使用甲基胆碱挑战试验诊断哮喘的新型人工智能技术。

IF 4.1 2区 医学 Q2 ALLERGY
Noeul Kang, KyungHyun Lee, Sangwon Byun, Jin-Young Lee, Dong-Chull Choi, Byung-Jae Lee
{"title":"使用甲基胆碱挑战试验诊断哮喘的新型人工智能技术。","authors":"Noeul Kang, KyungHyun Lee, Sangwon Byun, Jin-Young Lee, Dong-Chull Choi, Byung-Jae Lee","doi":"10.4168/aair.2024.16.1.42","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The methacholine challenge test (MCT) has high sensitivity but relatively low specificity for asthma diagnosis. This study aimed to develop and validate machine learning (ML) models to improve the diagnostic performance of MCT for asthma.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from 1,501 patients with asthma symptoms who underwent MCT between 2015 and 2020 were analyzed. The patients were grouped as either the training (80%, n = 1,265) and test sets (20%, n = 236) depending on the time of referral. The conventional model (provocative concentration that causes a 20% decrease in forced expiratory volume in one second [FEV<sub>1</sub>]; PC<sub>20</sub> ≤ 16 mg/mL) was compared with the prediction models derived from five ML methods: logistic regression, support vector machine, random forest, extreme gradient boosting, and artificial neural network. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUROC) and area under the precision-recall curves (AUPRC) of each model were compared. The prediction models were further analyzed using different input combinations of FEV<sub>1</sub>, forced vital capacity (FVC), and forced expiratory flow at 25%-75% of forced vital capacity (FEF<sub>25%-75%</sub>) values obtained during MCT.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 545 patients (36.3%) were diagnosed with asthma. The AUROC of the conventional model was 0.856 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.852-0.861), and the AUPRC was 0.759 (95% CI, 0.751-0.766). All the five ML prediction models had higher AUROC and AUPRC values than those of the conventional model, and random forest showed both highest AUROC (0.950; 95% CI, 0.948-0.952) and AUROC (0.909; 95% CI, 0.905-0.914) when FEV<sub>1</sub>, FVC, and FEF<sub>25%-75%</sub> were included as inputs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Artificial intelligence-based models showed excellent performance in asthma prediction compared to using PC<sub>20</sub> ≤ 16 mg/mL. The novel technology could be used to enhance the clinical diagnosis of asthma.</p>","PeriodicalId":7547,"journal":{"name":"Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research","volume":"16 1","pages":"42-54"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10823143/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Novel Artificial Intelligence-Based Technology to Diagnose Asthma Using Methacholine Challenge Tests.\",\"authors\":\"Noeul Kang, KyungHyun Lee, Sangwon Byun, Jin-Young Lee, Dong-Chull Choi, Byung-Jae Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.4168/aair.2024.16.1.42\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The methacholine challenge test (MCT) has high sensitivity but relatively low specificity for asthma diagnosis. This study aimed to develop and validate machine learning (ML) models to improve the diagnostic performance of MCT for asthma.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from 1,501 patients with asthma symptoms who underwent MCT between 2015 and 2020 were analyzed. The patients were grouped as either the training (80%, n = 1,265) and test sets (20%, n = 236) depending on the time of referral. The conventional model (provocative concentration that causes a 20% decrease in forced expiratory volume in one second [FEV<sub>1</sub>]; PC<sub>20</sub> ≤ 16 mg/mL) was compared with the prediction models derived from five ML methods: logistic regression, support vector machine, random forest, extreme gradient boosting, and artificial neural network. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUROC) and area under the precision-recall curves (AUPRC) of each model were compared. The prediction models were further analyzed using different input combinations of FEV<sub>1</sub>, forced vital capacity (FVC), and forced expiratory flow at 25%-75% of forced vital capacity (FEF<sub>25%-75%</sub>) values obtained during MCT.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 545 patients (36.3%) were diagnosed with asthma. The AUROC of the conventional model was 0.856 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.852-0.861), and the AUPRC was 0.759 (95% CI, 0.751-0.766). All the five ML prediction models had higher AUROC and AUPRC values than those of the conventional model, and random forest showed both highest AUROC (0.950; 95% CI, 0.948-0.952) and AUROC (0.909; 95% CI, 0.905-0.914) when FEV<sub>1</sub>, FVC, and FEF<sub>25%-75%</sub> were included as inputs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Artificial intelligence-based models showed excellent performance in asthma prediction compared to using PC<sub>20</sub> ≤ 16 mg/mL. The novel technology could be used to enhance the clinical diagnosis of asthma.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7547,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"42-54\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10823143/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4168/aair.2024.16.1.42\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ALLERGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4168/aair.2024.16.1.42","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:甲基胆碱挑战试验(MCT)对哮喘诊断的敏感性较高,但特异性相对较低。本研究旨在开发和验证机器学习(ML)模型,以提高 MCT 对哮喘的诊断性能:分析了2015年至2020年间接受MCT检查的1501名哮喘症状患者的数据。根据转诊时间,患者被分为训练集(80%,n = 1,265)和测试集(20%,n = 236)。将传统模型(导致一秒用力呼气容积 [FEV1] 下降 20% 的诱发浓度;PC20 ≤ 16 mg/mL)与五种 ML 方法(逻辑回归、支持向量机、随机森林、极端梯度提升和人工神经网络)得出的预测模型进行了比较。比较了每个模型的接收操作者特征曲线下面积(AUROC)和精确度-召回曲线下面积(AUPRC)。使用在 MCT 期间获得的 FEV1、强迫生命容量(FVC)和强迫生命容量 25%-75% 时的强迫呼气流量(FEF25%-75%)值的不同输入组合对预测模型进行了进一步分析:共有 545 名患者(36.3%)被诊断为哮喘。传统模型的 AUROC 为 0.856(95% 置信区间 [CI],0.852-0.861),AUPRC 为 0.759(95% 置信区间 [CI],0.751-0.766)。当输入 FEV1、FVC 和 FEF25%-75% 时,随机森林的 AUROC(0.950;95% CI,0.948-0.952)和 AUROC(0.909;95% CI,0.905-0.914)均为最高:与使用 PC20 ≤ 16 mg/mL 相比,基于人工智能的模型在哮喘预测方面表现出色。这项新技术可用于加强哮喘的临床诊断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Novel Artificial Intelligence-Based Technology to Diagnose Asthma Using Methacholine Challenge Tests.

Purpose: The methacholine challenge test (MCT) has high sensitivity but relatively low specificity for asthma diagnosis. This study aimed to develop and validate machine learning (ML) models to improve the diagnostic performance of MCT for asthma.

Methods: Data from 1,501 patients with asthma symptoms who underwent MCT between 2015 and 2020 were analyzed. The patients were grouped as either the training (80%, n = 1,265) and test sets (20%, n = 236) depending on the time of referral. The conventional model (provocative concentration that causes a 20% decrease in forced expiratory volume in one second [FEV1]; PC20 ≤ 16 mg/mL) was compared with the prediction models derived from five ML methods: logistic regression, support vector machine, random forest, extreme gradient boosting, and artificial neural network. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curves (AUROC) and area under the precision-recall curves (AUPRC) of each model were compared. The prediction models were further analyzed using different input combinations of FEV1, forced vital capacity (FVC), and forced expiratory flow at 25%-75% of forced vital capacity (FEF25%-75%) values obtained during MCT.

Results: In total, 545 patients (36.3%) were diagnosed with asthma. The AUROC of the conventional model was 0.856 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.852-0.861), and the AUPRC was 0.759 (95% CI, 0.751-0.766). All the five ML prediction models had higher AUROC and AUPRC values than those of the conventional model, and random forest showed both highest AUROC (0.950; 95% CI, 0.948-0.952) and AUROC (0.909; 95% CI, 0.905-0.914) when FEV1, FVC, and FEF25%-75% were included as inputs.

Conclusions: Artificial intelligence-based models showed excellent performance in asthma prediction compared to using PC20 ≤ 16 mg/mL. The novel technology could be used to enhance the clinical diagnosis of asthma.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
6.80%
发文量
53
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal features cutting-edge original research, brief communications, and state-of-the-art reviews in the specialties of allergy, asthma, and immunology, including clinical and experimental studies and instructive case reports. Contemporary reviews summarize information on topics for researchers and physicians in the fields of allergy and immunology. As of January 2017, AAIR do not accept case reports. However, if it is a clinically important case, authors can submit it in the form of letter to the Editor. Editorials and letters to the Editor explore controversial issues and encourage further discussion among physicians dealing with allergy, immunology, pediatric respirology, and related medical fields. AAIR also features topics in practice and management and recent advances in equipment and techniques for clinicians concerned with clinical manifestations of allergies and pediatric respiratory diseases.
×
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