Key result
A machine learning-based tool predicted 10-year disease progression in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with lower predictive error than medical experts for 5 of 6 clinical characteristics.
Why the study?
Current methods model sudden cardiac death risk in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, but methods for modeling a patient's clinical status up to 10 years ahead were lacking.
Does a machine learning-based tool improve the prediction of disease progression in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy compared to medical experts?
Does a machine learning-based tool improve the prediction of disease progression in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy compared to medical experts?
Effect estimate: R2 improved from 0.3 to 0.6
A novel machine learning tool outperformed medical experts in predicting 10-year adverse cardiac remodeling and clinical status in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.
May inform SCD risk modeling in HCM; leaves open need for validation before any clinical adoption.
BACKGROUND Cardiovascular disorders in general are responsible for 30% of deaths worldwide. Among them, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a genetic cardiac disease that is present in about 1 of 500 young adults and can cause sudden cardiac death (SCD). OBJECTIVE Although the current state-of-the-art methods model the risk of SCD for patients, to the best of our knowledge, no methods are available for modeling the patient's clinical status up to 10 years ahead. In this paper, we propose a novel machine learning (ML)-based tool for predicting disease progression for patients diagnosed with HCM in terms of adverse remodeling of the heart during a 10-year period. METHODS The method consisted of 6 predictive regression models that independently predict future values of 6 clinical characteristics: left atrial size, left atrial volume, left ventricular ejection fraction, New York Heart Association functional classification, left ventricular internal diastolic diameter, and left ventricular internal systolic diameter. We supplemented each prediction with the explanation that is generated using the Shapley additive explanation method. RESULTS The final experiments showed that predictive error is lower on 5 of the 6 constructed models in comparison to experts (on average, by 0.34) or a consortium of experts (on average, by 0.22). The experiments revealed that semisupervised learning and the artificial data from virtual patients help improve predictive accuracies. The best-performing random forest model improved R² from 0.3 to 0.6. CONCLUSIONS By engaging medical experts to provide interpretation and validation of the results, we determined the models' favorable performance compared to the performance of experts for 5 of 6 targets.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pičulin et al. (2021) studied Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Machine learning-based predictive regression models vs. Medical experts was evaluated on Predictive error for 6 clinical characteristics of adverse heart remodeling (R2 improved from 0.3 to 0.6). A machine learning-based tool predicted 10-year disease progression in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with lower predictive error than medical experts for 5 of 6 clinical characteristics.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: