Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2024 Jul 23;19(7):e0301596. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0301596

Thirty-day hospital readmission in females with acute heart failure and breast cancer: A retrospective cohort study from national readmission database

Soumya Kambalapalli 1, Nischit Baral 2, Timir K Paul 3,*, Prakash Upreti 4, Fahimeh Talaei 1, Sarah Ayad 5, Mahmoud Ibrahim 1, Vikas Aggarwal 6, Gautam Kumar 7, Chadi Alraies 8, Joshua Mitchell 9
Editor: Chiara Lazzeri10
PMCID: PMC11265691  PMID: 39042606

Abstract

Background

Breast Cancer and cardiovascular diseases are amongst the two leading causes of mortality in the United States, and the two conditions are connected in part because of recognized cardiotoxicity of cancer treatments. The aim of this study is to investigate the predictors risk factors for thirty-day readmission in female breast cancer survivors presenting with acute heart failure.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of acute heart failure (AHF) hospitalization in female patients with breast cancer in 2019 using the National Readmission Database (NRD), which is the largest publicly available all-payer inpatient readmission database in the United States. Our study sample included adult female patients aged 18 years and older. The primary outcome of interest was the rate of 30- day readmission.

Results

In 2019, there were 8332 total index admissions for AHF in females with breast cancer and 7776 patients were discharged alive. The mean age was 74.4 years (95% CI: 74, 74.7). The percentage of readmission at 30 days among those discharged alive was 21.8% (n = 1699). Hypertensive heart disease with chronic kidney disease accounted for the majority of readmission in AHF with breast cancer followed by sepsis, acute kidney injury, respiratory failure, pneumonia, and atrial fibrillation. Demographic factors including higher burden of comorbidities predict readmission. The total in-hospital mortality in index admission was 6.67% (n = 556) and for readmitted patients was 8.77% (n = 149). The mean length of stay for index admission was 7.5 days (95% CI: 7.25, 7.75).

Conclusions

Readmission of female breast cancer survivors presenting with AHF is common and largely be attributed to high burden of comorbidities including hypertension, and chronic kidney disease. A focus on close outpatient follow-up will be beneficial in lowering readmissions.

Introduction

Cardiovascular diseases and cancer continue to be the two major causes of death in the United States, according to data from 2020 [1]. Breast cancer (BC) is the most prevalent cancer in women, with one in eight women predicted to develop the disease over their lifetime [2]. According to data from the Center for Disease Control, approximately 264,000 women in the United States are diagnosed with breast cancer each year [3]. While early detection of breast cancer through screening and recent developments in therapy have significantly improved survival, cardiovascular death is still high in this population [4]. There is an increasing recognition that the two diseases are intertwined on many levels partly due to the shared risk factors such as obesity, age, diabetes, hypertension, heightened inflammation and the known cardiotoxicity of cancer therapy including chemotherapy and radiotherapy [5]. Breast cancer shares risk factors and common pathophysiological mechanisms with the development of cardiovascular disease. The complications of cancer related treatments along with these risk factors (advancing age and preexisting comorbidities) result in morbidity and decline in quality of life.

In a study by Thavendiranathan et.al, cardiovascular risk in breast cancer was reported as 4.1% chance of cardiovascular event occurrence within 5-year timeframe. But when important risk factors such as advancing age and preexisting cardiovascular conditions are taken into consideration the mortality risk amplifies to about 8.9% withing 5-year timeframe. Overall, the mortality risk increases 3.8-fold in individuals with breast cancer who subsequently develop cardiovascular disease [4]. Thus, given the increasing prevalence of cardiovascular diseases among breast cancer patients, both during and post-treatment, it is imperative to assess the contributing risk factors and develop preventive interventions.

Common neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatments for breast cancer have been linked to a higher risk of cardiac conditions, such as heart failure (HF), arrhythmias, and ischemic heart disease [6]. This highlights the importance of these competing risk factors in breast cancer patients. As per the American Society of Clinical Oncology, individuals with breast cancer exhibit a heightened occurrence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in comparison to non-cancer controls. Furthermore, after the onset of CVD, overall survival outcomes demonstrate significant deterioration [4]. In patients with breast cancer, CVD contributes to 16.3% of deaths, surpassing mortality from BC in those with pre-existing cardiovascular risk factors at a 10-year follow-up [1, 4]. BC patients exposed to cardiotoxic therapies, such as anthracycline-based chemotherapy and trastuzumab, face an elevated risk of CVD, including HF [7, 8]. Approximately one in four older BC patients succumbs to CVD [9]. Consequently, as the number of HF cases with a history of BC is expected to rise, understanding the impact of BC on HF survival and treatment becomes increasingly vital.

Heart failure is one of the leading causes of hospitalization and readmission and is major contributor to the growing healthcare burden [10]. Almost one- in- every- four HF patients is readmitted within 30 days of discharge, and roughly half are readmitted within 6 months [11]. Therefore, we through this study we intend to assess the predictors for the thirty-day readmission in female breast cancer survivors presenting with acute heart failure (AHF).

Methods

We used the National Readmission Database (NRD), which is the largest publicly available all-payer inpatient readmission database in the United States. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) is the official sponsor of the data [12]. The NRD from the year 2019 which contains discharge data for 58.7% of all US hospitalizations was used. More information about the NRD can be obtained from the website https://hcup-us.ahrq.gov. The study was exempt from the local Institutional Review Board as NRD is a publicly available database with de-identified data sets [12].

Study design and population

This is a retrospective cohort study utilizing the hospitalizations of adult females (≥18 years old) with AHF as the index or principal diagnosis and breast cancer as secondary diagnosis Principal diagnosis is the main diagnosis for which the patients are admitted in the hospital, and it is coded by variable I10_DX1. Secondary diagnosis is the diagnosis either present during the hospitalization or a comorbidity present from before coded by variable I10_DX2 to I10_DX40. To include breast cancer patients who might still be under treatment, we excluded hospitalizations with history of breast cancer. The diagnostic codes for AHF were based on the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD‐10‐CM) (S1 Table). We excluded December hospitalization as per the NRD data policy as they don’t have complete information to assess 30-day readmission along with elective and traumatic hospitalizations.

Outcome measures

The index admission included initial principal hospitalizations for AHF in patients with breast cancer. The primary outcome of interest was the rate of 30- day readmission rate. Secondary outcomes include predictors of 30-day readmission, top ten principal diagnoses in 30-day readmission, all cause in-hospital mortality rate, and length of stay (LOS) in days. NRD includes a dichotomous variable that identifies whether a patient died in a hospital or not (NIS variable DIED), as well as a continuous variable that represents LOS (NIS variable LOS). The 30-day readmission rate was calculated as the total number of index hospitalizations with AHF and breast cancer who were readmitted for any cause (excluding traumatic or elective admissions) after initial index AHF admissions within 30-days after being discharged alive as numerator divided by the total number of AHF and breast cancer hospitalizations who were discharged alive after index admission [12].

Statistical analysis

We evaluated the data for the outliers and tested the distribution of the main outcome (30- day readmission rate, in-hospital mortality, and LOS). Mean, median, interquartile range, frequencies, and percentages were calculated to describe the characteristics of the study sample. Chi-2 test was used for categorical variables and results were displayed in proportions. A t-test was used for continuous variables. Univariable cox regression was used to identify variables for multivariable cox regression. Variables with p values less than 0.20 were included in final multivariable cox regression to calculate the hazard ratio for 30-day readmission with a p value less than 0.05 as the level of statistical significance. STATA 17.0 (Stata-Corp., College Station, Tx, USA) was employed for all analysis.

Results

The total index admissions for AHF in females with breast cancer were 8332; among them, 7776 patients were discharged alive. Mean age was 74.4 years (95% CI: 74, 74.7). The percentage of readmission at 30 days among those discharged alive was 21.8% (n = 1699). The total in-hospital mortality in index admission was 6.67% (n = 556) and for readmitted patients was 8.77% (n = 149). The mean LOS for index admission was 7.5 days (95% CI: 7.25, 7.75). Demographic characteristics of patients with index admission are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Baseline characteristics of the index admission and readmission in acute heart failure in breast cancer patients.

Categories Variables Index admission, (%)
8332
30-day Readmission
n (%)1699
Age (years) (95% CI) - 74.4 (74, 74.7) 72.9 (72.2, 73.7)
Insurance Medicare 80.8 79.9
Medicaid 6.2 7.1
Private 11.1 10.9
Self-paying 0.7 0.5
Setting/location Rural 18.4 19.7
Urban non-teaching 73.2 72.7
Urban teaching 8.4 7.6
Bed size Small 21.0 21.6
Medium 28.2 28.3
Large 50.8 50.1
Charlson comorbidity index 1 0.1 4.5
2 0.1 5.1
3 or higher 99.8 89.9
Annual income (US $ per year) 1–45,999 28 29.1
46K–58,999 26.3 27.3
59K-78,999 24.9 22.4
79K or more 20.9 21.3
Major bleed - 1.7 3.3
Comorbidities Obesity 22 22.6
Hypertension 45.6 61.9
Tobacco Smoker 24.7 24.6
Anemia 42.5 45.1
Valvular heart disease 15.8 13.5
Acute kidney injury 32.2 34.7
COPD 26.9 29.4
Diabetes mellitus 43.3 47.1

SD: Standard Deviation LL: Lower Limit UL: Upper Limit CI: Confidence Interval

COPD: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

This study revealed that hypertensive heart disease with chronic kidney disease was the leading cause of readmission in AHF and breast cancer hospitalizations, followed by sepsis, acute kidney injury, respiratory failure, pneumonia, and atrial fibrillation as shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Top 10 principal diagnoses of readmissions for acute heart failure hospitalizations with breast cancer.

Principal readmission diagnosis (n = 1695) Number
Hypertensive heart disease with CKD stages 1–4 233
Hypertensive heart disease with heart failure 166
Sepsis, unspecified organism 136
Acute kidney injury 62
Acute and chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia 53
Pneumonia, unspecified organism 37
Hypertensive heart disease with End stage kidney disease 34
Acute on chronic diastolic heart failure 30
Acute respiratory failure with hypoxia 29
Paroxysmal Atrial fibrillation 27
Principal readmission diagnosis (n = 1695) Number (%)
Cardiovascular 490 (28.9)
 • Hypertensive heart disease with CKD stages 1–4 233 (13.7)
 • Hypertensive heart disease with heart failure 166 (9.8)
 • Hypertensive heart disease with End stage kidney disease 34 (2.0)
 • Acute on chronic diastolic heart failure 30 (1.8)
 • Paroxysmal Atrial fibrillation 27 (1.6)
Sepsis, unspecified organism 136 (8.0)
Respiratory 119 (7.0)
 • Acute and (on) chronic respiratory failure with hypoxia 53 (3.1)
 • Pneumonia, unspecified organism 37 (2.2)
 • Acute respiratory failure with hypoxia 29 (1.7)
Acute kidney injury 62 (3.6)

CKD: chronic kidney disease

Readmission for AHF with breast cancer carried more than 34% increase in mortality as shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Clinical outcomes of acute heart failure hospitalizations with breast cancer.

Outcome 30-day readmission, % Index admission, % OR/MD (95% CI) P value
In hospital mortality 8.77 (n = 149) 6.67 (n = 556) 1.34 (1.11, 1.62) 0.002
Length of stay 6.4 days 7.5 days -1.10 (-1.52, -0.68) <0.001

OR: Odds ratio, MD: Mean difference

Age, comorbidity, teaching status, income, insurance, obesity, acute kidney injury, atrial fibrillation, valvular heart disease, hypertension, acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and major bleed were included in univariable cox regression. Being on Medicaid, hypertension, higher comorbidities, acute exacerbation of COPD, and anemia were shown to increase readmission in univariable cox regression. Higher age was associated with lower readmission rate.

Discussion

Our study demonstrated d that hypertensive heart disease with chronic kidney disease was the leading cause of hospital readmission in female breast cancer patients with AHF. Our findings also suggest that patients who were readmitted within 30daysof initial discharge had 8.8-fold higher in-hospital mortality rate than the rate at the initial admission. A higher burden of comorbidities and acute exacerbation of COPD were significant predictors of 30-days readmission. With increase in cancer survivor’s secondary to early detection and varied treatment strategies, aging population with chronic comorbidities are a risk for developing cardiovascular conditions leading to decline in functional status, significant morbidity, and impaired health related quality of life.

Few studies have investigated a correlation between the likelihood of developing HF in breast cancer in low socioeconomic status patients. In a study by Sterling et al. involving 690 HF patients across 440 U.S. hospitals, 23.5% exhibited low educational attainment, 63.0% had limited income, 21.0% experienced zip code-level poverty, 43.5% inhabited areas with shortage of Health Professional Areas (HPSAs), 39.3% lived in states with deficient public health infrastructure, 13.1% experienced social isolation, 13.3% had impoverished social networks, and 10.2% resided in rural areas [13]. This study also reported that study participants who were readmitted within 30days had more comorbidities and longer length of stay. Summarizing that patients enrolled in Medicare, a government-funded health insurance program in the United States, have elevated readmission rates and morbidity [10]. As mentioned in the REGARDS study (Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke) [13], these results may be attributable to low health literacy/awareness, higher financial burden associated with the cost of cancer treatment, decreased likelihood of adhering to follow-up care, medication non-compliance, and a lack of receiving referrals for specialized medical care based upon insurance coverage [13, 14]. A positive linear correlation exists between the number of socioeconomic risk factors and the incidence of hospitalization for HF, cardiovascular events, and mortality, such that an increase in the number of socioeconomic risk factors is associated with an increased risk of these adverse health outcomes [14].

The mortality risk for patients hospitalized for AHF is highest in the early post discharge period, and post discharge hospital events are high in females with breast cancer who are hospitalized for AHF. Previous studies on metastatic cancer or solid tumors without metastasis did not recognize either as an independent predictor of AHF readmission, although in our study the 30-day mortality rate of 8.77% in females with breast cancer was higher than the 30-day mortality rate (4.2%) in the general population, as shown in previous observational studies [14].

Similarly, the 30-day readmission rate for AHF in female breast cancer patients was 21.8%, which is higher than the (18.2%) readmission rate of the general patient population who were hospitalized for HF in previous NRD studies [14]. Moreover, in our study, patients with a higher Charlson comorbidity index, i.e., a higher burden of comorbidities, were more likely to be readmitted within 30-days following initial hospitalization (HR 1.07; 95% CI 1.04–1.10; p< 0.001) as seen in Table 4. This is similar to previous data showing that Charlson comorbidity index is a predictor of 30-day readmission in heart failure patients [1519].

Table 4. Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios for predictors of readmission among acute heart failure with breast cancer patients.

30-day Readmission Unadjusted HR LL, UL 95% CI P value Adjusted LL, UL 95% CI P value
Predictors HR
Age 0.99 0.98, 0.99 0.001 0.99 0.98, 0.99 <0.001
Charlson Comorbidity index 1.08 1.06, 1.11 <0.01 1.07 1.04, 1.10 <0.001
Setting/teaching status of Hospital (Reference: Rural)
Non-teaching 0.93 0.79, 1.10 0.412 0.92 0.78, 1.08 0.318
Teaching 0.76 0.56, 1.02 0.071 0.74 0.54, 1.02 0.064
Household Income by Quartile (USD) (Reference: 1–45,999)
46,000–58,999 0.98 0.81, 1.19 0.852 1.01 0.84, 1.22 0.925
59,000–78,999 0.87 0.72, 1.05 0.135 0.88 0.73, 1.06 0.194
79,000 or higher 0.98 0.82, 1.19 0.874 1.04 0.86, 1.25 0.700
Insurance type (Reference: Medicare)
Medicaid 1.39 1.08, 1.79 0.011 1.08 0.82, 1.41 0.602
Private 1.07 0.85, 1.35 0.572 0.90 0.70, 1.18 0.452
Obesity 1.13 0.97, 1.32 0.118 1.04 0.88, 1.22 0.602
Acute kidney injury 1.22 1.06, 1.40 0.006 1.12 0.97, 1.30 0.128
Atrial Fibrillation 0.88 0.77, 1.01 0.069 0.97 0.84, 1.12 0.701
Anemia 1.20 1.05, 1.37 0.008 1.08 0.94, 1.24 0.252
Valvular Heart Disease 0.97 0.81, 1.16 0.736 NA NA NA
AECOPD 1.25 1.08, 1.44 0.002 1.22 1.05, 1.41 0.010
Major Bleed 0.84 0.49, 1.45 0.528 NA NA NA
Hypertension 1.14 1.00, 1.30 0.049 1.12 0.98, 1.28 0.095

AECOPD: acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

LL–lower limit; UL–upper limit

In this real-world study of a selected group of females with breast cancer, the leading diagnosis of readmission was cardiovascular causes (28.9%). In the general population, it is 49.7% [20], followed by sepsis (8%), respiratory causes (7%), and acute kidney injury (3.6%). Among cardiovascular causes of AHF readmission, the most common causes of principal readmission were hypertensive heart disease with CKD (13.7%) and hypertensive heart disease with HF (9.8%). In other NRD studies in the general patient population, cardiovascular causes were also leading causes of readmission, although percentage was higher (52.8%), with HF being the cause of one-third of readmissions [17].

Data from clinical trials had previously identified admission serum creatinine, low systolic blood pressure, and pulmonary disease as the important predictors for the combined end point of death or rehospitalization [20]. Also, kidney disease, COPD, diabetes mellitus and female sex were major independent risk factors for readmission [19], but not a diagnosis of solid tumor or metastatic cancer. In the current study, the most frequent variables associated with increased HF readmission in females with breast cancer was being on Medicaid, hypertension, higher comorbidities, acute exacerbation of COPD, and anemia, but older age was associated with a lower readmission rate, which is consistent with similar reports from Medicare beneficiaries and proposed predictive models of HF rehospitalization [16, 19, 21, 22].

Our study has several limitations. First, this is an observational analysis of NRD administrative data, thus the result cannot establish causality. Second, data regarding type of HF, stage of cancer, previous or current chemotherapeutic regimen, and post-discharge medications, clinic, or specialist follow-up were not available, which may have impacted readmission mortality rates after index hospitalization. Third, NRD excludes interstate hospitalizations and does not link patient data across years, which may have affected readmission estimates. Fourth, the use of ICD codes for administrative data analysis is subject to potential errors related to coding discrepancies, as the accuracy of the data is dependent on the rigor of the coding practices of participating institutes. Finally, NRD only collects data on in-hospital mortality; outpatient death data are not available. Thus, although studies have evaluated the association of hospital readmission reduction programs with post-discharge mortality, such an assessment was not possible in the current study.

Conclusion

Compared to the general population, the 30-day readmission rate for AHF was significantly higher among female breast cancer patients. Additionally, the in-hospital mortality rate of female breast cancer patients readmitted for AHF within 30 days of their initial discharge was higher than that of the general population. Sepsis, respiratory causes, and acute kidney injury were the most prevalent predictors associated with readmission rates (per Table 4 above). A focus on close outpatient follow-up will be beneficial in lowering readmissions. The results of the present study underscore the significance of implementing strategies aimed at enhancing cardiovascular health among breast cancer patients to prevent morbidity and mortality.

Supporting information

S1 Table

(DOCX)

pone.0301596.s001.docx (14.6KB, docx)

Data Availability

Our study’s data is available on the public data available on National Readmission Database (NRD), which is the largest publicly available all-payer inpatient readmission database in the United States. The NRD from the year 2019 which contains discharge data for 58.7% of all US hospitalizations was used. More information about the NRD can be obtained from the website https://hcup-us.ahrq.gov. The study was exempt from the local Institutional Review Board as NRD is a publicly available database with de-identified data sets. Others can access these datasets by logging in to HCUP (https://hcup-us.ahrq.gov/tech_assist/centdist.jsp) and creating an account with an email so that they can access this data in the same manner as the authors. HCUP. HCUP Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD). Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). 2014, 2016, and 2017. 2023 [cited 2023; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/]. Available from: www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/nrdoverview.jsp.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Ahmad F.B. and Anderson R.N., The Leading Causes of Death in the US for 2020. JAMA, 2021. 325(18): p. 1829–1830. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.5469 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Feuer E.J., et al., The lifetime risk of developing breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst, 1993. 85(11): p. 892–7. doi: 10.1093/jnci/85.11.892 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/breast/basic_info/index.htm#:~:text=Each%20year%20in%20the%20United,What%%2020Is%20Breast%20Cancer%3F.
  • 4.Abdel-Qadir H., et al., A Population-Based Study of Cardiovascular Mortality Following Early-Stage Breast Cancer. JAMA Cardiol, 2017. 2(1): p. 88–93. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2016.3841 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Sinha A., et al., Interconnected Clinical and Social Risk Factors in Breast Cancer and Heart Failure. Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, 2022. 9. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.847975 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Yang H., et al., Risk of heart disease following treatment for breast cancer—results from a population-based cohort study. Elife, 2022. 11. doi: 10.7554/eLife.71562 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Bird, Healey Brian R J, and Swain Sandra M. “Cardiac toxicity in breast cancer survivors: review of potential cardiac problems.” Clinical cancer research: an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research vol. 14,1 (2008): 14–24. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-1033 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Chavez-MacGregor Mariana et al. “Trastuzumab-related cardiotoxicity among older patients with breast cancer.” Journal of clinical oncology: official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology vol. 31,33 (2013): 4222–8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.48.7884 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Colzani Edoardo et al. “Prognosis of patients with breast cancer: causes of death and effects of time since diagnosis, age, and tumor characteristics.” Journal of clinical oncology: official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology vol. 29,30 (2011): 4014–21. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.32.6462 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ziaeian B. and Fonarow G.C., The Prevention of Hospital Readmissions in Heart Failure . Prog Cardiovasc Dis, 2016. 58(4): p. 379–85. doi: 10.1016/j.pcad.2015.09.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Khan M.S., et al., Trends in 30- and 90-Day Readmission Rates for Heart Failure. Circ Heart Fail, 2021. 14(4): p. e008335. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.121.008335 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.HCUP. HCUP Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD). Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). 2014, 2016, and 2017. 2023. [cited 2023; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/]. Available from: www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/nrdoverview.jsp. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Sterling M.R., et al., Social Determinants of Health and 30-Day Readmissions Among Adults Hospitalized for Heart Failure in the REGARDS Study . Circ Heart Fail, 2022. 15(1): p. e008409. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.121.008409 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Schrage B., et al., Lower socioeconomic status predicts higher mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure. Heart, 2021. 107(3): p. 229–236. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2020-317216 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Wang H., et al., Using the LACE index to predict hospital readmissions in congestive heart failure patients. BMC Cardiovasc Disord, 2014. 14: p. 97. doi: 10.1186/1471-2261-14-97 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Patil S., et al., Readmissions Among Patients Admitted With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure Based on Income Quartiles. Mayo Clin Proc, 2019. 94(10): p. 1939–1950. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.05.027 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Dharmarajan K., et al., Diagnoses and timing of 30-day readmissions after hospitalization for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or pneumonia. Jama, 2013. 309(4): p. 355–63. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.216476 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Bradford C., et al., Patient and clinical characteristics that heighten risk for heart failure readmission. Res Social Adm Pharm, 2017. 13(6): p. 1070–1081. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2016.11.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Lan T., et al., Mortality and Readmission Rates After Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Ther Clin Risk Manag, 2021. 17: p. 1307–1320. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S340587 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.O’Connor C.M., et al., Predictors of mortality after discharge in patients hospitalized with heart failure: an analysis from the Organized Program to Initiate Lifesaving Treatment in Hospitalized Patients with Heart Failure (OPTIMIZE-HF). Am Heart J, 2008. 156(4): p. 662–73. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2008.04.030 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Chamberlain R.S., et al., Determining 30-day readmission risk for heart failure patients: the Readmission After Heart Failure scale. Int J Gen Med, 2018. 11: p. 127–141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Zheng L., et al., Predictive Model for Heart Failure Readmission Using Nationwide Readmissions Database. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes, 2022. 6(3): p. 228–238. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2022.04.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Chiara Lazzeri

14 Dec 2023

PONE-D-23-24874Thirty-day Hospital Readmission in Females with Acute Heart Failure and Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study from National Readmission DatabasePLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kambalapalli,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 28 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Chiara Lazzeri

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf.

2. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

""Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

3. We note that you have stated that you will provide repository information for your data at acceptance. Should your manuscript be accepted for publication, we will hold it until you provide the relevant accession numbers or DOIs necessary to access your data. If you wish to make changes to your Data Availability statement, please describe these changes in your cover letter and we will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide.

4. Please include your full ethics statement in the ‘Methods’ section of your manuscript file. In your statement, please include the full name of the IRB or ethics committee who approved or waived your study, as well as whether or not you obtained informed written or verbal consent. If consent was waived for your study, please include this information in your statement as well. 

5. Please include your tables as part of your main manuscript and remove the individual files. Please note that supplementary tables (should remain/ be uploaded) as separate ""supporting information"" files"

6. Please include a copy of Table S1 in supporting information file which you refer to in your text on page 13.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Introduction: Would add more info on prevalence of HF in Breast cancer patients? what cardiovascular causes are the major cause of death in Breast cancer patients- like CHF/MI etc. This would explain why tis study is important

- Almost-one-in =four (this is hw it appeared on manuscript for review). please check?

Study design:

- If AHF was the principal diagnosis - does it mean just ICD codes for acute heart failure(I50)? If thats the case then what about hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease with heart failure, code I13. This diagnosis is more often the principal in pts with HF and ckd. Was the ICD code for this used?

- Need to update what icd10 codes were used (for heart failure)

- So were patients with history of breast cancer who were in remission excluded for this study purpose?

Results:

- hypertensive heart disease with chronic kidney disease seems to be the major cause of readmission. As mentioned about hypertensive heart disease with chronic kidney disease with heart failure(I30) is the principal diagnosis in most patients who have CKD as well so it's important to know if this ICD10 was used for extracting data in first place?

Discussion

- first para seems repeat of what was already said above in results

- second para needs to be modified - seems widely jumping from one to other- initially talk about Several studies have investigated a robust correlation between the likelihood of developing HF and breast cancer". Then at end of the para states "underlying association between hypertension and the risk of breast cancer has not been extensively researched or studied yet". This study if apt CHF and breast cancer so narrow down to that- pathophysiology, what evidence other studies show. Also talks about medicare pts , REGARD study which is more about stroke rather than HF. Please use data about Medicare patients and HF readmission if needed.

Reviewer #2: ncrease readmission rate as expected on the lines of other reasearch studies/ literature we already have

if you can try to add other variables if available would be be more novel.

overall good writing and research methodolgy used.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Thulasi Ram Gudi

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2024 Jul 23;19(7):e0301596. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0301596.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


9 Mar 2024

Dear Editor-in-Chief and Reviewers,

We submit for the revision of our manuscript entitled " Thirty-day Hospital Readmission in Females with Acute Heart Failure and Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study from National Readmission Database” for consideration in your respected journal.

We are grateful for your critical comments and thoughtful suggestions which are valuable and very helpful for revising and improving our paper. We truly appreciate your time, effort, and patience towards providing these queries and suggestions.

The following is a point-by-point response to the reviewers’ comments.

Reviewer #1:

Question: Introduction: Would add more info on prevalence of HF in Breast cancer patients? what cardiovascular causes are the major cause of death in Breast cancer patients- like CHF/MI etc. This would explain why tis study is important

Almost-one-in =four (this is hw it appeared on manuscript for review). please check?

Response: Thank you for the query and suggestions.

We have reviewed literature on HF prevalence in Breast cancer and added it to the introduction as suggested. Also made appropriate changes regarding the incidence of cardiovascular complications in breast cancer patients.

Reviewer Question:

Study design:

- If AHF was the principal diagnosis - does it mean just ICD codes for acute heart failure(I50)? If thats the case then what about hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease with heart failure, code I13. This diagnosis is more often the principal in pts with HF and ckd. Was the ICD code for this used?

- Need to update what icd10 codes were used (for heart failure)

- So were patients with history of breast cancer who were in remission excluded for this study purpose?

Response: Thank you for the query and suggestions.

Following ICD codes were used for Acute heart failure, Hypertensive heart disease and chronic kidney disease for our study’s analysis.

Below is the table depicting the ICD codes used for analysis.

CONDITION ICD CODE

Acute Heart Failure I50.21, I50.23, I50.31, I50.33, I50.41, I50.43

Hypertension I10

Hypertensive Chronic Kidney disease I12.9, I12.0

Hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease with heart failure, with stage 1 through stage 4 chronic kidney disease, or unspecified chronic kidney disease I13.0

Hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease without heart failure I13.1

Hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease without heart failure, with stage 5 chronic kidney disease, or end stage renal disease I13.11, I13.2

Renovascular hypertension I15.0

Other secondary hypertension I15.8, I6.74

Hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease without heart failure I13.1

Hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease without heart failure, with stage 5 chronic kidney disease, or end stage renal disease I13.11, I13.2

Renovascular hypertension I15.0

Other secondary hypertension I15.8, I6.74

Reviewer Question: So, were patients with history of breast cancer who were in remission excluded for this study purpose?

Response: Thank you for the query.

All patients with history or active breast cancer were included in the study with following ICD codes.

Breast cancer ICD codes-

C50.011, C50.012, C50.019, C50021, C50022, C50029, C50111, C50112, C50119, C50121, C50122, C50129, C50211, C50212, C50219, C50221, C50222, C50229, C50311, C50312, C50319, C50321, C50322, C50329, C5041, C50412, C50419, C50421, C50422, C50429, C50511, C50512, C50519, C50521, C50522, C50529, C50611, C50612, C50619, C50621, C50622, C50629, C50811, C50812, C50819, C50821, C50822, C50829, C50911, C50912, C50919, C50921, C50922, C50929

Reviewer Question: hypertensive heart disease with chronic kidney disease seems to be the major cause of readmission. As mentioned about hypertensive heart disease with chronic kidney disease with heart failure(I30) is the principal diagnosis in most patients who have CKD as well so it's important to know if this ICD10 was used for extracting data in first place?

Response: Thank you for the query and suggestions.

Yes, we have included both hypertensive heart disease and chronic kidney diseases ICD codes for study’s data extraction.

Hypertensive Chronic Kidney disease- I12.9, I12.0

Hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease with heart failure (with stage 1 through stage 4 chronic kidney disease, or unspecified chronic kidney disease)-I13.0

Hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease without heart failure- I13.1

Hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease without heart failure (with stage 5 chronic kidney disease, or end stage renal disease)- I13.11, I13.2

Reviewer Question:

Discussion

- first para seems repeat of what was already said above in results

- second para needs to be modified - seems widely jumping from one to other- initially talk about Several studies have investigated a robust correlation between the likelihood of developing HF and breast cancer". Then at end of the para states "underlying association between hypertension and the risk of breast cancer has not been extensively researched or studied yet". This study if apt CHF and breast cancer so narrow down to that- pathophysiology, what evidence other studies show. Also talks about medicare pts, REGARD study which is more about stroke rather than HF. Please use data about Medicare patients and HF readmission if needed.

Response: Thank you for the suggestions.

We have revised the first paragraph of the discussion as advised. We have also reviewed existing literature and made changes in the second paragraph to address their findings correlating with our analysis. We included the findings of REGARDS study as it reported the impact of socioeconomic parameters, social determinants of life (poverty, insurance type, education, household income) in medicare beneficiaries on the long-term outcomes, morbidity and rehospitalization rates in HF patients.

REGARDS STUDY by Sterling, et.al

Sterling MR, Ringel JB, Pinheiro LC, et al. Social Determinants of Health and 30-Day Readmissions Among Adults Hospitalized for Heart Failure in the REGARDS Study. Circ Heart Fail. 2022;15(1):e008409.

Reviewer #2: increase readmission rate as expected on the lines of other research studies/ literature we already have

if you can try to add other variables if available would be more novel.

overall good writing and research methodology used.

Response: Thank you for your kind words and suggestions.

We aimed at studying readmission rates for heart failure patients in breast cancer using National Readmission Database. Our objective, as a nascent research team, was to investigate the impact of medical comorbidities and socioeconomic parameters in relation to HF readmission rates in breast cancer. Your input is invaluable, and we surely plan to incorporate additional variables into our future studies based on your recommendations.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

pone.0301596.s002.docx (19.1KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Chiara Lazzeri

20 Mar 2024

Thirty-day Hospital Readmission in Females with Acute Heart Failure and Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study from National Readmission Database

PONE-D-23-24874R1

Dear Dr. Kambalapalli,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® , click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Chiara Lazzeri

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Chiara Lazzeri

13 Jul 2024

PONE-D-23-24874R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kambalapalli,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Chiara Lazzeri

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table

    (DOCX)

    pone.0301596.s001.docx (14.6KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    pone.0301596.s002.docx (19.1KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    Our study’s data is available on the public data available on National Readmission Database (NRD), which is the largest publicly available all-payer inpatient readmission database in the United States. The NRD from the year 2019 which contains discharge data for 58.7% of all US hospitalizations was used. More information about the NRD can be obtained from the website https://hcup-us.ahrq.gov. The study was exempt from the local Institutional Review Board as NRD is a publicly available database with de-identified data sets. Others can access these datasets by logging in to HCUP (https://hcup-us.ahrq.gov/tech_assist/centdist.jsp) and creating an account with an email so that they can access this data in the same manner as the authors. HCUP. HCUP Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD). Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP). 2014, 2016, and 2017. 2023 [cited 2023; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/]. Available from: www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/nrdoverview.jsp.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES