Richard Rios1, Robert J H Miller2, Nipun Manral3, Tali Sharir4, Andrew J Einstein5, Mathews B Fish6, Terrence D Ruddy7, Philipp A Kaufmann8, Albert J Sinusas9, Edward J Miller9, Timothy M Bateman10, Sharmila Dorbala11, Marcelo Di Carli11, Serge D Van Kriekinge3, Paul B Kavanagh3, Tejas Parekh3, Joanna X Liang3, Damini Dey3, Daniel S Berman3, Piotr J Slomka12. 1. Departments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Sede de La Paz, GAUNAL, La Paz, Colombia. 2. Departments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Cardiac Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. 3. Departments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 4. Department of Nuclear Cardiology, Assuta Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel; Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheba, Israel. 5. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Radiology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA. 6. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Oregon Heart and Vascular Institute, Sacred Heart Medical Center, Springfield, OR, USA. 7. Division of Cardiology, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 8. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Cardiac Imaging, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 9. Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA. 10. Cardiovascular Imaging Technologies LLC, Kansas City, MO, USA. 11. Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 12. Departments of Medicine (Division of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine), Imaging, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Electronic address: piotr.slomka@cshs.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Machine learning (ML) models can improve prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), but in clinical practice some values may be missing. We evaluated the influence of missing values in ML models for patient-specific prediction of MACE risk. METHODS: We included 20,179 patients from the multicenter REFINE SPECT registry with MACE follow-up data. We evaluated seven methods for handling missing values: 1) removal of variables with missing values (ML-Remove), 2) imputation with median and unique category for continuous and categorical variables, respectively (ML-Traditional), 3) unique category for missing variables (ML-Unique), 4) cluster-based imputation (ML-Cluster), 5) regression-based imputation (ML-Regression), 6) missRanger imputation (ML-MR), and 7) multiple imputation (ML-MICE). We trained ML models with full data and simulated missing values in testing patients. Prediction performance was evaluated using area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) and compared with a model without missing values (ML-All), expert visual diagnosis and total perfusion deficit (TPD). RESULTS: During mean follow-up of 4.7 ± 1.5 years, 3,541 patients experienced at least one MACE (3.7% annualized risk). ML-All (reference model-no missing values) had AUC 0.799 for MACE risk prediction. All seven models with missing values had lower AUC (ML-Remove: 0.778, ML-MICE: 0.774, ML-Cluster: 0.771, ML-Traditional: 0.771, ML-Regression: 0.770, ML-MR: 0.766, and ML-Unique: 0.766; p < 0.01 for ML-Remove vs remaining methods). Stress TPD (AUC 0.698) and visual diagnosis (0.681) had the lowest AUCs. CONCLUSION: Missing values reduce the accuracy of ML models when predicting MACE risk. Removing variables with missing values and retraining the model may yield superior patient-level prediction performance.
BACKGROUND: Machine learning (ML) models can improve prediction of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), but in clinical practice some values may be missing. We evaluated the influence of missing values in ML models for patient-specific prediction of MACE risk. METHODS: We included 20,179 patients from the multicenter REFINE SPECT registry with MACE follow-up data. We evaluated seven methods for handling missing values: 1) removal of variables with missing values (ML-Remove), 2) imputation with median and unique category for continuous and categorical variables, respectively (ML-Traditional), 3) unique category for missing variables (ML-Unique), 4) cluster-based imputation (ML-Cluster), 5) regression-based imputation (ML-Regression), 6) missRanger imputation (ML-MR), and 7) multiple imputation (ML-MICE). We trained ML models with full data and simulated missing values in testing patients. Prediction performance was evaluated using area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) and compared with a model without missing values (ML-All), expert visual diagnosis and total perfusion deficit (TPD). RESULTS: During mean follow-up of 4.7 ± 1.5 years, 3,541 patients experienced at least one MACE (3.7% annualized risk). ML-All (reference model-no missing values) had AUC 0.799 for MACE risk prediction. All seven models with missing values had lower AUC (ML-Remove: 0.778, ML-MICE: 0.774, ML-Cluster: 0.771, ML-Traditional: 0.771, ML-Regression: 0.770, ML-MR: 0.766, and ML-Unique: 0.766; p < 0.01 for ML-Remove vs remaining methods). Stress TPD (AUC 0.698) and visual diagnosis (0.681) had the lowest AUCs. CONCLUSION: Missing values reduce the accuracy of ML models when predicting MACE risk. Removing variables with missing values and retraining the model may yield superior patient-level prediction performance.
Authors: Piotr J Slomka; Hidetaka Nishina; Daniel S Berman; Cigdem Akincioglu; Aiden Abidov; John D Friedman; Sean W Hayes; Guido Germano Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2005 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Melissa J Azur; Elizabeth A Stuart; Constantine Frangakis; Philip J Leaf Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Kristian Thygesen; Joseph S Alpert; Harvey D White; Allan S Jaffe; Fred S Apple; Marcello Galvani; Hugo A Katus; L Kristin Newby; Jan Ravkilde; Bernard Chaitman; Peter M Clemmensen; Mikael Dellborg; Hanoch Hod; Pekka Porela; Richard Underwood; Jeroen J Bax; George A Beller; Robert Bonow; Ernst E Van der Wall; Jean-Pierre Bassand; William Wijns; T Bruce Ferguson; Philippe G Steg; Barry F Uretsky; David O Williams; Paul W Armstrong; Elliott M Antman; Keith A Fox; Christian W Hamm; E Magnus Ohman; Maarten L Simoons; Philip A Poole-Wilson; Enrique P Gurfinkel; José-Luis Lopez-Sendon; Prem Pais; Shanti Mendis; Jun-Ren Zhu; Lars C Wallentin; Francisco Fernández-Avilés; Kim M Fox; Alexander N Parkhomenko; Silvia G Priori; Michal Tendera; Liisa-Maria Voipio-Pulkki; Alec Vahanian; A John Camm; Raffaele De Caterina; Veronica Dean; Kenneth Dickstein; Gerasimos Filippatos; Christian Funck-Brentano; Irene Hellemans; Steen Dalby Kristensen; Keith McGregor; Udo Sechtem; Sigmund Silber; Michal Tendera; Petr Widimsky; José Luis Zamorano; Joao Morais; Sorin Brener; Robert Harrington; David Morrow; Michael Lim; Marco A Martinez-Rios; Steve Steinhubl; Glen N Levine; W Brian Gibler; David Goff; Marco Tubaro; Darek Dudek; Nawwar Al-Attar Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-10-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Damini Dey; Piotr J Slomka; Paul Leeson; Dorin Comaniciu; Sirish Shrestha; Partho P Sengupta; Thomas H Marwick Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2019-03-26 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Juhani Knuuti; William Wijns; Antti Saraste; Davide Capodanno; Emanuele Barbato; Christian Funck-Brentano; Eva Prescott; Robert F Storey; Christi Deaton; Thomas Cuisset; Stefan Agewall; Kenneth Dickstein; Thor Edvardsen; Javier Escaned; Bernard J Gersh; Pavel Svitil; Martine Gilard; David Hasdai; Robert Hatala; Felix Mahfoud; Josep Masip; Claudio Muneretto; Marco Valgimigli; Stephan Achenbach; Jeroen J Bax Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2020-01-14 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Piotr J Slomka; Julian Betancur; Joanna X Liang; Yuka Otaki; Lien-Hsin Hu; Tali Sharir; Sharmila Dorbala; Marcelo Di Carli; Mathews B Fish; Terrence D Ruddy; Timothy M Bateman; Andrew J Einstein; Philipp A Kaufmann; Edward J Miller; Albert J Sinusas; Peyman N Azadani; Heidi Gransar; Balaji K Tamarappoo; Damini Dey; Daniel S Berman; Guido Germano Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2018-06-19 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Ryo Nakazato; Daniel S Berman; Heidi Gransar; Mark Hyun; Romalisa Miranda-Peats; Faith C Kite; Sean W Hayes; Louise E J Thomson; John D Friedman; Alan Rozanski; Piotr J Slomka Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2012-10-12 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Richard Rios; Robert J H Miller; Lien Hsin Hu; Yuka Otaki; Ananya Singh; Marcio Diniz; Tali Sharir; Andrew J Einstein; Mathews B Fish; Terrence D Ruddy; Philipp A Kaufmann; Albert J Sinusas; Edward J Miller; Timothy M Bateman; Sharmila Dorbala; Marcelo DiCarli; Serge Van Kriekinge; Paul Kavanagh; Tejas Parekh; Joanna X Liang; Damini Dey; Daniel S Berman; Piotr Slomka Journal: Cardiovasc Res Date: 2022-07-20 Impact factor: 13.081