Cargando…

Machine learning approaches improve risk stratification for secondary cardiovascular disease prevention in multiethnic patients

OBJECTIVES: Identifying high-risk patients is crucial for effective cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. It is not known whether electronic health record (EHR)-based machine-learning (ML) models can improve CVD risk stratification compared with a secondary prevention risk score developed from ra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sarraju, Ashish, Ward, Andrew, Chung, Sukyung, Li, Jiang, Scheinker, David, Rodríguez, Fàtima
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8527119/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34667093
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2021-001802
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: Identifying high-risk patients is crucial for effective cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. It is not known whether electronic health record (EHR)-based machine-learning (ML) models can improve CVD risk stratification compared with a secondary prevention risk score developed from randomised clinical trials (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Secondary Prevention, TRS 2°P). METHODS: We identified patients with CVD in a large health system, including atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD), split into 80% training and 20% test sets. A rich set of EHR patient features was extracted. ML models were trained to estimate 5-year CVD event risk (random forests (RF), gradient-boosted machines (GBM), extreme gradient-boosted models (XGBoost), logistic regression with an L(2) penalty and L(1) penalty (Lasso)). ML models and TRS 2°P were evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). RESULTS: The cohort included 32 192 patients (median age 74 years, with 46% female, 63% non-Hispanic white and 12% Asian patients and 23 475 patients with ASCVD). There were 4010 events over 5 years of follow-up. ML models demonstrated good overall performance; XGBoost demonstrated AUC 0.70 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.71) in the full CVD cohort and AUC 0.71 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.73) in patients with ASCVD, with comparable performance by GBM, RF and Lasso. TRS 2°P performed poorly in all CVD (AUC 0.51, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.53) and ASCVD (AUC 0.50, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.52) patients. ML identified nontraditional predictive variables including education level and primary care visits. CONCLUSIONS: In a multiethnic real-world population, EHR-based ML approaches significantly improved CVD risk stratification for secondary prevention.