internet]. Arch Med Sci 2014; 2:251–257 [cited 2018 May 14] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24904657
    OpenUrl
  15. 15.↵
    Krijthe JH: Rtsne: T-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding using a Barnes-Hut Implementation [Internet]. Available from: https://github.com/jkrijthe/Rtsne
  16. 16.↵
    Ligges U, Mächler M: Scatterplot3d - an R Package for Visualizing Multivariate Data. J Stat Softw 8:1–20
  17. 17.↵
    Singbartl K, Kellum JA: AKI in the ICU: definition, epidemiology, risk stratification, and outcomes. [Internet]. Kidney Int 2012; 81:819–25 [cited 2018 May 21] Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S008525381555401X
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  18. 18.↵
    Calfee CS, Delucchi K, Parsons PE, et al: Subphenotypes in acute respiratory distress syndrome: latent class analysis of data from two randomised controlled trials [Internet]. Lancet Respir Med 2014; 2:611–620 [cited 2018 May 21] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24853585
    OpenUrl
  19. 19.↵
    Le Gall J-R, Lemeshow S, Saulnier F: A New Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) Based on a European/North American Multicenter Study [Internet]. JAMA J Am Med Assoc 1993; 270:2957 [cited 2018 Apr 11] Available from: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?doi=10.1001/jama.1993.03510240069035
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  20. 20.↵
    Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, et al: APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. [Internet]. Crit Care Med 1985; 13:818–29[cited 2018 Apr 11] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3928249
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  21. 21.↵
    Huh JW, Lim C-M, Koh Y, et al: A Comparison of Acute Kidney Injury Classifications in Patients With Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock [Internet]. Am J Med Sci 2012; 344:350–356 [cited 2018 Apr 11] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22261626
    OpenUrlPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    White LE, Hassoun HT, Bihorac A, et al: Acute kidney injury is surprisingly common and a powerful predictor of mortality in surgical sepsis. [Internet]. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2013; 75:432–8 [cited 2018 Apr 11] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24089113
    OpenUrl
  23. 23.↵
    Kim WY, Huh JW, Lim C-M, et al: Analysis of progression in risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage renal disease classification on outcome in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock [Internet]. J Crit Care 2012; 27:104.e1-104.e7 [cited 2018 Apr 11] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21715135
    OpenUrl
  24. 24.↵
    Hermanides J, Vriesendorp TM, Bosman RJ, et al: Glucose variability is associated with intensive care unit mortality* [Internet]. Crit Care Med 2010; 38:838–842[cited 2018 Apr 12] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20035218
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  25. 25.
    Hessels L, Hoekstra M, Mijzen LJ, et al: The relationship between serum potassium, potassium variability and in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients and a before-after analysis on the impact of computer-assisted potassium control [Internet]. Crit Care 2015; 19:4 [cited 2018 Apr 17] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25560457
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    Brown SM, Tate Q, Jones JP, et al: Initial fractal exponent of heart rate variability is associated with success of early resuscitation in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock: a prospective cohort study [Internet]. J Crit Care 2013; 28:959–963[cited 2018 Apr 17] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23958243
    OpenUrl
  27. 27.↵
    Bass DA, Gonwa TA, Szejda P, et al: Eosinopenia of acute infection: Production of eosinopenia by chemotactic factors of acute inflammation. [Internet]. J Clin Invest 1980; 65:1265–71[cited 2018 Apr 18] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7410543
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  28. 28.↵
    Abidi K, Belayachi J, Derras Y, et al: Eosinopenia, an early marker of increased mortality in critically ill medical patients. [Internet]. Intensive Care Med 2011; 37:1136–42[cited 2018 Apr 18] Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00134-011-2170-z
    OpenUrlPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    Abidi K, Khoudri I, Belayachi J, et al: Eosinopenia is a reliable marker of sepsis on admission to medical intensive care units. [Internet]. Crit Care 2008; 12:R59 [cited 2018 Apr 18] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18435836
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    Cohen O, Leibovici L, Mor F, et al: Significance of elevated levels of serum creatine phosphokinase in febrile diseases: a prospective study. [Internet]. Rev Infect Dis 13:237–42[cited 2018 Apr 25] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2041954
  31. 31.↵
    Nieuwendijk R, Demey H, Jorens P: High incidence of elevated serum creatine kinase in the ICU: an underestimated problem [Internet]. Crit Care 2006; 10:P365 [cited 2018 Apr 11] Available from: http://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/cc4712
    OpenUrl
  32. 32.↵
    Sowards KJ, Mukherjee K, Norris PR, et al: Elevated serum creatine phosphokinase is associated with mortality and inotropic requirement in critically injured adults [Internet]. Injury 2014; 45:2096–2100 [cited 2018 May 1] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25441175
    OpenUrl
  33. 33.↵
    Ball IM, Bagshaw SM, Burns KEA, et al: Outcomes of elderly critically ill medical and surgical patients: a multicentre cohort study [Internet]. Can J Anesth Can d’anesthésie 2017; 64:260–269[cited 2018 Apr 13] Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12630-016-0798-4
    OpenUrl
  34. 34.
    Craven DE, Kunches LM, Lichtenberg DA, et al: Nosocomial infection and fatality in medical and surgical intensive care unit patients. [Internet]. Arch Intern Med 1988; 148:1161–8[cited 2018 Apr 13] Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3365084
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  35. 35.↵
    Sinha SS, Sjoding MW, Sukul D, et al: Changes in Primary Noncardiac Diagnoses Over Time Among Elderly Cardiac Intensive Care Unit Patients in the United States [Internet]. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2017; 10:e003616[cited 2018 Apr 13] Available from: http://circoutcomes.ahajournals.org/lookup/doi/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.117.003616
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted October 18, 2018.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Unsupervised Machine learning to subtype Sepsis-Associated Acute Kidney Injury
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Unsupervised Machine learning to subtype Sepsis-Associated Acute Kidney Injury
Kumardeep Chaudhary, Aine Duffy, Priti Poojary, Aparna Saha, Kinsuk Chauhan, Ron Do, Tielman Van Vleck, Steven G. Coca, Lili Chan, Girish N. Nadkarni
bioRxiv 447425; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/447425
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Unsupervised Machine learning to subtype Sepsis-Associated Acute Kidney Injury
Kumardeep Chaudhary, Aine Duffy, Priti Poojary, Aparna Saha, Kinsuk Chauhan, Ron Do, Tielman Van Vleck, Steven G. Coca, Lili Chan, Girish N. Nadkarni
bioRxiv 447425; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/447425

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Bioinformatics
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4113)
  • Biochemistry (8815)
  • Bioengineering (6518)
  • Bioinformatics (23459)
  • Biophysics (11789)
  • Cancer Biology (9207)
  • Cell Biology (13322)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (7436)
  • Ecology (11409)
  • Epidemiology (2066)
  • Evolutionary Biology (15149)
  • Genetics (10436)
  • Genomics (14043)
  • Immunology (9171)
  • Microbiology (22153)
  • Molecular Biology (8812)
  • Neuroscience (47566)
  • Paleontology (350)
  • Pathology (1428)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2491)
  • Physiology (3730)
  • Plant Biology (8079)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1437)
  • Synthetic Biology (2220)
  • Systems Biology (6037)
  • Zoology (1253)