Hironori Ishiguchi, Yang Chen, Bi Huang, Ying Gue, Elon Correa, Shunichi Homma, John L P Thompson, Min Qian, Gregory Y H Lip, Azmil H Abdul-Rahim
{"title":"机器学习治疗射血分数降低但无心房颤动的心力衰竭患者的中风:WARCEF 试验的事后分析。","authors":"Hironori Ishiguchi, Yang Chen, Bi Huang, Ying Gue, Elon Correa, Shunichi Homma, John L P Thompson, Min Qian, Gregory Y H Lip, Azmil H Abdul-Rahim","doi":"10.1111/eci.14360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The prediction of ischaemic stroke in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but without atrial fibrillation (AF) remains challenging. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of machine learning (ML) in identifying the development of ischaemic stroke in this population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a post-hoc analysis of the WARCEF trial, only including patients without a history of AF. We evaluated the performance of 9 ML models for identifying incident stroke using metrics including area under the curve (AUC) and decision curve analysis. The importance of each feature used in the model was ranked by SAPley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 2213 patients with HFrEF but without AF (mean age 58 ± 11 years; 80% male). Of these, 74 (3.3%) had an ischaemic stroke in sinus rhythm during a mean follow-up of 3.3 ± 1.8 years. Out of the 29 patient-demographics variables, 12 were selected for the ML training. Almost all ML models demonstrated high AUC values, outperforming the CHA<sub>2</sub>DS<sub>2</sub>-VASc score (AUC: 0.643, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.512-0.767). The Support Vector Machine (SVM) and XGBoost models achieved the highest AUCs, with 0.874 (95% CI: 0.769-0.959) and 0.873 (95% CI: 0.783-0.953), respectively. The SVM and LightGBM consistently provided significant net clinical benefits. Key features consistently identified across these models were creatinine clearance (CrCl), blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and warfarin use.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Machine-learning models can be useful in identifying incident ischaemic strokes in patients with HFrEF but without AF. CrCl, BUN and warfarin use were the key features.</p>","PeriodicalId":12013,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Clinical Investigation","volume":" ","pages":"e14360"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Machine learning for stroke in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction but without atrial fibrillation: A post-hoc analysis of the WARCEF trial.\",\"authors\":\"Hironori Ishiguchi, Yang Chen, Bi Huang, Ying Gue, Elon Correa, Shunichi Homma, John L P Thompson, Min Qian, Gregory Y H Lip, Azmil H Abdul-Rahim\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/eci.14360\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The prediction of ischaemic stroke in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but without atrial fibrillation (AF) remains challenging. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of machine learning (ML) in identifying the development of ischaemic stroke in this population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a post-hoc analysis of the WARCEF trial, only including patients without a history of AF. We evaluated the performance of 9 ML models for identifying incident stroke using metrics including area under the curve (AUC) and decision curve analysis. The importance of each feature used in the model was ranked by SAPley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 2213 patients with HFrEF but without AF (mean age 58 ± 11 years; 80% male). Of these, 74 (3.3%) had an ischaemic stroke in sinus rhythm during a mean follow-up of 3.3 ± 1.8 years. Out of the 29 patient-demographics variables, 12 were selected for the ML training. Almost all ML models demonstrated high AUC values, outperforming the CHA<sub>2</sub>DS<sub>2</sub>-VASc score (AUC: 0.643, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.512-0.767). The Support Vector Machine (SVM) and XGBoost models achieved the highest AUCs, with 0.874 (95% CI: 0.769-0.959) and 0.873 (95% CI: 0.783-0.953), respectively. The SVM and LightGBM consistently provided significant net clinical benefits. Key features consistently identified across these models were creatinine clearance (CrCl), blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and warfarin use.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Machine-learning models can be useful in identifying incident ischaemic strokes in patients with HFrEF but without AF. CrCl, BUN and warfarin use were the key features.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12013,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Clinical Investigation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e14360\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Clinical Investigation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.14360\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Clinical Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.14360","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Machine learning for stroke in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction but without atrial fibrillation: A post-hoc analysis of the WARCEF trial.
Background: The prediction of ischaemic stroke in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but without atrial fibrillation (AF) remains challenging. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of machine learning (ML) in identifying the development of ischaemic stroke in this population.
Methods: We performed a post-hoc analysis of the WARCEF trial, only including patients without a history of AF. We evaluated the performance of 9 ML models for identifying incident stroke using metrics including area under the curve (AUC) and decision curve analysis. The importance of each feature used in the model was ranked by SAPley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values.
Results: We included 2213 patients with HFrEF but without AF (mean age 58 ± 11 years; 80% male). Of these, 74 (3.3%) had an ischaemic stroke in sinus rhythm during a mean follow-up of 3.3 ± 1.8 years. Out of the 29 patient-demographics variables, 12 were selected for the ML training. Almost all ML models demonstrated high AUC values, outperforming the CHA2DS2-VASc score (AUC: 0.643, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.512-0.767). The Support Vector Machine (SVM) and XGBoost models achieved the highest AUCs, with 0.874 (95% CI: 0.769-0.959) and 0.873 (95% CI: 0.783-0.953), respectively. The SVM and LightGBM consistently provided significant net clinical benefits. Key features consistently identified across these models were creatinine clearance (CrCl), blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and warfarin use.
Conclusions: Machine-learning models can be useful in identifying incident ischaemic strokes in patients with HFrEF but without AF. CrCl, BUN and warfarin use were the key features.
期刊介绍:
EJCI considers any original contribution from the most sophisticated basic molecular sciences to applied clinical and translational research and evidence-based medicine across a broad range of subspecialties. The EJCI publishes reports of high-quality research that pertain to the genetic, molecular, cellular, or physiological basis of human biology and disease, as well as research that addresses prevalence, diagnosis, course, treatment, and prevention of disease. We are primarily interested in studies directly pertinent to humans, but submission of robust in vitro and animal work is also encouraged. Interdisciplinary work and research using innovative methods and combinations of laboratory, clinical, and epidemiological methodologies and techniques is of great interest to the journal. Several categories of manuscripts (for detailed description see below) are considered: editorials, original articles (also including randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses), reviews (narrative reviews), opinion articles (including debates, perspectives and commentaries); and letters to the Editor.