{"title":"Prediction and critical feature analysis for coronary artery calcification progression.","authors":"Ran Liu, Gaojian Yang, Wenyu Huang, Junyan Zhang, Yuting Lei, Rui Zhang, Zhongxiu Chen, Yong He, Hongmei Yan, Kaiyue Diao","doi":"10.1007/s11517-026-03647-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Coronary calcification is a prevalent pathology and strong cardiovascular indicator. However, its progression drivers remain poorly defined. With limited clinical samples, it is unclear if simple traditional machine learning can effectively predict progression, challenging risk assessment and individualized treatment. We assembled a serial CCTA dataset of 2,579 patients from West China Hospital. Using Random Forest, Gradient Boosting Decision Trees, XGBoost, and Logistic Regression with SHAP analysis, we identified key features of coronary artery calcification progression and built predictive models, then compared them with traditional clinical models. The Random Forest (RF) model achieved an AUC of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.78-0.84) vs. 0.64 (0.59-0.68) for the traditional model. Baseline CACS, plaque burden, and other CCTA features were key predictors, with critical thresholds determined. A coronary artery calcification progression prediction score (CACPPS) was derived to quantify personalized progression risk. The RF model also showed acceptable calibration (Brier score = 0.169; Hosmer-Lemeshow p = 0.415), favorable decision-curve net benefit, and an optimal CACPPS threshold of 0.566. In patients with suspected or confirmed CAD, a traditional yet interpretable machine learning model can predict CACS progression and generate CACPPS to support treatment decisions and dynamic individualized management, mitigating black-box concerns through indirect interpretability.</p>","PeriodicalId":49840,"journal":{"name":"Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing","volume":" ","pages":"3399-3411"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-026-03647-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Coronary calcification is a prevalent pathology and strong cardiovascular indicator. However, its progression drivers remain poorly defined. With limited clinical samples, it is unclear if simple traditional machine learning can effectively predict progression, challenging risk assessment and individualized treatment. We assembled a serial CCTA dataset of 2,579 patients from West China Hospital. Using Random Forest, Gradient Boosting Decision Trees, XGBoost, and Logistic Regression with SHAP analysis, we identified key features of coronary artery calcification progression and built predictive models, then compared them with traditional clinical models. The Random Forest (RF) model achieved an AUC of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.78-0.84) vs. 0.64 (0.59-0.68) for the traditional model. Baseline CACS, plaque burden, and other CCTA features were key predictors, with critical thresholds determined. A coronary artery calcification progression prediction score (CACPPS) was derived to quantify personalized progression risk. The RF model also showed acceptable calibration (Brier score = 0.169; Hosmer-Lemeshow p = 0.415), favorable decision-curve net benefit, and an optimal CACPPS threshold of 0.566. In patients with suspected or confirmed CAD, a traditional yet interpretable machine learning model can predict CACS progression and generate CACPPS to support treatment decisions and dynamic individualized management, mitigating black-box concerns through indirect interpretability.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1963, Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing (MBEC) continues to serve the biomedical engineering community, covering the entire spectrum of biomedical and clinical engineering. The journal presents exciting and vital experimental and theoretical developments in biomedical science and technology, and reports on advances in computer-based methodologies in these multidisciplinary subjects. The journal also incorporates new and evolving technologies including cellular engineering and molecular imaging.
MBEC publishes original research articles as well as reviews and technical notes. Its Rapid Communications category focuses on material of immediate value to the readership, while the Controversies section provides a forum to exchange views on selected issues, stimulating a vigorous and informed debate in this exciting and high profile field.
MBEC is an official journal of the International Federation of Medical and Biological Engineering (IFMBE).