Literature DB >> 31513271

Machine learning of clinical variables and coronary artery calcium scoring for the prediction of obstructive coronary artery disease on coronary computed tomography angiography: analysis from the CONFIRM registry.

Subhi J Al'Aref1, Gabriel Maliakal1, Gurpreet Singh1, Alexander R van Rosendael1, Xiaoyue Ma2, Zhuoran Xu1, Omar Al Hussein Alawamlh1, Benjamin Lee1, Mohit Pandey1, Stephan Achenbach3, Mouaz H Al-Mallah4, Daniele Andreini5, Jeroen J Bax6, Daniel S Berman7, Matthew J Budoff8, Filippo Cademartiri9, Tracy Q Callister10, Hyuk-Jae Chang11, Kavitha Chinnaiyan12, Benjamin J W Chow13, Ricardo C Cury14, Augustin DeLago15, Gudrun Feuchtner16, Martin Hadamitzky17, Joerg Hausleiter18, Philipp A Kaufmann19, Yong-Jin Kim20, Jonathon A Leipsic21, Erica Maffei22, Hugo Marques23, Pedro de Araújo Gonçalves23, Gianluca Pontone5, Gilbert L Raff12, Ronen Rubinshtein24, Todd C Villines25, Heidi Gransar7, Yao Lu2, Erica C Jones1, Jessica M Peña1, Fay Y Lin1, James K Min1, Leslee J Shaw1.   

Abstract

AIMS: Symptom-based pretest probability scores that estimate the likelihood of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in stable chest pain have moderate accuracy. We sought to develop a machine learning (ML) model, utilizing clinical factors and the coronary artery calcium score (CACS), to predict the presence of obstructive CAD on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). METHODS AND
RESULTS: The study screened 35 281 participants enrolled in the CONFIRM registry, who underwent ≥64 detector row CCTA evaluation because of either suspected or previously established CAD. A boosted ensemble algorithm (XGBoost) was used, with data split into a training set (80%) on which 10-fold cross-validation was done and a test set (20%). Performance was assessed of the (1) ML model (using 25 clinical and demographic features), (2) ML + CACS, (3) CAD consortium clinical score, (4) CAD consortium clinical score + CACS, and (5) updated Diamond-Forrester (UDF) score. The study population comprised of 13 054 patients, of whom 2380 (18.2%) had obstructive CAD (≥50% stenosis). Machine learning with CACS produced the best performance [area under the curve (AUC) of 0.881] compared with ML alone (AUC of 0.773), CAD consortium clinical score (AUC of 0.734), and with CACS (AUC of 0.866) and UDF (AUC of 0.682), P < 0.05 for all comparisons. CACS, age, and gender were the highest ranking features.
CONCLUSION: A ML model incorporating clinical features in addition to CACS can accurately estimate the pretest likelihood of obstructive CAD on CCTA. In clinical practice, the utilization of such an approach could improve risk stratification and help guide downstream management. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
© The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Coronary artery calcium score; Coronary artery disease; Coronary computed tomography angiography; Machine learning

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31513271      PMCID: PMC7849944          DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz565

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Heart J        ISSN: 0195-668X            Impact factor:   29.983


  33 in total

1.  Analysis of Machine Learning Techniques for Heart Failure Readmissions.

Authors:  Bobak J Mortazavi; Nicholas S Downing; Emily M Bucholz; Kumar Dharmarajan; Ajay Manhapra; Shu-Xia Li; Sahand N Negahban; Harlan M Krumholz
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2016-11-08

2.  2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology.

Authors:  Gilles Montalescot; Udo Sechtem; Stephan Achenbach; Felicita Andreotti; Chris Arden; Andrzej Budaj; Raffaele Bugiardini; Filippo Crea; Thomas Cuisset; Carlo Di Mario; J Rafael Ferreira; Bernard J Gersh; Anselm K Gitt; Jean-Sebastien Hulot; Nikolaus Marx; Lionel H Opie; Matthias Pfisterer; Eva Prescott; Frank Ruschitzka; Manel Sabaté; Roxy Senior; David Paul Taggart; Ernst E van der Wall; Christiaan J M Vrints; Jose Luis Zamorano; Stephan Achenbach; Helmut Baumgartner; Jeroen J Bax; Héctor Bueno; Veronica Dean; Christi Deaton; Cetin Erol; Robert Fagard; Roberto Ferrari; David Hasdai; Arno W Hoes; Paulus Kirchhof; Juhani Knuuti; Philippe Kolh; Patrizio Lancellotti; Ales Linhart; Petros Nihoyannopoulos; Massimo F Piepoli; Piotr Ponikowski; Per Anton Sirnes; Juan Luis Tamargo; Michal Tendera; Adam Torbicki; William Wijns; Stephan Windecker; Juhani Knuuti; Marco Valgimigli; Héctor Bueno; Marc J Claeys; Norbert Donner-Banzhoff; Cetin Erol; Herbert Frank; Christian Funck-Brentano; Oliver Gaemperli; José R Gonzalez-Juanatey; Michalis Hamilos; David Hasdai; Steen Husted; Stefan K James; Kari Kervinen; Philippe Kolh; Steen Dalby Kristensen; Patrizio Lancellotti; Aldo Pietro Maggioni; Massimo F Piepoli; Axel R Pries; Francesco Romeo; Lars Rydén; Maarten L Simoons; Per Anton Sirnes; Ph Gabriel Steg; Adam Timmis; William Wijns; Stephan Windecker; Aylin Yildirir; Jose Luis Zamorano
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2013-08-30       Impact factor: 29.983

3.  European Society of Cardiology-Recommended Coronary Artery Disease Consortium Pretest Probability Scores More Accurately Predict Obstructive Coronary Disease and Cardiovascular Events Than the Diamond and Forrester Score: The Partners Registry.

Authors:  Marcio Sommer Bittencourt; Edward Hulten; Tamar S Polonsky; Udo Hoffman; Khurram Nasir; Suhny Abbara; Marcelo Di Carli; Ron Blankstein
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2016-07-13       Impact factor: 29.690

4.  A Comparison of the Updated Diamond-Forrester, CAD Consortium, and CONFIRM History-Based Risk Scores for Predicting Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Stable Chest Pain: The SCOT-HEART Coronary CTA Cohort.

Authors:  Lohendran Baskaran; Ibrahim Danad; Heidi Gransar; Bríain Ó Hartaigh; Joshua Schulman-Marcus; Fay Y Lin; Jessica M Peña; Amanda Hunter; David E Newby; Philip D Adamson; James K Min
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2018-04-18

5.  Correlation of coronary calcification and angiographically documented stenoses in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: results of 1,764 patients.

Authors:  R Haberl; A Becker; A Leber; A Knez; C Becker; C Lang; R Brüning; M Reiser; G Steinbeck
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 24.094

6.  Continuous probabilistic prediction of angiographically significant coronary artery disease using electron beam tomography.

Authors:  Matthew J Budoff; George A Diamond; Paolo Raggi; Yadon Arad; Alan D Guerci; Tracy Q Callister; Daniel Berman
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2002-04-16       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Diagnostic performance of coronary angiography by 64-row CT.

Authors:  Julie M Miller; Carlos E Rochitte; Marc Dewey; Armin Arbab-Zadeh; Hiroyuki Niinuma; Ilan Gottlieb; Narinder Paul; Melvin E Clouse; Edward P Shapiro; John Hoe; Albert C Lardo; David E Bush; Albert de Roos; Christopher Cox; Jeffery Brinker; João A C Lima
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2008-11-27       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Diagnostic performance of 64-multidetector row coronary computed tomographic angiography for evaluation of coronary artery stenosis in individuals without known coronary artery disease: results from the prospective multicenter ACCURACY (Assessment by Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography of Individuals Undergoing Invasive Coronary Angiography) trial.

Authors:  Matthew J Budoff; David Dowe; James G Jollis; Michael Gitter; John Sutherland; Edward Halamert; Markus Scherer; Raye Bellinger; Arthur Martin; Robert Benton; Augustin Delago; James K Min
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2008-11-18       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 9.  Diagnostic models of the pre-test probability of stable coronary artery disease: A systematic review.

Authors:  Ting He; Xing Liu; Nana Xu; Ying Li; Qiaoyu Wu; Meilin Liu; Hong Yuan
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 2.365

10.  Prediction model to estimate presence of coronary artery disease: retrospective pooled analysis of existing cohorts.

Authors:  Tessa S S Genders; Ewout W Steyerberg; M G Myriam Hunink; Koen Nieman; Tjebbe W Galema; Nico R Mollet; Pim J de Feyter; Gabriel P Krestin; Hatem Alkadhi; Sebastian Leschka; Lotus Desbiolles; Matthijs F L Meijs; Maarten J Cramer; Juhani Knuuti; Sami Kajander; Jan Bogaert; Kaatje Goetschalckx; Filippo Cademartiri; Erica Maffei; Chiara Martini; Sara Seitun; Annachiara Aldrovandi; Simon Wildermuth; Björn Stinn; Jürgen Fornaro; Gudrun Feuchtner; Tobias De Zordo; Thomas Auer; Fabian Plank; Guy Friedrich; Francesca Pugliese; Steffen E Petersen; L Ceri Davies; U Joseph Schoepf; Garrett W Rowe; Carlos A G van Mieghem; Luc van Driessche; Valentin Sinitsyn; Deepa Gopalan; Konstantin Nikolaou; Fabian Bamberg; Ricardo C Cury; Juan Battle; Pál Maurovich-Horvat; Andrea Bartykowszki; Bela Merkely; Dávid Becker; Martin Hadamitzky; Jörg Hausleiter; Marc Dewey; Elke Zimmermann; Michael Laule
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2012-06-12
View more
  37 in total

Review 1.  Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Cardiovascular Imaging.

Authors:  Karthik Seetharam; James K Min
Journal:  Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J       Date:  2020 Oct-Dec

2.  Artificial intelligence in medical imaging: A radiomic guide to precision phenotyping of cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Evangelos K Oikonomou; Musib Siddique; Charalambos Antoniades
Journal:  Cardiovasc Res       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 10.787

Review 3.  Artificial Intelligence in Cardiovascular Imaging for Risk Stratification in Coronary Artery Disease.

Authors:  Andrew Lin; Márton Kolossváry; Manish Motwani; Ivana Išgum; Pál Maurovich-Horvat; Piotr J Slomka; Damini Dey
Journal:  Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging       Date:  2021-02-25

4.  Vascular age based on coronary calcium burden and carotid intima media thickness (a comparative study).

Authors:  Maryam Moradi; Mahnaz Fosouli; Jalil Khataei
Journal:  Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2022-06-15

Review 5.  Machine learning applications in cardiac computed tomography: a composite systematic review.

Authors:  Jonathan James Hyett Bray; Moghees Ahmad Hanif; Mohammad Alradhawi; Jacob Ibbetson; Surinder Singh Dosanjh; Sabrina Lucy Smith; Mahmood Ahmad; Dominic Pimenta
Journal:  Eur Heart J Open       Date:  2022-03-17

6.  Usefulness of Random Forest Algorithm in Predicting Severe Acute Pancreatitis.

Authors:  Wandong Hong; Yajing Lu; Xiaoying Zhou; Shengchun Jin; Jingyi Pan; Qingyi Lin; Shaopeng Yang; Zarrin Basharat; Maddalena Zippi; Hemant Goyal
Journal:  Front Cell Infect Microbiol       Date:  2022-06-10       Impact factor: 6.073

7.  Machine Learning Approach for Cardiovascular Risk and Coronary Artery Calcification Score.

Authors:  C R Aditya; Naveen Chakravarthy Sattaru; Kumaraguruparan Gopal; R Rahul; G Chandra Shekara; Omaima Nasif; Sulaiman Ali Alharbi; S S Raghavan; S Arockia Jayadhas
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 3.246

8.  Evaluating the Coronary Artery Disease Consortium Model and the Coronary Artery Calcium Score in Predicting Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in a Symptomatic Mixed Asian Cohort.

Authors:  Lohendran Baskaran; Yu Pei Neo; Jing Kai Lee; Yeonyee Elizabeth Yoon; Yilin Jiang; Subhi J Al'Aref; Alexander R van Rosendael; Donghee Han; Fay Y Lin; Rine Nakanishi; Pál Maurovich Horvat; Swee Yaw Tan; Todd C Villines; Marcio S Bittencourt; Leslee J Shaw
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2022-04-12       Impact factor: 6.106

9.  The year in cardiovascular medicine 2020: digital health and innovation.

Authors:  Charalambos Antoniades; Folkert W Asselbergs; Panos Vardas
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2021-02-14       Impact factor: 29.983

Review 10.  Machine Learning and the Future of Cardiovascular Care: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

Authors:  Giorgio Quer; Ramy Arnaout; Michael Henne; Rima Arnaout
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 24.094

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.