Literature DB >> 35381453

Handling missing values in machine learning to predict patient-specific risk of adverse cardiac events: Insights from REFINE SPECT registry.

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.   

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.
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical implementation; Machine learning; Missing values; Myocardial perfusion imaging; Prognosis

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35381453      PMCID: PMC9117456          DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.105449

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Biol Med        ISSN: 0010-4825            Impact factor:   6.698


  24 in total

1.  Automated quantification of myocardial perfusion SPECT using simplified normal limits.

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

2.  Multiple imputation by chained equations: what is it and how does it work?

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

3.  Universal definition of myocardial infarction.

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

Review 4.  Artificial Intelligence in Cardiovascular Imaging: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

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

5.  2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes.

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

Review 6.  Application and Translation of Artificial Intelligence to Cardiovascular Imaging in Nuclear Medicine and Noncontrast CT.

Authors:  Piotr J Slomka; Robert Jh Miller; Ivana Isgum; Damini Dey
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  2020-05-20       Impact factor: 4.446

7.  Rationale and design of the REgistry of Fast Myocardial Perfusion Imaging with NExt generation SPECT (REFINE SPECT).

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

8.  Missing data imputation using statistical and machine learning methods in a real breast cancer problem.

Authors:  José M Jerez; Ignacio Molina; Pedro J García-Laencina; Emilio Alba; Nuria Ribelles; Miguel Martín; Leonardo Franco
Journal:  Artif Intell Med       Date:  2010-07-16       Impact factor: 5.326

9.  Prognostic value of quantitative high-speed myocardial perfusion imaging.

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

10.  Determining a minimum set of variables for machine learning cardiovascular event prediction: results from REFINE SPECT registry.

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.