Key result
HbA1c- and CRP-creatinine-dominant phenotypes are linked to ~145% higher 1-year MACE in ACS.
Why the study?
Does machine-learning derived cardio-kidney-metabolic phenotyping identify distinct residual cardiovascular risk profiles in statin-treated ACS patients?
Cohort (n=20,070)
Yes
Does machine-learning derived cardio-kidney-metabolic phenotyping identify distinct residual cardiovascular risk profiles in statin-treated ACS patients?
Hazard Ratio: 2.45 (95% CI 1.64–3.66)
p-value: p=<0.001
Machine learning-derived cardio-kidney-metabolic phenotypes identify distinct residual cardiovascular risk profiles in statin-treated ACS patients, highlighting the need for targeted secondary prevention.
Background Residual cardiovascular risk reflects a complex interplay of lipid, low-grade inflammatory, and cardio-kidney-metabolic (CKM) pathways. In patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS), this risk remains substantial despite intensive low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering therapy.1,2 A more holistic understanding of ACS patient phenotypes is required to allow for more targeted interventions.3,4 Purpose To identify ACS phenotypes by machine-learning (ML) and determine their individual contributions to residual cardiovascular risk. Methods We analysed 4,787 Swiss statin-treated acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients from the Special Programme University Medicine Acute Coronary Syndrome (SPUM-ACS) study and 15,283 French statin-treated ACS patients from the obseRvatoire des Infarctus de Côte-d’Or (RICO) study. By using the Davies–Bouldin index and silhouette coefficient, unsupervised ML identified four patient clusters (k = 4) across lipid, inflammatory, and CKM domains. One-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were compared across phenotypes using Kaplan–Meier and multivariable Cox analyses. Results In SPUM-ACS, four patient clusters were identified by unsupervised ML, namely HDL-, LDL-, HbA1c-, and CRP–creatinine–dominant patient phenotypes (Fig. 1A). In RICO, similar clusters were identified (Fig. 1B). Risk of 1-year MACE differed significantly across clusters (log-rank p < 0.001) in both Swiss and French patients (Fig. 1C-D), manifested as a 2.45- (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.45, 95% CI 1.64–3.66) and 2.40-fold (aHR, 2.40, 95% CI 1.60–3.59) higher MACE risk for HbA1c- and CRP-creatinine-dominant phenotypes, respectively, while LDL- (aHR, 1.07, 95% CI 0.68–1.69) and HDL-dominant (reference) phenotypes showing the best outcomes among statin-treated patients (Fig. 1E-F). Expectedly, the proportion of patients exceeding guideline-recommended risk thresholds differed significantly across clusters, irrespectively whether Swiss or French patients were analyzed (Fig. 2A-B). Conclusions ML-derived unsupervised clustering identifies reproducible CKM phenotypes with distinct risk profiles, providing a foundation for phenotype-guided secondary prevention strategies in the contemporary era.For image description, please refer to the figure legend and surrounding text. For image description, please refer to the figure legend and surrounding text.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Acute coronary syndromes (n=20,070). HbA1c- and CRP-creatinine-dominant phenotypes vs. HDL-dominant phenotype was evaluated on 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (HR 2.45, 95% CI 1.64-3.66, p=<0.001). HbA1c- and CRP-creatinine-dominant phenotypes were associated with a 2.45- (95% CI 1.64-3.66) and 2.40-fold higher risk of 1-year MACE compared to HDL-dominant phenotypes in statin-treated ACS.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: