_version_ 1785095086598520832
author Neumann, Johannes Tobias
Twerenbold, Raphael
Ojeda, Francisco
Aldous, Sally J.
Allen, Brandon R.
Apple, Fred S.
Babel, Hugo
Christenson, Robert H.
Cullen, Louise
Di Carluccio, Eleonora
Doudesis, Dimitrios
Ekelund, Ulf
Giannitsis, Evangelos
Greenslade, Jaimi
Inoue, Kenji
Jernberg, Tomas
Kavsak, Peter
Keller, Till
Lee, Kuan Ken
Lindahl, Bertil
Lorenz, Thiess
Mahler, Simon A.
Mills, Nicholas L.
Mokhtari, Arash
Parsonage, William
Pickering, John W.
Pemberton, Christopher J.
Reich, Christoph
Richards, A. Mark
Sandoval, Yader
Than, Martin P.
Toprak, Betül
Troughton, Richard W.
Worster, Andrew
Zeller, Tanja
Ziegler, Andreas
Blankenberg, Stefan
author_facet Neumann, Johannes Tobias
Twerenbold, Raphael
Ojeda, Francisco
Aldous, Sally J.
Allen, Brandon R.
Apple, Fred S.
Babel, Hugo
Christenson, Robert H.
Cullen, Louise
Di Carluccio, Eleonora
Doudesis, Dimitrios
Ekelund, Ulf
Giannitsis, Evangelos
Greenslade, Jaimi
Inoue, Kenji
Jernberg, Tomas
Kavsak, Peter
Keller, Till
Lee, Kuan Ken
Lindahl, Bertil
Lorenz, Thiess
Mahler, Simon A.
Mills, Nicholas L.
Mokhtari, Arash
Parsonage, William
Pickering, John W.
Pemberton, Christopher J.
Reich, Christoph
Richards, A. Mark
Sandoval, Yader
Than, Martin P.
Toprak, Betül
Troughton, Richard W.
Worster, Andrew
Zeller, Tanja
Ziegler, Andreas
Blankenberg, Stefan
author_sort Neumann, Johannes Tobias
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In suspected myocardial infarction (MI), guidelines recommend using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn)-based approaches. These require fixed assay-specific thresholds and timepoints, without directly integrating clinical information. Using machine-learning techniques including hs-cTn and clinical routine variables, we aimed to build a digital tool to directly estimate the individual probability of MI, allowing for numerous hs-cTn assays. METHODS: In 2,575 patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected MI, two ensembles of machine-learning models using single or serial concentrations of six different hs-cTn assays were derived to estimate the individual MI probability (ARTEMIS model). Discriminative performance of the models was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and logLoss. Model performance was validated in an external cohort with 1688 patients and tested for global generalizability in 13 international cohorts with 23,411 patients. RESULTS: Eleven routinely available variables including age, sex, cardiovascular risk factors, electrocardiography, and hs-cTn were included in the ARTEMIS models. In the validation and generalization cohorts, excellent discriminative performance was confirmed, superior to hs-cTn only. For the serial hs-cTn measurement model, AUC ranged from 0.92 to 0.98. Good calibration was observed. Using a single hs-cTn measurement, the ARTEMIS model allowed direct rule-out of MI with very high and similar safety but up to tripled efficiency compared to the guideline-recommended strategy. CONCLUSION: We developed and validated diagnostic models to accurately estimate the individual probability of MI, which allow for variable hs-cTn use and flexible timing of resampling. Their digital application may provide rapid, safe and efficient personalized patient care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: Data of following cohorts were used for this project: BACC (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02355457), stenoCardia (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT03227159), ADAPT-BSN (www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au; ACTRN12611001069943), IMPACT (www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au, ACTRN12611000206921), ADAPT-RCT (www.anzctr.org.au; ANZCTR12610000766011), EDACS-RCT (www.anzctr.org.au; ANZCTR12613000745741); DROP-ACS (https://www.umin.ac.jp, UMIN000030668); High-STEACS (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01852123), LUND (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT05484544), RAPID-CPU (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT03111862), ROMI (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01994577), SAMIE (https://anzctr.org.au; ACTRN12621000053820), SEIGE and SAFETY (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT04772157), STOP-CP (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02984436), UTROPIA (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02060760). GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00392-023-02206-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10449973
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104499732023-08-26 Personalized diagnosis in suspected myocardial infarction Neumann, Johannes Tobias Twerenbold, Raphael Ojeda, Francisco Aldous, Sally J. Allen, Brandon R. Apple, Fred S. Babel, Hugo Christenson, Robert H. Cullen, Louise Di Carluccio, Eleonora Doudesis, Dimitrios Ekelund, Ulf Giannitsis, Evangelos Greenslade, Jaimi Inoue, Kenji Jernberg, Tomas Kavsak, Peter Keller, Till Lee, Kuan Ken Lindahl, Bertil Lorenz, Thiess Mahler, Simon A. Mills, Nicholas L. Mokhtari, Arash Parsonage, William Pickering, John W. Pemberton, Christopher J. Reich, Christoph Richards, A. Mark Sandoval, Yader Than, Martin P. Toprak, Betül Troughton, Richard W. Worster, Andrew Zeller, Tanja Ziegler, Andreas Blankenberg, Stefan Clin Res Cardiol Original Paper BACKGROUND: In suspected myocardial infarction (MI), guidelines recommend using high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn)-based approaches. These require fixed assay-specific thresholds and timepoints, without directly integrating clinical information. Using machine-learning techniques including hs-cTn and clinical routine variables, we aimed to build a digital tool to directly estimate the individual probability of MI, allowing for numerous hs-cTn assays. METHODS: In 2,575 patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected MI, two ensembles of machine-learning models using single or serial concentrations of six different hs-cTn assays were derived to estimate the individual MI probability (ARTEMIS model). Discriminative performance of the models was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and logLoss. Model performance was validated in an external cohort with 1688 patients and tested for global generalizability in 13 international cohorts with 23,411 patients. RESULTS: Eleven routinely available variables including age, sex, cardiovascular risk factors, electrocardiography, and hs-cTn were included in the ARTEMIS models. In the validation and generalization cohorts, excellent discriminative performance was confirmed, superior to hs-cTn only. For the serial hs-cTn measurement model, AUC ranged from 0.92 to 0.98. Good calibration was observed. Using a single hs-cTn measurement, the ARTEMIS model allowed direct rule-out of MI with very high and similar safety but up to tripled efficiency compared to the guideline-recommended strategy. CONCLUSION: We developed and validated diagnostic models to accurately estimate the individual probability of MI, which allow for variable hs-cTn use and flexible timing of resampling. Their digital application may provide rapid, safe and efficient personalized patient care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: Data of following cohorts were used for this project: BACC (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02355457), stenoCardia (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT03227159), ADAPT-BSN (www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au; ACTRN12611001069943), IMPACT (www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au, ACTRN12611000206921), ADAPT-RCT (www.anzctr.org.au; ANZCTR12610000766011), EDACS-RCT (www.anzctr.org.au; ANZCTR12613000745741); DROP-ACS (https://www.umin.ac.jp, UMIN000030668); High-STEACS (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01852123), LUND (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT05484544), RAPID-CPU (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT03111862), ROMI (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01994577), SAMIE (https://anzctr.org.au; ACTRN12621000053820), SEIGE and SAFETY (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT04772157), STOP-CP (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02984436), UTROPIA (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02060760). GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00392-023-02206-3. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-05-02 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10449973/ /pubmed/37131096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-023-02206-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Paper
Neumann, Johannes Tobias
Twerenbold, Raphael
Ojeda, Francisco
Aldous, Sally J.
Allen, Brandon R.
Apple, Fred S.
Babel, Hugo
Christenson, Robert H.
Cullen, Louise
Di Carluccio, Eleonora
Doudesis, Dimitrios
Ekelund, Ulf
Giannitsis, Evangelos
Greenslade, Jaimi
Inoue, Kenji
Jernberg, Tomas
Kavsak, Peter
Keller, Till
Lee, Kuan Ken
Lindahl, Bertil
Lorenz, Thiess
Mahler, Simon A.
Mills, Nicholas L.
Mokhtari, Arash
Parsonage, William
Pickering, John W.
Pemberton, Christopher J.
Reich, Christoph
Richards, A. Mark
Sandoval, Yader
Than, Martin P.
Toprak, Betül
Troughton, Richard W.
Worster, Andrew
Zeller, Tanja
Ziegler, Andreas
Blankenberg, Stefan
Personalized diagnosis in suspected myocardial infarction
title Personalized diagnosis in suspected myocardial infarction
title_full Personalized diagnosis in suspected myocardial infarction
title_fullStr Personalized diagnosis in suspected myocardial infarction
title_full_unstemmed Personalized diagnosis in suspected myocardial infarction
title_short Personalized diagnosis in suspected myocardial infarction
title_sort personalized diagnosis in suspected myocardial infarction
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10449973/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37131096
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00392-023-02206-3
work_keys_str_mv AT neumannjohannestobias personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT twerenboldraphael personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT ojedafrancisco personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT aldoussallyj personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT allenbrandonr personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT applefreds personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT babelhugo personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT christensonroberth personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT cullenlouise personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT dicarluccioeleonora personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT doudesisdimitrios personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT ekelundulf personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT giannitsisevangelos personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT greensladejaimi personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT inouekenji personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT jernbergtomas personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT kavsakpeter personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT kellertill personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT leekuanken personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT lindahlbertil personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT lorenzthiess personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT mahlersimona personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT millsnicholasl personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT mokhtariarash personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT parsonagewilliam personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT pickeringjohnw personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT pembertonchristopherj personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT reichchristoph personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT richardsamark personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT sandovalyader personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT thanmartinp personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT toprakbetul personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT troughtonrichardw personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT worsterandrew personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT zellertanja personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT zieglerandreas personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT blankenbergstefan personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction
AT personalizeddiagnosisinsuspectedmyocardialinfarction