Cargando…

Evaluation of Quantitative Decision‐Making for Rhythm Management of Atrial Fibrillation Using Tabular Q‐Learning

BACKGROUND: Rhythm management is a complex decision for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Although clinical trials have identified subsets of patients who might benefit from a given rhythm‐management strategy, for individual patients it is not always clear which strategy is expected to have th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Barrett, Christopher D., Suzuki, Yuto, Hussein, Sundos, Garg, Lohit, Tumolo, Alexis, Sandhu, Amneet, West, John J., Zipse, Matthew, Aleong, Ryan, Varosy, Paul, Tzou, Wendy S., Banaei‐Kashani, Farnoush, Rosenberg, Michael A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10227221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37119087
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.028483
_version_ 1785050721792557056
author Barrett, Christopher D.
Suzuki, Yuto
Hussein, Sundos
Garg, Lohit
Tumolo, Alexis
Sandhu, Amneet
West, John J.
Zipse, Matthew
Aleong, Ryan
Varosy, Paul
Tzou, Wendy S.
Banaei‐Kashani, Farnoush
Rosenberg, Michael A.
author_facet Barrett, Christopher D.
Suzuki, Yuto
Hussein, Sundos
Garg, Lohit
Tumolo, Alexis
Sandhu, Amneet
West, John J.
Zipse, Matthew
Aleong, Ryan
Varosy, Paul
Tzou, Wendy S.
Banaei‐Kashani, Farnoush
Rosenberg, Michael A.
author_sort Barrett, Christopher D.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Rhythm management is a complex decision for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Although clinical trials have identified subsets of patients who might benefit from a given rhythm‐management strategy, for individual patients it is not always clear which strategy is expected to have the greatest mortality benefit or durability. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this investigation 52 547 patients with a new atrial fibrillation diagnosis between 2010 and 2020 were retrospectively identified. We applied a type of artificial intelligence called tabular Q‐learning to identify the optimal initial rhythm‐management strategy, based on a composite outcome of mortality, change in treatment, and sustainability of the given treatment, termed the reward function. We first applied an unsupervised learning algorithm using a variational autoencoder with K‐means clustering to cluster atrial fibrillation patients into 8 distinct phenotypes. We then fit a Q‐learning algorithm to predict the best outcome for each cluster. Although rate‐control strategy was most frequently selected by treating providers, the outcome was superior for rhythm‐control strategies across all clusters. Subjects in whom provider‐selected treatment matched the Q‐table recommendation had fewer total deaths (4 [8.5%] versus 473 [22.4%], odds ratio=0.32, P=0.02) and a greater reward (P=4.8×10(−6)). We then demonstrated application of dynamic learning by updating the Q‐table prospectively using batch gradient descent, in which the optimal strategy in some clusters changed from cardioversion to ablation. CONCLUSIONS: Tabular Q‐learning provides a dynamic and interpretable approach to apply artificial intelligence to clinical decision‐making for atrial fibrillation. Further work is needed to examine application of Q‐learning prospectively in clinical patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10227221
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102272212023-05-31 Evaluation of Quantitative Decision‐Making for Rhythm Management of Atrial Fibrillation Using Tabular Q‐Learning Barrett, Christopher D. Suzuki, Yuto Hussein, Sundos Garg, Lohit Tumolo, Alexis Sandhu, Amneet West, John J. Zipse, Matthew Aleong, Ryan Varosy, Paul Tzou, Wendy S. Banaei‐Kashani, Farnoush Rosenberg, Michael A. J Am Heart Assoc Original Research BACKGROUND: Rhythm management is a complex decision for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Although clinical trials have identified subsets of patients who might benefit from a given rhythm‐management strategy, for individual patients it is not always clear which strategy is expected to have the greatest mortality benefit or durability. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this investigation 52 547 patients with a new atrial fibrillation diagnosis between 2010 and 2020 were retrospectively identified. We applied a type of artificial intelligence called tabular Q‐learning to identify the optimal initial rhythm‐management strategy, based on a composite outcome of mortality, change in treatment, and sustainability of the given treatment, termed the reward function. We first applied an unsupervised learning algorithm using a variational autoencoder with K‐means clustering to cluster atrial fibrillation patients into 8 distinct phenotypes. We then fit a Q‐learning algorithm to predict the best outcome for each cluster. Although rate‐control strategy was most frequently selected by treating providers, the outcome was superior for rhythm‐control strategies across all clusters. Subjects in whom provider‐selected treatment matched the Q‐table recommendation had fewer total deaths (4 [8.5%] versus 473 [22.4%], odds ratio=0.32, P=0.02) and a greater reward (P=4.8×10(−6)). We then demonstrated application of dynamic learning by updating the Q‐table prospectively using batch gradient descent, in which the optimal strategy in some clusters changed from cardioversion to ablation. CONCLUSIONS: Tabular Q‐learning provides a dynamic and interpretable approach to apply artificial intelligence to clinical decision‐making for atrial fibrillation. Further work is needed to examine application of Q‐learning prospectively in clinical patients. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10227221/ /pubmed/37119087 http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.028483 Text en © 2023 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Research
Barrett, Christopher D.
Suzuki, Yuto
Hussein, Sundos
Garg, Lohit
Tumolo, Alexis
Sandhu, Amneet
West, John J.
Zipse, Matthew
Aleong, Ryan
Varosy, Paul
Tzou, Wendy S.
Banaei‐Kashani, Farnoush
Rosenberg, Michael A.
Evaluation of Quantitative Decision‐Making for Rhythm Management of Atrial Fibrillation Using Tabular Q‐Learning
title Evaluation of Quantitative Decision‐Making for Rhythm Management of Atrial Fibrillation Using Tabular Q‐Learning
title_full Evaluation of Quantitative Decision‐Making for Rhythm Management of Atrial Fibrillation Using Tabular Q‐Learning
title_fullStr Evaluation of Quantitative Decision‐Making for Rhythm Management of Atrial Fibrillation Using Tabular Q‐Learning
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Quantitative Decision‐Making for Rhythm Management of Atrial Fibrillation Using Tabular Q‐Learning
title_short Evaluation of Quantitative Decision‐Making for Rhythm Management of Atrial Fibrillation Using Tabular Q‐Learning
title_sort evaluation of quantitative decision‐making for rhythm management of atrial fibrillation using tabular q‐learning
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10227221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37119087
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.028483
work_keys_str_mv AT barrettchristopherd evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning
AT suzukiyuto evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning
AT husseinsundos evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning
AT garglohit evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning
AT tumoloalexis evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning
AT sandhuamneet evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning
AT westjohnj evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning
AT zipsematthew evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning
AT aleongryan evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning
AT varosypaul evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning
AT tzouwendys evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning
AT banaeikashanifarnoush evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning
AT rosenbergmichaela evaluationofquantitativedecisionmakingforrhythmmanagementofatrialfibrillationusingtabularqlearning