The XGBoost model predicted in-hospital bleeding after PCI with AUC 0.972, balanced accuracy 86.1%, sensitivity 76%, and specificity 96.2% in patients with diabetes and acute coronary syndrome.
Cohort (n=1,488)
No
Does an interpretable XGBoost machine learning model accurately predict in-hospital bleeding in patients with diabetes and ACS undergoing PCI?
An interpretable XGBoost machine learning model can accurately predict in-hospital bleeding risk in diabetic patients with ACS undergoing PCI, identifying low hemoglobin, multivessel disease, and lack of PPI use as key drivers.
Effect estimate: AUC 0.972 (95% CI: 0.954–0.990), balanced accuracy 0.861, sensitivity 0.76, specificity 0.962 (95% CI 95% CI 0.954–0.990 for AUC)
To develop and validate interpretable machine learning models for predicting in-hospital bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in high-risk patients with diabetes and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This retrospective cohort study included 1,488 patients with diabetes and ACS who underwent PCI between 2021 and 2024. We employed LASSO and Boruta algorithms for feature selection from a comprehensive set of clinical variables. Five ML models were developed using a 70/30 training-validation split. The optimal model was selected based on performance metrics, including balanced accuracy, and was interpreted using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). In-hospital bleeding occurred in 80 patients (5.4%). In the validation set, the XGBoost model was selected as the optimal model, achieving the highest balanced accuracy (0.861) with a sensitivity of 0.76 and specificity of 0.962. SHAP analysis revealed that low hemoglobin, multivessel disease, and the absence of proton pump inhibitor therapy were the most significant predictors of bleeding. An interpretable XGBoost model accurately predicts in-hospital bleeding risk in patients with diabetes and ACS undergoing PCI. By providing patient-specific explanations for its predictions, the model enhances personalized risk stratification and provides a valuable tool to guide clinical decision-making regarding antithrombotic therapy.
Lv et al. (Fri,) conducted a cohort in Patients with diabetes mellitus and acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (n=1,488). XGBoost machine learning model for predicting in-hospital bleeding risk vs. Other machine learning models (Decision Tree, Support Vector Machine, LightGBM, Naive Bayes Model) was evaluated on Clinically significant in-hospital bleeding defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding during index hospitalization (AUC 0.972 (95% CI: 0.954–0.990), balanced accuracy 0.861, sensitivity 0.76, specificity 0.962, 95% CI 95% CI 0.954–0.990 for AUC). The XGBoost model predicted in-hospital bleeding after PCI with AUC 0.972, balanced accuracy 86.1%, sensitivity 76%, and specificity 96.2% in patients with diabetes and acute coronary syndrome.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: