Applying Administrative Data-Based Coding Algorithms for Frailty in Patients With Cirrhosis

Frailty is a powerful prognostic tool in cirrhosis. Claims-based frailty scores estimate the presence of frailty without the need for in-person evaluation. These algorithms have not been validated in cirrhosis. Whether they measure true frailty or perform as well as frailty in outcome prediction is unknown. We evaluated 2 claims-based frailty scores—Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) and Claims-Based Frailty Index (CFI)—in 3 prospective cohorts comprising 1100 patients with cirrhosis. We assessed differences in neuromuscular/neurocognitive capabilities in those classified as frail or nonfrail based on each score. We assessed the ability of the indexes to discriminate frailty based on the Fried Frailty Index (FFI), chair stands, activities of daily living (ADL), and falls. Finally, we compared the performance of claims-based frailty measures and physical frailty measures to predict transplant-free survival using competing risk regression and patient-reported outcomes. The CFI identified neuromuscular deficits (balance, chair stands, hip strength), whereas the HFRS only identified poor chair-stand performance. The CFI had areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCs) for identifying frailty as measured by the FFI, ADL, and falls of 0.57, 0.60, and 0.68, respectively; similarly, the AUROCs were 0.66, 0.63, and 0.67, respectively, for the HFRS. Claims-based frailty scores were associated with poor quality of life and sleep but were outperformed by the FFI and chair stands. The HFRS, per 10-point increase (but not the CFI) predicted survival of patients in the liver transplantation (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.12) and non–liver transplantation cohorts (SHR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.05-1.22). Claims-based frailty scores do not adequately associate with physical frailty but are associated with important cirrhosis-related outcomes.