Cargando…

Comparison of State-of-the-Art Neural Network Survival Models with the Pooled Cohort Equations for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction

BACKGROUND: The Pooled Cohort Equations (PCEs) are race- and sex-specific Cox proportional hazards (PH)-based models used for 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk prediction with acceptable discrimination. In recent years, neural network models have gained increasing popularit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Deng, Yu, Liu, Lei, Jiang, Hongmei, Peng, Yifan, Wei, Yishu, Zhou, Zhiyang, Zhong, Yizhen, Zhao, Yun, Yang, Xiaoyun, Yu, Jingzhi, Lu, Zhiyong, Kho, Abel, Ning, Hongyan, Allen, Norrina B., Wilkins, John T., Liu, Kiang, Lloyd-Jones, Donald M., Zhao, Lihui
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9872364/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36694118
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01829-w
_version_ 1784877388095553536
author Deng, Yu
Liu, Lei
Jiang, Hongmei
Peng, Yifan
Wei, Yishu
Zhou, Zhiyang
Zhong, Yizhen
Zhao, Yun
Yang, Xiaoyun
Yu, Jingzhi
Lu, Zhiyong
Kho, Abel
Ning, Hongyan
Allen, Norrina B.
Wilkins, John T.
Liu, Kiang
Lloyd-Jones, Donald M.
Zhao, Lihui
author_facet Deng, Yu
Liu, Lei
Jiang, Hongmei
Peng, Yifan
Wei, Yishu
Zhou, Zhiyang
Zhong, Yizhen
Zhao, Yun
Yang, Xiaoyun
Yu, Jingzhi
Lu, Zhiyong
Kho, Abel
Ning, Hongyan
Allen, Norrina B.
Wilkins, John T.
Liu, Kiang
Lloyd-Jones, Donald M.
Zhao, Lihui
author_sort Deng, Yu
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Pooled Cohort Equations (PCEs) are race- and sex-specific Cox proportional hazards (PH)-based models used for 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk prediction with acceptable discrimination. In recent years, neural network models have gained increasing popularity with their success in image recognition and text classification. Various survival neural network models have been proposed by combining survival analysis and neural network architecture to take advantage of the strengths from both. However, the performance of these survival neural network models compared to each other and to PCEs in ASCVD prediction is unknown. METHODS: In this study, we used 6 cohorts from the Lifetime Risk Pooling Project (with 5 cohorts as training/internal validation and one cohort as external validation) and compared the performance of the PCEs in 10-year ASCVD risk prediction with an all two-way interactions Cox PH model (Cox PH-TWI) and three state-of-the-art neural network survival models including Nnet-survival, Deepsurv, and Cox-nnet. For all the models, we used the same 7 covariates as used in the PCEs. We fitted each of the aforementioned models in white females, white males, black females, and black males, respectively. We evaluated models’ internal and external discrimination power and calibration. RESULTS: The training/internal validation sample comprised 23216 individuals. The average age at baseline was 57.8 years old (SD = 9.6); 16% developed ASCVD during average follow-up of 10.50 (SD = 3.02) years. Based on 10 × 10 cross-validation, the method that had the highest C-statistics was Deepsurv (0.7371) for white males, Deepsurv and Cox PH-TWI (0.7972) for white females, PCE (0.6981) for black males, and Deepsurv (0.7886) for black females. In the external validation dataset, Deepsurv (0.7032), Cox-nnet (0.7282), PCE (0.6811), and Deepsurv (0.7316) had the highest C-statistics for white male, white female, black male, and black female population, respectively. Calibration plots showed that in 10 × 10 validation, all models had good calibration in all race and sex groups. In external validation, all models overestimated the risk for 10-year ASCVD. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the use of the state-of-the-art neural network survival models in ASCVD risk prediction. Neural network survival models had similar if not superior discrimination and calibration compared to PCEs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01829-w.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9872364
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98723642023-01-25 Comparison of State-of-the-Art Neural Network Survival Models with the Pooled Cohort Equations for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction Deng, Yu Liu, Lei Jiang, Hongmei Peng, Yifan Wei, Yishu Zhou, Zhiyang Zhong, Yizhen Zhao, Yun Yang, Xiaoyun Yu, Jingzhi Lu, Zhiyong Kho, Abel Ning, Hongyan Allen, Norrina B. Wilkins, John T. Liu, Kiang Lloyd-Jones, Donald M. Zhao, Lihui BMC Med Res Methodol Research BACKGROUND: The Pooled Cohort Equations (PCEs) are race- and sex-specific Cox proportional hazards (PH)-based models used for 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk prediction with acceptable discrimination. In recent years, neural network models have gained increasing popularity with their success in image recognition and text classification. Various survival neural network models have been proposed by combining survival analysis and neural network architecture to take advantage of the strengths from both. However, the performance of these survival neural network models compared to each other and to PCEs in ASCVD prediction is unknown. METHODS: In this study, we used 6 cohorts from the Lifetime Risk Pooling Project (with 5 cohorts as training/internal validation and one cohort as external validation) and compared the performance of the PCEs in 10-year ASCVD risk prediction with an all two-way interactions Cox PH model (Cox PH-TWI) and three state-of-the-art neural network survival models including Nnet-survival, Deepsurv, and Cox-nnet. For all the models, we used the same 7 covariates as used in the PCEs. We fitted each of the aforementioned models in white females, white males, black females, and black males, respectively. We evaluated models’ internal and external discrimination power and calibration. RESULTS: The training/internal validation sample comprised 23216 individuals. The average age at baseline was 57.8 years old (SD = 9.6); 16% developed ASCVD during average follow-up of 10.50 (SD = 3.02) years. Based on 10 × 10 cross-validation, the method that had the highest C-statistics was Deepsurv (0.7371) for white males, Deepsurv and Cox PH-TWI (0.7972) for white females, PCE (0.6981) for black males, and Deepsurv (0.7886) for black females. In the external validation dataset, Deepsurv (0.7032), Cox-nnet (0.7282), PCE (0.6811), and Deepsurv (0.7316) had the highest C-statistics for white male, white female, black male, and black female population, respectively. Calibration plots showed that in 10 × 10 validation, all models had good calibration in all race and sex groups. In external validation, all models overestimated the risk for 10-year ASCVD. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the use of the state-of-the-art neural network survival models in ASCVD risk prediction. Neural network survival models had similar if not superior discrimination and calibration compared to PCEs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-022-01829-w. BioMed Central 2023-01-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9872364/ /pubmed/36694118 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01829-w 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/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Deng, Yu
Liu, Lei
Jiang, Hongmei
Peng, Yifan
Wei, Yishu
Zhou, Zhiyang
Zhong, Yizhen
Zhao, Yun
Yang, Xiaoyun
Yu, Jingzhi
Lu, Zhiyong
Kho, Abel
Ning, Hongyan
Allen, Norrina B.
Wilkins, John T.
Liu, Kiang
Lloyd-Jones, Donald M.
Zhao, Lihui
Comparison of State-of-the-Art Neural Network Survival Models with the Pooled Cohort Equations for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction
title Comparison of State-of-the-Art Neural Network Survival Models with the Pooled Cohort Equations for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction
title_full Comparison of State-of-the-Art Neural Network Survival Models with the Pooled Cohort Equations for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction
title_fullStr Comparison of State-of-the-Art Neural Network Survival Models with the Pooled Cohort Equations for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of State-of-the-Art Neural Network Survival Models with the Pooled Cohort Equations for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction
title_short Comparison of State-of-the-Art Neural Network Survival Models with the Pooled Cohort Equations for Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction
title_sort comparison of state-of-the-art neural network survival models with the pooled cohort equations for cardiovascular disease risk prediction
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9872364/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36694118
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-022-01829-w
work_keys_str_mv AT dengyu comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT liulei comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT jianghongmei comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT pengyifan comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT weiyishu comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT zhouzhiyang comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT zhongyizhen comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT zhaoyun comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT yangxiaoyun comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT yujingzhi comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT luzhiyong comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT khoabel comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT ninghongyan comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT allennorrinab comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT wilkinsjohnt comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT liukiang comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT lloydjonesdonaldm comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction
AT zhaolihui comparisonofstateoftheartneuralnetworksurvivalmodelswiththepooledcohortequationsforcardiovasculardiseaseriskprediction