随机生存森林机器学习用于预测测量脂蛋白(a)水平患者的心血管事件:一项模型开发研究。

IF 6 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Jay B Lusk, Emily C O'Brien, Bradley G Hammill, Fan Li, Brian Mac Grory, Manesh R Patel, Neha J Pagidipati, Nishant P Shah
{"title":"随机生存森林机器学习用于预测测量脂蛋白(a)水平患者的心血管事件:一项模型开发研究。","authors":"Jay B Lusk, Emily C O'Brien, Bradley G Hammill, Fan Li, Brian Mac Grory, Manesh R Patel, Neha J Pagidipati, Nishant P Shah","doi":"10.1161/CIRCGEN.124.004629","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Established risk models may not be applicable to patients at higher cardiovascular risk with a measured Lp(a) (lipoprotein[a]) level, a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a model development study. The data source was the Nashville Biosciences Lp(a) data set, which includes clinical data from the Vanderbilt University Health System. We included patients with an Lp(a) measured between 1989 and 2022 and who had at least 1 year of electronic health record data before measurement of an Lp(a) level. The end point of interest was time to first myocardial infarction, stroke/TIA, or coronary revascularization. A random survival forest model was derived and compared with a Cox proportional hazards model derived from traditional cardiovascular risk factors (ie, the variables used to estimate the Pooled Cohort Equations for the primary prevention population and the variables used to estimate the Second Manifestations of Arterial Disease and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Secondary Prevention scores for the secondary prevention population). Model discrimination was evaluated using Harrell's C-index.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 4369 patients were included in the study (49.5% were female, mean age was 51 [SD 18] years, and mean Lp(a) level was 33.6 [38.6] mg/dL, of whom 23.7% had a prior cardiovascular event). The random survival forest model outperformed the traditional risk factor models in the test set (c-index, 0.82 [random forest model] versus 0.69 [primary prevention model] versus 0.80 [secondary prevention model]). These results were similar when restricted to a primary prevention population and under various strategies to handle competing risk. A Cox proportional hazard model based on the top 25 variables from the random forest model had a c-index of 0.80.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A random survival forest model outperformed a model using traditional risk factors for predicting cardiovascular events in patients with a measured Lp(a) level.</p>","PeriodicalId":10326,"journal":{"name":"Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"e004629"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Random Survival Forest Machine Learning for the Prediction of Cardiovascular Events Among Patients With a Measured Lipoprotein(a) Level: A Model Development Study.\",\"authors\":\"Jay B Lusk, Emily C O'Brien, Bradley G Hammill, Fan Li, Brian Mac Grory, Manesh R Patel, Neha J Pagidipati, Nishant P Shah\",\"doi\":\"10.1161/CIRCGEN.124.004629\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Established risk models may not be applicable to patients at higher cardiovascular risk with a measured Lp(a) (lipoprotein[a]) level, a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a model development study. The data source was the Nashville Biosciences Lp(a) data set, which includes clinical data from the Vanderbilt University Health System. We included patients with an Lp(a) measured between 1989 and 2022 and who had at least 1 year of electronic health record data before measurement of an Lp(a) level. The end point of interest was time to first myocardial infarction, stroke/TIA, or coronary revascularization. A random survival forest model was derived and compared with a Cox proportional hazards model derived from traditional cardiovascular risk factors (ie, the variables used to estimate the Pooled Cohort Equations for the primary prevention population and the variables used to estimate the Second Manifestations of Arterial Disease and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Secondary Prevention scores for the secondary prevention population). Model discrimination was evaluated using Harrell's C-index.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 4369 patients were included in the study (49.5% were female, mean age was 51 [SD 18] years, and mean Lp(a) level was 33.6 [38.6] mg/dL, of whom 23.7% had a prior cardiovascular event). The random survival forest model outperformed the traditional risk factor models in the test set (c-index, 0.82 [random forest model] versus 0.69 [primary prevention model] versus 0.80 [secondary prevention model]). These results were similar when restricted to a primary prevention population and under various strategies to handle competing risk. A Cox proportional hazard model based on the top 25 variables from the random forest model had a c-index of 0.80.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A random survival forest model outperformed a model using traditional risk factors for predicting cardiovascular events in patients with a measured Lp(a) level.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e004629\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCGEN.124.004629\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCGEN.124.004629","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:已建立的风险模型可能不适用于测量脂蛋白[a]水平的心血管风险较高的患者,脂蛋白[a]水平是动脉粥样硬化性心血管疾病的因果危险因素。方法:采用模型开发法。数据来源是纳什维尔生物科学有限公司(a)的数据集,其中包括范德比尔特大学卫生系统的临床数据。我们纳入了1989年至2022年间测量Lp(a)的患者,并且在测量Lp(a)水平之前至少有1年的电子健康记录数据。研究的终点是首次心肌梗死、卒中/TIA或冠状动脉血运重建术的时间。导出随机生存森林模型,并与传统心血管危险因素(即用于估计一级预防人群Pooled Cohort equation的变量和用于估计二级预防人群动脉疾病第二表现和心肌梗死溶栓风险评分的变量)导出的Cox比例风险模型进行比较。采用Harrell c指数评价模型的判别性。结果:共纳入4369例患者(49.5%为女性,平均年龄51 [SD, 18]岁,平均Lp(A)水平为33.6 [38.6]mg/dL,其中23.7%既往有心血管事件)。随机生存森林模型在测试集中优于传统的风险因素模型(c-index, 0.82[随机森林]vs 0.69[一级预防]vs 0.80[二级预防])。当仅限于初级预防人群并采用各种策略处理竞争风险时,这些结果相似。基于随机森林模型前25个变量的Cox比例风险模型的c指数为0.80。结论:随机生存森林模型在预测测量Lp(A)水平患者心血管事件方面优于使用传统危险因素的模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Random Survival Forest Machine Learning for the Prediction of Cardiovascular Events Among Patients With a Measured Lipoprotein(a) Level: A Model Development Study.

Background: Established risk models may not be applicable to patients at higher cardiovascular risk with a measured Lp(a) (lipoprotein[a]) level, a causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Methods: This was a model development study. The data source was the Nashville Biosciences Lp(a) data set, which includes clinical data from the Vanderbilt University Health System. We included patients with an Lp(a) measured between 1989 and 2022 and who had at least 1 year of electronic health record data before measurement of an Lp(a) level. The end point of interest was time to first myocardial infarction, stroke/TIA, or coronary revascularization. A random survival forest model was derived and compared with a Cox proportional hazards model derived from traditional cardiovascular risk factors (ie, the variables used to estimate the Pooled Cohort Equations for the primary prevention population and the variables used to estimate the Second Manifestations of Arterial Disease and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Secondary Prevention scores for the secondary prevention population). Model discrimination was evaluated using Harrell's C-index.

Results: A total of 4369 patients were included in the study (49.5% were female, mean age was 51 [SD 18] years, and mean Lp(a) level was 33.6 [38.6] mg/dL, of whom 23.7% had a prior cardiovascular event). The random survival forest model outperformed the traditional risk factor models in the test set (c-index, 0.82 [random forest model] versus 0.69 [primary prevention model] versus 0.80 [secondary prevention model]). These results were similar when restricted to a primary prevention population and under various strategies to handle competing risk. A Cox proportional hazard model based on the top 25 variables from the random forest model had a c-index of 0.80.

Conclusions: A random survival forest model outperformed a model using traditional risk factors for predicting cardiovascular events in patients with a measured Lp(a) level.

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
Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine
Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Genetics
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
144
期刊介绍: Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine is a distinguished journal dedicated to advancing the frontiers of cardiovascular genomics and precision medicine. It publishes a diverse array of original research articles that delve into the genetic and molecular underpinnings of cardiovascular diseases. The journal's scope is broad, encompassing studies from human subjects to laboratory models, and from in vitro experiments to computational simulations. Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine is committed to publishing studies that have direct relevance to human cardiovascular biology and disease, with the ultimate goal of improving patient care and outcomes. The journal serves as a platform for researchers to share their groundbreaking work, fostering collaboration and innovation in the field of cardiovascular genomics and precision medicine.
×
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