Jacek Kwiecinski1,1, Evangelos Tzolos1,2, Mohammed N Meah2, Sebastien Cadet3, Philip D Adamson4, Kajetan Grodecki5, Nikhil V Joshi6, Alastair J Moss2, Michelle C Williams2, Edwin J R van Beek2,7, Daniel S Berman3, David E Newby2, Damini Dey5, Marc R Dweck2, Piotr J Slomka8. 1. Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, Department of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. 2. BHF Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. 3. Department of Imaging, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. 4. Christchurch Heart Institute, University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand. 5. Department of Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. 6. Bristol Heart Institute, University of Bristol, United Kingdom; and. 7. Edinburgh Imaging, Queens Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. 8. Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, Department of Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California; piotr.slomka@cshs.org.
Abstract
Coronary 18F-sodium fluoride (18F-NaF) PET and CT angiography-based quantitative plaque analysis have shown promise in refining risk stratification in patients with coronary artery disease. We combined both of these novel imaging approaches to develop an optimal machine-learning model for the future risk of myocardial infarction in patients with stable coronary disease. Methods: Patients with known coronary artery disease underwent coronary 18F-NaF PET and CT angiography on a hybrid PET/CT scanner. Machine-learning by extreme gradient boosting was trained using clinical data, CT quantitative plaque analysis, measures and 18F-NaF PET, and it was tested using repeated 10-fold hold-out testing. Results: Among 293 study participants (65 ± 9 y; 84% male), 22 subjects experienced a myocardial infarction over the 53 (40-59) months of follow-up. On univariable receiver-operator-curve analysis, only 18F-NaF coronary uptake emerged as a predictor of myocardial infarction (c-statistic 0.76, 95% CI 0.68-0.83). When incorporated into machine-learning models, clinical characteristics showed limited predictive performance (c-statistic 0.64, 95% CI 0.53-0.76) and were outperformed by a quantitative plaque analysis-based machine-learning model (c-statistic 0.72, 95% CI 0.60-0.84). After inclusion of all available data (clinical, quantitative plaque and 18F-NaF PET), we achieved a substantial improvement (P = 0.008 versus 18F-NaF PET alone) in the model performance (c-statistic 0.85, 95% CI 0.79-0.91). Conclusion: Both 18F-NaF uptake and quantitative plaque analysis measures are additive and strong predictors of outcome in patients with established coronary artery disease. Optimal risk stratification can be achieved by combining clinical data with these approaches in a machine-learning model.
Coronary 18F-sodium fluoride (18F-NaF) PET and CT angiography-based quantitative plaque analysis have shown promise in refining risk stratification in patients with coronary artery disease. We combined both of these novel imaging approaches to develop an optimal machine-learning model for the future risk of myocardial infarction in patients with stable coronary disease. Methods: Patients with known coronary artery disease underwent coronary 18F-NaF PET and CT angiography on a hybrid PET/CT scanner. Machine-learning by extreme gradient boosting was trained using clinical data, CT quantitative plaque analysis, measures and 18F-NaF PET, and it was tested using repeated 10-fold hold-out testing. Results: Among 293 study participants (65 ± 9 y; 84% male), 22 subjects experienced a myocardial infarction over the 53 (40-59) months of follow-up. On univariable receiver-operator-curve analysis, only 18F-NaF coronary uptake emerged as a predictor of myocardial infarction (c-statistic 0.76, 95% CI 0.68-0.83). When incorporated into machine-learning models, clinical characteristics showed limited predictive performance (c-statistic 0.64, 95% CI 0.53-0.76) and were outperformed by a quantitative plaque analysis-based machine-learning model (c-statistic 0.72, 95% CI 0.60-0.84). After inclusion of all available data (clinical, quantitative plaque and 18F-NaF PET), we achieved a substantial improvement (P = 0.008 versus 18F-NaF PET alone) in the model performance (c-statistic 0.85, 95% CI 0.79-0.91). Conclusion: Both 18F-NaF uptake and quantitative plaque analysis measures are additive and strong predictors of outcome in patients with established coronary artery disease. Optimal risk stratification can be achieved by combining clinical data with these approaches in a machine-learning model.
Authors: Michaela M Hell; Manish Motwani; Yuka Otaki; Sebastien Cadet; Heidi Gransar; Romalisa Miranda-Peats; Jacob Valk; Piotr J Slomka; Victor Y Cheng; Alan Rozanski; Balaji K Tamarappoo; Sean Hayes; Stephan Achenbach; Daniel S Berman; Damini Dey Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Alexander R van Rosendael; Gabriel Maliakal; Kranthi K Kolli; Ashley Beecy; Subhi J Al'Aref; Aeshita Dwivedi; Gurpreet Singh; Mohit Panday; Amit Kumar; Xiaoyue Ma; Stephan Achenbach; Mouaz H Al-Mallah; Daniele Andreini; Jeroen J Bax; Daniel S Berman; Matthew J Budoff; Filippo Cademartiri; Tracy Q Callister; Hyuk-Jae Chang; Kavitha Chinnaiyan; Benjamin J W Chow; Ricardo C Cury; Augustin DeLago; Gudrun Feuchtner; Martin Hadamitzky; Joerg Hausleiter; Philipp A Kaufmann; Yong-Jin Kim; Jonathon A Leipsic; Erica Maffei; Hugo Marques; Gianluca Pontone; Gilbert L Raff; Ronen Rubinshtein; Leslee J Shaw; Todd C Villines; Heidi Gransar; Yao Lu; Erica C Jones; Jessica M Peña; Fay Y Lin; James K Min Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2018-04-30
Authors: Jacek Kwiecinski; Damini Dey; Sebastien Cadet; Sang-Eun Lee; Yuka Otaki; Phi T Huynh; Mhairi K Doris; Evann Eisenberg; Mijin Yun; Maurits A Jansen; Michelle C Williams; Balaji K Tamarappoo; John D Friedman; Marc R Dweck; David E Newby; Hyuk-Jae Chang; Piotr J Slomka; Daniel S Berman Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2019-02-13
Authors: Jacek Kwiecinski; Damini Dey; Sebastien Cadet; Sang-Eun Lee; Balaji Tamarappoo; Yuka Otaki; Phi T Huynh; John D Friedman; Mark R Dweck; David E Newby; Mijin Yun; Hyuk-Jae Chang; Piotr J Slomka; Daniel S Berman Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2020-01-01 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Daniele Massera; Mhairi K Doris; Sebastien Cadet; Jacek Kwiecinski; Tania A Pawade; Frederique E C M Peeters; Damini Dey; David E Newby; Marc R Dweck; Piotr J Slomka Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Mathieu Rubeaux; Nikhil V Joshi; Marc R Dweck; Alison Fletcher; Manish Motwani; Louise E Thomson; Guido Germano; Damini Dey; Debiao Li; Daniel S Berman; David E Newby; Piotr J Slomka Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-10-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Jacek Kwiecinski; Evangelos Tzolos; Philip D Adamson; Sebastien Cadet; Alastair J Moss; Nikhil Joshi; Michelle C Williams; Edwin J R van Beek; Damini Dey; Daniel S Berman; David E Newby; Piotr J Slomka; Marc R Dweck Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2020-06-23 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Timothy R G Cartlidge; Mhairi K Doris; Stephanie L Sellers; Tania A Pawade; Audrey C White; Renzo Pessotto; Jacek Kwiecinski; Alison Fletcher; Carlos Alcaide; Christophe Lucatelli; Cameron Densem; James H F Rudd; Edwin J R van Beek; Adriana Tavares; Renu Virmani; Daniel Berman; Jonathon A Leipsic; David E Newby; Marc R Dweck Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2019-03-19 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Martin Lyngby Lassen; Jacek Kwiecinski; Damini Dey; Sebastien Cadet; Guido Germano; Daniel S Berman; Philip D Adamson; Alastair J Moss; Marc R Dweck; David E Newby; Piotr J Slomka Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-08-05 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Marc R Dweck; Damini Dey; Michelle C Williams; Jacek Kwiecinski; Mhairi Doris; Priscilla McElhinney; Michelle S D'Souza; Sebastien Cadet; Philip D Adamson; Alastair J Moss; Shirjel Alam; Amanda Hunter; Anoop S V Shah; Nicholas L Mills; Tania Pawade; Chengjia Wang; Jonathan Weir McCall; Michael Bonnici-Mallia; Christopher Murrills; Giles Roditi; Edwin J R van Beek; Leslee J Shaw; Edward D Nicol; Daniel S Berman; Piotr J Slomka; David E Newby Journal: Circulation Date: 2020-03-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jacek Kwiecinski; Evangelos Tzolos; Alexander J Fletcher; Jennifer Nash; Mohammed N Meah; Sebastien Cadet; Philip D Adamson; Kajetan Grodecki; Nikhil Joshi; Michelle C Williams; Edwin J R van Beek; Chi Lai; Adriana A S Tavares; Mark G MacAskill; Damini Dey; Andrew H Baker; Jonathon Leipsic; Daniel S Berman; Stephanie L Sellers; David E Newby; Marc R Dweck; Piotr J Slomka Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2022-02-16
Authors: Jacek Kwiecinski; Evangelos Tzolos; Timothy R G Cartlidge; Stephanie L Sellers; Daniel S Berman; Marc R Dweck; Alexander Fletcher; Mhairi K Doris; Rong Bing; Jason M Tarkin; Michael A Seidman; Gaurav S Gulsin; Nicholas L Cruden; Anna K Barton; Neal G Uren; Michelle C Williams; Edwin J R van Beek; Jonathon Leipsic; Damini Dey; Raj R Makkar; Piotr J Slomka; James H F Rudd; David E Newby Journal: Circulation Date: 2021-08-29 Impact factor: 39.918
Authors: Xianglong Xu; Zongyuan Ge; Eric P F Chow; Zhen Yu; David Lee; Jinrong Wu; Jason J Ong; Christopher K Fairley; Lei Zhang Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-03-25 Impact factor: 4.241