Why the study?
Pre-test probability models are key for diagnosing suspected obstructive CAD, but their accuracy remains controversial.
Does a machine learning model using clinically relevant biomarkers improve the prediction of stable obstructive CAD compared to established pre-test probability models in patients with suspected CAD?
Does a machine learning model using clinically relevant biomarkers improve the prediction of stable obstructive CAD compared to established pre-test probability models in patients with suspected CAD?
Machine learning models incorporating routine clinical and blood biomarkers provide higher accuracy for predicting stable obstructive CAD than traditional pre-test probability scores.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Should not yet change pretest pathways for suspected CAD; leaves open external validation of biomarker-ML models versus PTP scores.
Background: In patients with suspected obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), evaluation using a pre-test probability model is the key element for diagnosis; however, its accuracy is controversial. This study aimed to develop machine learning (ML) models using clinically relevant biomarkers to predict the presence of stable obstructive CAD and to compare ML models with an established pre-test probability of CAD models. Methods: Eight machine learning models for prediction of obstructive CAD were trained on a cohort of 1,312 patients [randomly split into the training (80%) and internal validation sets (20%)]. Twelve clinical and blood biomarker features assessed on admission were used to inform the models. We compared the best-performing ML model and established the pre-test probability of CAD (updated Diamond-Forrester and CAD consortium) models. Results: The CatBoost algorithm model showed the best performance (area under the receiver operating characteristics, AUROC, 0.796, and 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.740-0.853; Matthews correlation coefficient, MCC, 0.448) compared to the seven other algorithms. The CatBoost algorithm model improved risk prediction compared with the CAD consortium clinical model (AUROC 0.727; 95% CI 0.664-0.789; MCC 0.313). The accuracy of the ML model was 74.6%. Age, sex, hypertension, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T, hemoglobin A1c, triglyceride, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels contributed most to obstructive CAD prediction. Conclusion: The ML models using clinically relevant biomarkers provided high accuracy for stable obstructive CAD prediction. In real-world practice, employing such an approach could improve discrimination of patients with suspected obstructive CAD and help select appropriate non-invasive testing for ischemia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: