Cargando…

Neural network and logistic regression diagnostic prediction models for giant cell arteritis: development and validation

PURPOSE: To develop and validate neural network (NN) vs logistic regression (LR) diagnostic prediction models in patients with suspected giant cell arteritis (GCA). Design: Multicenter retrospective chart review. METHODS: An audit of consecutive patients undergoing temporal artery biopsy (TABx) for...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ing, Edsel B, Miller, Neil R, Nguyen, Angeline, Su, Wanhua, Bursztyn, Lulu L C D, Poole, Meredith, Kansal, Vinay, Toren, Andrew, Albreki, Dana, Mouhanna, Jack G, Muladzanov, Alla, Bernier, Mikaël, Gans, Mark, Lee, Dongho, Wendel, Colten, Sheldon, Claire, Shields, Marc, Bellan, Lorne, Lee-Wing, Matthew, Mohadjer, Yasaman, Nijhawan, Navdeep, Tyndel, Felix, Sundaram, Arun N E, ten Hove, Martin W, Chen, John J, Rodriguez, Amadeo R, Hu, Angela, Khalidi, Nader, Ing, Royce, Wong, Samuel W K, Torun, Nurhan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6388759/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30863010
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S193460
_version_ 1783397812653785088
author Ing, Edsel B
Miller, Neil R
Nguyen, Angeline
Su, Wanhua
Bursztyn, Lulu L C D
Poole, Meredith
Kansal, Vinay
Toren, Andrew
Albreki, Dana
Mouhanna, Jack G
Muladzanov, Alla
Bernier, Mikaël
Gans, Mark
Lee, Dongho
Wendel, Colten
Sheldon, Claire
Shields, Marc
Bellan, Lorne
Lee-Wing, Matthew
Mohadjer, Yasaman
Nijhawan, Navdeep
Tyndel, Felix
Sundaram, Arun N E
ten Hove, Martin W
Chen, John J
Rodriguez, Amadeo R
Hu, Angela
Khalidi, Nader
Ing, Royce
Wong, Samuel W K
Torun, Nurhan
author_facet Ing, Edsel B
Miller, Neil R
Nguyen, Angeline
Su, Wanhua
Bursztyn, Lulu L C D
Poole, Meredith
Kansal, Vinay
Toren, Andrew
Albreki, Dana
Mouhanna, Jack G
Muladzanov, Alla
Bernier, Mikaël
Gans, Mark
Lee, Dongho
Wendel, Colten
Sheldon, Claire
Shields, Marc
Bellan, Lorne
Lee-Wing, Matthew
Mohadjer, Yasaman
Nijhawan, Navdeep
Tyndel, Felix
Sundaram, Arun N E
ten Hove, Martin W
Chen, John J
Rodriguez, Amadeo R
Hu, Angela
Khalidi, Nader
Ing, Royce
Wong, Samuel W K
Torun, Nurhan
author_sort Ing, Edsel B
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To develop and validate neural network (NN) vs logistic regression (LR) diagnostic prediction models in patients with suspected giant cell arteritis (GCA). Design: Multicenter retrospective chart review. METHODS: An audit of consecutive patients undergoing temporal artery biopsy (TABx) for suspected GCA was conducted at 14 international medical centers. The outcome variable was biopsy-proven GCA. The predictor variables were age, gender, headache, clinical temporal artery abnormality, jaw claudication, vision loss, diplopia, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, and platelet level. The data were divided into three groups to train, validate, and test the models. The NN model with the lowest false-negative rate was chosen. Internal and external validations were performed. RESULTS: Of 1,833 patients who underwent TABx, there was complete information on 1,201 patients, 300 (25%) of whom had a positive TABx. On multivariable LR age, platelets, jaw claudication, vision loss, log C-reactive protein, log erythrocyte sedimentation rate, headache, and clinical temporal artery abnormality were statistically significant predictors of a positive TABx (P≤0.05). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve/Hosmer–Lemeshow P for LR was 0.867 (95% CI, 0.794, 0.917)/0.119 vs NN 0.860 (95% CI, 0.786, 0.911)/0.805, with no statistically significant difference of the area under the curves (P=0.316). The misclassification rate/false-negative rate of LR was 20.6%/47.5% vs 18.1%/30.5% for NN. Missing data analysis did not change the results. CONCLUSION: Statistical models can aid in the triage of patients with suspected GCA. Misclassification remains a concern, but cutoff values for 95% and 99% sensitivities are provided (https://goo.gl/THCnuU).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6388759
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63887592019-03-12 Neural network and logistic regression diagnostic prediction models for giant cell arteritis: development and validation Ing, Edsel B Miller, Neil R Nguyen, Angeline Su, Wanhua Bursztyn, Lulu L C D Poole, Meredith Kansal, Vinay Toren, Andrew Albreki, Dana Mouhanna, Jack G Muladzanov, Alla Bernier, Mikaël Gans, Mark Lee, Dongho Wendel, Colten Sheldon, Claire Shields, Marc Bellan, Lorne Lee-Wing, Matthew Mohadjer, Yasaman Nijhawan, Navdeep Tyndel, Felix Sundaram, Arun N E ten Hove, Martin W Chen, John J Rodriguez, Amadeo R Hu, Angela Khalidi, Nader Ing, Royce Wong, Samuel W K Torun, Nurhan Clin Ophthalmol Original Research PURPOSE: To develop and validate neural network (NN) vs logistic regression (LR) diagnostic prediction models in patients with suspected giant cell arteritis (GCA). Design: Multicenter retrospective chart review. METHODS: An audit of consecutive patients undergoing temporal artery biopsy (TABx) for suspected GCA was conducted at 14 international medical centers. The outcome variable was biopsy-proven GCA. The predictor variables were age, gender, headache, clinical temporal artery abnormality, jaw claudication, vision loss, diplopia, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, and platelet level. The data were divided into three groups to train, validate, and test the models. The NN model with the lowest false-negative rate was chosen. Internal and external validations were performed. RESULTS: Of 1,833 patients who underwent TABx, there was complete information on 1,201 patients, 300 (25%) of whom had a positive TABx. On multivariable LR age, platelets, jaw claudication, vision loss, log C-reactive protein, log erythrocyte sedimentation rate, headache, and clinical temporal artery abnormality were statistically significant predictors of a positive TABx (P≤0.05). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve/Hosmer–Lemeshow P for LR was 0.867 (95% CI, 0.794, 0.917)/0.119 vs NN 0.860 (95% CI, 0.786, 0.911)/0.805, with no statistically significant difference of the area under the curves (P=0.316). The misclassification rate/false-negative rate of LR was 20.6%/47.5% vs 18.1%/30.5% for NN. Missing data analysis did not change the results. CONCLUSION: Statistical models can aid in the triage of patients with suspected GCA. Misclassification remains a concern, but cutoff values for 95% and 99% sensitivities are provided (https://goo.gl/THCnuU). Dove Medical Press 2019-02-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6388759/ /pubmed/30863010 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S193460 Text en © 2019 Ing et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Ing, Edsel B
Miller, Neil R
Nguyen, Angeline
Su, Wanhua
Bursztyn, Lulu L C D
Poole, Meredith
Kansal, Vinay
Toren, Andrew
Albreki, Dana
Mouhanna, Jack G
Muladzanov, Alla
Bernier, Mikaël
Gans, Mark
Lee, Dongho
Wendel, Colten
Sheldon, Claire
Shields, Marc
Bellan, Lorne
Lee-Wing, Matthew
Mohadjer, Yasaman
Nijhawan, Navdeep
Tyndel, Felix
Sundaram, Arun N E
ten Hove, Martin W
Chen, John J
Rodriguez, Amadeo R
Hu, Angela
Khalidi, Nader
Ing, Royce
Wong, Samuel W K
Torun, Nurhan
Neural network and logistic regression diagnostic prediction models for giant cell arteritis: development and validation
title Neural network and logistic regression diagnostic prediction models for giant cell arteritis: development and validation
title_full Neural network and logistic regression diagnostic prediction models for giant cell arteritis: development and validation
title_fullStr Neural network and logistic regression diagnostic prediction models for giant cell arteritis: development and validation
title_full_unstemmed Neural network and logistic regression diagnostic prediction models for giant cell arteritis: development and validation
title_short Neural network and logistic regression diagnostic prediction models for giant cell arteritis: development and validation
title_sort neural network and logistic regression diagnostic prediction models for giant cell arteritis: development and validation
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6388759/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30863010
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S193460
work_keys_str_mv AT ingedselb neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT millerneilr neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT nguyenangeline neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT suwanhua neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT bursztynlululcd neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT poolemeredith neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT kansalvinay neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT torenandrew neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT albrekidana neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT mouhannajackg neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT muladzanovalla neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT berniermikael neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT gansmark neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT leedongho neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT wendelcolten neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT sheldonclaire neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT shieldsmarc neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT bellanlorne neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT leewingmatthew neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT mohadjeryasaman neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT nijhawannavdeep neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT tyndelfelix neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT sundaramarunne neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT tenhovemartinw neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT chenjohnj neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT rodriguezamadeor neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT huangela neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT khalidinader neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT ingroyce neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT wongsamuelwk neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation
AT torunnurhan neuralnetworkandlogisticregressiondiagnosticpredictionmodelsforgiantcellarteritisdevelopmentandvalidation