Machine-learning models to predict serious adverse hospitalization events after ACS.

IF 3.6 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Hui Gao, Xuanze Liu, Dongyuan Sun, Xue Liu, Yasong Wang, Zhiqiang Zhang, Yaling Han, Xiaozeng Wang
{"title":"Machine-learning models to predict serious adverse hospitalization events after ACS.","authors":"Hui Gao, Xuanze Liu, Dongyuan Sun, Xue Liu, Yasong Wang, Zhiqiang Zhang, Yaling Han, Xiaozeng Wang","doi":"10.1093/postmj/qgae180","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We developed a risk stratification model to predict serious adverse hospitalization events (mortality, cardiac shock, cardiac arrest) (SAHE) after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) based on machine-learning models and logistic regression model.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cohort study is based on the CCC-ACS project. The primary efficacy outcomes were SAHE. Clinical prediction models were established based on five machine-learning (XGBoost, RF, MLP, KNN, and stacking model) and logistic regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 112 363 patients in the study, age (55-65 years: OR: 1.392; 95%CI: 1.212-1.600; 65-75 years: OR: 1.878; 95%CI: 1.647-2.144; ≥75 year: OR: 2.976; 95%CI: 2.615-3.393), history of diabetes mellitus (OR: 1.188; 95%CI: 1.083-1.302), history of renal failure (OR: 1.645; 95%CI: 1.311-2.044), heart rate (60-100 beats/min: OR: 0.468; 95%CI: 0.409-0.536; ≥100 beats/min: OR: 0.540; 95%CI: 0.454-0.643), shock index (0.4-0.8: OR: 1.796; 95%CI: 1.440-2.264; ≥0.8: OR: 5.883; 95%CI: 4.619-7.561), KILLIP (II: OR: 1.171; 95%CI: 1.048-1.306; III: OR: 1.696; 95%CI: 1.469-1.952; IV: OR: 7.811; 95%CI: 7.023-8.684), and cardiac arrest at admission (OR: 12.507; 95%CI: 10.757-14.530) were independent predictors of severe adverse hospitalization events for ACS patients. In several machine-learning models, RF (AUC: 0.817; 95%CI: 0.808-0.826) and XGBoost (AUC: 0.816; 95%CI: 0.807-0.825) also showed good discrimination in the training set, which ranked the first two positions. They also presented good accuracy and the best clinical benefits in the decision curve analysis. In addition, logistic regression was able to discriminate the SAHE (AUC: 0.816; 95%CI: 0.807-0.825) and performed the best prediction accuracy (0.822; 95%CI: 0.822-0.822) compared to several machine-learning models. Model calibration and decision curve analysis showed these prediction models have similar predictive performance. Based on these findings, we developed two CCC-ACS In-hospital Major Adverse Events Risk Scores and its online calculator. One is based on machine-learning model (https://ccc-acs-sae-3-xcnjsvoccusjwkfhfthh44.streamlit.app/), and another is based on logistic regression model (https://ccc-acs-sae-logistic-9te57ylnq3kazkeuyc7dub.streamlit.app/), offering a validated tool to predict survival for patients with ACS during hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Machine-learning-based approaches for identifying predictors of SAHE after an ACS were feasible and practical. Based on this, we developed two online risk prediction websites for clinicians' decision-making. The CCC-ACS-MSAE score showed accurate discriminative capabilities for predicting severe adverse hospitalization events and might help guide clinical decision-making. Key messages: Three research questions and three bullet points What is already known on this topic? Observational studies have identified risk factors for in-hospital death in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). However, the real-world results of a large sample in China still need to be further explored. What does this study add? Machine-learning-based approaches for identifying predictors of SAHE after an ACS were feasible and practical. Based on these findings, we developed two CCC-ACS In-hospital Major Adverse Events Risk Scores and its online calculator. One is based on machine-learning model (https://ccc-acs-sae-3-xcnjsvoccusjwkfhfthh44.streamlit.app/), and another is based on logistic regression model (https://ccc-acs-sae-logistic-9te57ylnq3kazkeuyc7dub.streamlit.app/), offering a validated tool to predict survival for patients with ACS during hospitalization. How this study might affect research, practice, or policy? Early identification of high-risk ACS patients will help reduce in-hospital deaths and improve the prognosis of ACS patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":20374,"journal":{"name":"Postgraduate Medical Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Postgraduate Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/postmj/qgae180","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: We developed a risk stratification model to predict serious adverse hospitalization events (mortality, cardiac shock, cardiac arrest) (SAHE) after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) based on machine-learning models and logistic regression model.

Methods: This cohort study is based on the CCC-ACS project. The primary efficacy outcomes were SAHE. Clinical prediction models were established based on five machine-learning (XGBoost, RF, MLP, KNN, and stacking model) and logistic regression models.

Results: Among the 112 363 patients in the study, age (55-65 years: OR: 1.392; 95%CI: 1.212-1.600; 65-75 years: OR: 1.878; 95%CI: 1.647-2.144; ≥75 year: OR: 2.976; 95%CI: 2.615-3.393), history of diabetes mellitus (OR: 1.188; 95%CI: 1.083-1.302), history of renal failure (OR: 1.645; 95%CI: 1.311-2.044), heart rate (60-100 beats/min: OR: 0.468; 95%CI: 0.409-0.536; ≥100 beats/min: OR: 0.540; 95%CI: 0.454-0.643), shock index (0.4-0.8: OR: 1.796; 95%CI: 1.440-2.264; ≥0.8: OR: 5.883; 95%CI: 4.619-7.561), KILLIP (II: OR: 1.171; 95%CI: 1.048-1.306; III: OR: 1.696; 95%CI: 1.469-1.952; IV: OR: 7.811; 95%CI: 7.023-8.684), and cardiac arrest at admission (OR: 12.507; 95%CI: 10.757-14.530) were independent predictors of severe adverse hospitalization events for ACS patients. In several machine-learning models, RF (AUC: 0.817; 95%CI: 0.808-0.826) and XGBoost (AUC: 0.816; 95%CI: 0.807-0.825) also showed good discrimination in the training set, which ranked the first two positions. They also presented good accuracy and the best clinical benefits in the decision curve analysis. In addition, logistic regression was able to discriminate the SAHE (AUC: 0.816; 95%CI: 0.807-0.825) and performed the best prediction accuracy (0.822; 95%CI: 0.822-0.822) compared to several machine-learning models. Model calibration and decision curve analysis showed these prediction models have similar predictive performance. Based on these findings, we developed two CCC-ACS In-hospital Major Adverse Events Risk Scores and its online calculator. One is based on machine-learning model (https://ccc-acs-sae-3-xcnjsvoccusjwkfhfthh44.streamlit.app/), and another is based on logistic regression model (https://ccc-acs-sae-logistic-9te57ylnq3kazkeuyc7dub.streamlit.app/), offering a validated tool to predict survival for patients with ACS during hospitalization.

Conclusions: Machine-learning-based approaches for identifying predictors of SAHE after an ACS were feasible and practical. Based on this, we developed two online risk prediction websites for clinicians' decision-making. The CCC-ACS-MSAE score showed accurate discriminative capabilities for predicting severe adverse hospitalization events and might help guide clinical decision-making. Key messages: Three research questions and three bullet points What is already known on this topic? Observational studies have identified risk factors for in-hospital death in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). However, the real-world results of a large sample in China still need to be further explored. What does this study add? Machine-learning-based approaches for identifying predictors of SAHE after an ACS were feasible and practical. Based on these findings, we developed two CCC-ACS In-hospital Major Adverse Events Risk Scores and its online calculator. One is based on machine-learning model (https://ccc-acs-sae-3-xcnjsvoccusjwkfhfthh44.streamlit.app/), and another is based on logistic regression model (https://ccc-acs-sae-logistic-9te57ylnq3kazkeuyc7dub.streamlit.app/), offering a validated tool to predict survival for patients with ACS during hospitalization. How this study might affect research, practice, or policy? Early identification of high-risk ACS patients will help reduce in-hospital deaths and improve the prognosis of ACS patients.

预测 ACS 后严重不良住院事件的机器学习模型。
目的:建立基于机器学习模型和logistic回归模型的危险分层模型,预测急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)后严重不良住院事件(死亡率、心源性休克、心脏骤停)(SAHE)。方法:本队列研究基于CCC-ACS项目。主要疗效指标为SAHE。基于5种机器学习(XGBoost、RF、MLP、KNN和堆叠模型)和logistic回归模型建立临床预测模型。结果:纳入研究的112363例患者中,年龄(55-65岁:OR: 1.392;95%置信区间:1.212—-1.600;65-75岁:OR: 1.878;95%置信区间:1.647—-2.144;≥75岁:OR: 2.976;95%CI: 2.615-3.393)、糖尿病史(OR: 1.188;95%CI: 1.083-1.302),肾功能衰竭史(OR: 1.645;95%CI: 1.311-2.044),心率(60-100次/分钟:OR: 0.468;95%置信区间:0.409—-0.536;≥100次/分:OR: 0.540;95%CI: 0.454-0.643),休克指数(0.4-0.8):OR: 1.796;95%置信区间:1.440—-2.264;≥0.8:或:5.883;95%ci: 4.619-7.561), killip (ii: or: 1.171;95%置信区间:1.048—-1.306;Iii:或:1.696;95%置信区间:1.469—-1.952;Iv:或:7.811;95%CI: 7.023-8.684)和入院时心脏骤停(OR: 12.507;95%CI: 10.757-14.530)是ACS患者严重不良住院事件的独立预测因子。在一些机器学习模型中,RF (AUC: 0.817;95%CI: 0.808-0.826)和XGBoost (AUC: 0.816;95%CI: 0.807-0.825)在训练集中也表现出良好的辨别能力,排在前两位。他们在决策曲线分析中也表现出良好的准确性和最佳的临床效益。此外,logistic回归能够区分SAHE (AUC: 0.816;95%CI: 0.807-0.825),预测准确率最高(0.822;95%CI: 0.822-0.822),与几个机器学习模型相比。模型标定和决策曲线分析表明,这些预测模型具有相似的预测性能。基于这些发现,我们开发了两个CCC-ACS院内主要不良事件风险评分及其在线计算器。一种是基于机器学习模型(https://ccc-acs-sae-3-xcnjsvoccusjwkfhfthh44.streamlit.app/),另一种是基于逻辑回归模型(https://ccc-acs-sae-logistic-9te57ylnq3kazkeuyc7dub.streamlit.app/),提供了一种有效的工具来预测ACS患者在住院期间的生存。结论:基于机器学习的方法识别ACS后SAHE的预测因素是可行和实用的。基于此,我们开发了两个在线风险预测网站,供临床医生决策使用。CCC-ACS-MSAE评分在预测严重不良住院事件方面具有准确的判别能力,可能有助于指导临床决策。关键信息:三个研究问题和三个要点关于这个主题我们已经知道了什么?观察性研究已经确定了急性冠脉综合征(ACS)患者院内死亡的危险因素。然而,中国大样本的现实结果仍需要进一步探索。这项研究补充了什么?基于机器学习的方法用于识别ACS后SAHE的预测因素是可行和实用的。基于这些发现,我们开发了两个CCC-ACS院内主要不良事件风险评分及其在线计算器。一种是基于机器学习模型(https://ccc-acs-sae-3-xcnjsvoccusjwkfhfthh44.streamlit.app/),另一种是基于逻辑回归模型(https://ccc-acs-sae-logistic-9te57ylnq3kazkeuyc7dub.streamlit.app/),提供了一种有效的工具来预测ACS患者在住院期间的生存。这项研究将如何影响研究、实践或政策?早期发现ACS高危患者有助于减少院内死亡,改善ACS患者预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Postgraduate Medical Journal
Postgraduate Medical Journal 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
2.00%
发文量
131
审稿时长
2.5 months
期刊介绍: Postgraduate Medical Journal is a peer reviewed journal published on behalf of the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine. The journal aims to support junior doctors and their teachers and contribute to the continuing professional development of all doctors by publishing papers on a wide range of topics relevant to the practicing clinician and teacher. Papers published in PMJ include those that focus on core competencies; that describe current practice and new developments in all branches of medicine; that describe relevance and impact of translational research on clinical practice; that provide background relevant to examinations; and papers on medical education and medical education research. PMJ supports CPD by providing the opportunity for doctors to publish many types of articles including original clinical research; reviews; quality improvement reports; editorials, and correspondence on clinical matters.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信