Key result
Machine learning links worst HFpEF outcomes to phenogroups featuring hypertension, AF, CKD, and severe symptoms.
Why the study?
Machine learning techniques have examined clinically meaningful subtypes of HFpEF, but studies appear to have produced discordant results.
Do machine learning-derived phenogroups identify HFpEF patients at high risk of adverse outcomes?
Systematic Review
Do machine learning-derived phenogroups identify HFpEF patients at high risk of adverse outcomes?
Machine learning-derived phenogroups based on clinical factors like hypertension, atrial fibrillation, CKD, and symptom severity can identify HFpEF patients at high risk for adverse outcomes.
The ability to distinguish clinically meaningful subtypes of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has recently been examined by machine learning techniques but studies appear to have produced discordant results. The objective of this study is to synthesize the types of HFpEF by examining their features and relating them to phenotypes with adverse prognosis. A systematic search was conducted using the search terms "Diastolic Heart Failure" OR "heart failure with preserved ejection fraction" OR "heart failure with normal ejection fraction" OR "HFpEF" AND "machine learning" OR "artificial intelligence" OR 'computational biology'. Ten studies were identified and they varied in their prevalence of ten clinical variables: age, sex, body mass index (BMI) or obesity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or symptom severity (NYHA class or BNP). The clinical findings associated with the different phenotypes in > 85 % of studies were age, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease and worse symptoms severity; an adverse outcome was in 65 % to 85 % of studies identified diabetes mellitus and female sex and in less than 65 % of studies was body mass index or obesity, and coronary artery disease. COPD was a relevant factor in only 33 % of studies. Adverse clinical outcome - death or admission to hospital (for heart failure) defined phenogroups with the worst outcome. Combining the 4 studies that calculated the MAGGIC score showed a significant (p<0.05) linear relationship between MAGGIC score and outcome, using the one-year event rate. A new score based on strength of the evidence of the HFpEF studies analyzed here, using 9 variables (eliminating COPD), showed a significant (p<0.009) linear relationship with one-year event rate. Three studies examined biomarkers in detail and the ones most prominently related to outcome or consistently found in the studies were GDF15, FABP4, FGF23, sST2, renin and TNF. The dominant factors that identified phenotypes of HFpEF with adverse outcome were hypertension, atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease and worse symptoms severity. A new simplified score, based on clinical factors, was proposed to assess prognosis in HFpEF. Several biomarkers were consistently elevated in phenogroups with adverse outcomes and may indicate the underlying mechanism or pathophysiology specific for phenotypes with an adverse prognosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Simon W. Rabkin (2021) conducted a systematic review in Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Machine learning phenotyping was evaluated on Adverse clinical outcome (death or admission to hospital for heart failure). Machine learning identified distinct HFpEF phenogroups, with the worst adverse outcomes consistently associated with hypertension, atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease, and worse symptom severity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: