Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Machine learning to predict hemodynamically significant CAD based on traditional risk factors, coronary artery calcium and epicardial fat volume

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology Aims and scope

Abstract

We sought to establish an explainable machine learning (ML) model to screen for hemodynamically significant coronary artery disease (CAD) based on traditional risk factors, coronary artery calcium (CAC) and epicardial fat volume (EFV) measured from non-contrast CT scans. 184 symptomatic inpatients who underwent Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography/Myocardial Perfusion Imaging (SPECT/MPI) and Invasive Coronary Angiography (ICA) were enrolled. Clinical and imaging features (CAC and EFV) were collected. Hemodynamically significant CAD was defined when coronary stenosis severity ≥ 50% with a matched reversible perfusion defect in SPECT/MPI. Data was randomly split into a training cohort (70%) on which five-fold cross-validation was done and a test cohort (30%). The normalized training phase was preceded by the selection of features using recursive feature elimination (RFE). Three ML classifiers (LR, SVM, and XGBoost) were used to construct and choose the best predictive model for hemodynamically significant CAD. An explainable approach based on ML and the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method was deployed to generate individual explanation of the model’s decision. In the training cohort, hemodynamically significant CAD patients had significantly higher age, BMI and EFV, higher proportions of hypertension and CAC comparing with controls (P all < .05). In the test cohorts, hemodynamically significant CAD had significantly higher EFV and higher proportion of CAC. EFV, CAC, diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension, and hyperlipidemia were the highest ranking features by RFE. XGBoost produced better performance (AUC of 0.88) compared with traditional LR model (AUC of 0.82) and SVM (AUC of 0.82) in the training cohort. Decision Curve Analysis (DCA) demonstrated that XGBoost model had the highest Net Benefit index. Validation of the model also yielded a favorable discriminatory ability with the AUC, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy of 0.89, 68.0%, 96.8%, 94.4%, 79.0% and 83.9% in the XGBoost model. A XGBoost model based on EFV, CAC, hypertension, DM and hyperlipidemia to assess hemodynamically significant CAD was constructed and validated, which showed favorable predictive value. ML combined with SHAP can offer a transparent explanation of personalized risk prediction, enabling physicians to gain an intuitive understanding of the impact of key features in the model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

EFV:

Epicardial fat volume

EAT:

Epicardial adipose tissue

CACS:

Coronary artery calcium score

SPECT:

Single photon emission computerized tomography

MPI:

Myocardial perfusion imaging

CAD:

Coronary artery disease

ML:

Machine learning

SVM:

Support vector machine

XGBoost:

Extreme gradient boosting

LR:

Logistic regression

References

  1. Shoutao Hu, Gao R, Yang Y, Wang W, Gao W, Li Z. Recommendations on the suitability criteria for coronary revascularization in China (Trial). Chin Circ J 2016;031:313‐7.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Koo BK, Erglis A, Doh JH, Daniels DV, Jegere S, Kim HS, et al. Diagnosis of ischemia-causing coronary stenoses by noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms. Results from the prospective multicenter DISCOVER-FLOW (Diagnosis of Ischemia-Causing Stenoses Obtained Via Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve) study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:1989‐97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ornish D, Redberg RF. PCI guided by fractional flow reserve at 5 years. N Engl J Med 2019;380:103‐4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Klocke FJ, Baird MG, Lorell BH, Bateman TM, Messer JV, Berman DS, et al. ACC/AHA/ASNC guidelines for the clinical use of cardiac radionuclide imaging–executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/ASNC Committee to Revise the 1995 Guidelines for the Clinical Use of Cardiac Radionuclide Imaging). Circulation 2003;108:1404‐18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Alizadehsani R, Abdar M, Roshanzamir M, Khosravi A, Kebria PM, Khozeimeh F, et al. Machine learning-based coronary artery disease diagnosis: a comprehensive review. Comput Biol Med 2019;111:103346.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bittencourt MS, Hulten E, Polonsky TS, Hoffman U, Nasir K, Abbara S, et al. European Society of Cardiology-recommended coronary artery disease consortium pretest probability scores more accurately predict obstructive coronary disease and cardiovascular events than the diamond and Forrester score: the partners registry. Circulation 2016;134:201‐11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Polonsky TS, McClelland RL, Jorgensen NW, Bild DE, Burke GL, Guerci AD, et al. Coronary artery calcium score and risk classification for coronary heart disease prediction. JAMA 2010;303:1610‐6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Budoff MJ, Diamond GA, Raggi P, Arad Y, Guerci AD, Callister TQ, et al. Continuous probabilistic prediction of angiographically significant coronary artery disease using electron beam tomography. Circulation 2002;105:1791‐6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hesse B, Tägil K, Cuocolo A, Anagnostopoulos C, Bardiés M, Bax J, et al. EANM/ESC procedural guidelines for myocardial perfusion imaging in nuclear cardiology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;32:855‐97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Baker AR, Harte AL, Howell N, Pritlove DC, Ranasinghe AM, da Silva NF, et al. Epicardial adipose tissue as a source of nuclear factor-kappaB and c-Jun N-terminal kinase mediated inflammation in patients with coronary artery disease. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2009;94:261‐7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yu W, Liu B, Zhang F, Wang J, Shao X, Yang X, et al. Association of epicardial fat volume with increased risk of obstructive coronary artery disease in Chinese patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Heart Assoc 2021;10:e018080.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Yu W, Zhang F, Liu B, Wang J, Shao X, Yang MF, et al. Incremental value of epicardial fat volume to coronary artery calcium score and traditional risk factors for predicting myocardial ischemia in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol 2022;29:1583‐92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Arsanjani R, Xu Y, Dey D, Vahistha V, Shalev A, Nakanishi R, et al. Improved accuracy of myocardial perfusion SPECT for detection of coronary artery disease by machine learning in a large population. J Nucl Cardiol 2013;20:553‐62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Dey D, Gaur S, Ovrehus KA, Slomka PJ, Betancur J, Goeller M, et al. Integrated prediction of lesion-specific ischaemia from quantitative coronary CT angiography using machine learning: a multicentre study. Eur Radiol 2018;28:2655‐64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Motwani M, Dey D, Berman DS, Germano G, Achenbach S, Al-Mallah MH, et al. Machine learning for prediction of all-cause mortality in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: a 5-year multicentre prospective registry analysis. Eur Heart J 2017;38:500‐7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Berman DS, Abidov A, Kang X, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, Sciammarella MG, et al. Prognostic validation of a 17-segment score derived from a 20-segment score for myocardial perfusion SPECT interpretation. J Nucl Cardiol 2004;11:414‐23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, Jacobs AK, Kaul S, Laskey WK, et al. Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart. A statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. Circulation 2002;105:539‐42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Xu Y, Fish M, Gerlach J, Lemley M, Berman DS, Germano G, et al. Combined quantitative analysis of attenuation corrected and non-corrected myocardial perfusion SPECT: method development and clinical validation. J Nucl Cardiol 2010;17:591‐9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Mahaisavariya P, Detrano R, Kang X, Garner D, Vo A, Georgiou D, et al. Quantitation of in vitro coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1994;32:387‐93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Huang G, Wang D, Zeb I, Budoff MJ, Harman SM, Miller V, et al. Intra-thoracic fat, cardiometabolic risk factors, and subclinical cardiovascular disease in healthy, recently menopausal women screened for the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS). Atherosclerosis 2012;221:198‐205.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chang CC, Lin CJ. Training nu-support vector regression: theory and algorithms. Neural Comput 2002;14:1959‐77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Khera R, Haimovich J, Hurley NC, McNamara R, Spertus JA, Desai N, et al. Use of machine learning models to predict death after acute myocardial infarction. JAMA Cardiol 2021;6:633‐41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wang C, Xiao Z, Wu J. Functional connectivity-based classification of autism and control using SVM-RFECV on rs-fMRI data. Phys Med 2019;65:99‐105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Molinaro AM, Simon R, Pfeiffer RM. Prediction error estimation: a comparison of resampling methods. Bioinformatics 2005;21:3301‐7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988;44:837‐45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Vickers AJ, Elkin EB. Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Making 2006;26:565‐74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Assante R, Acampa W, Zampella E, Arumugam P, Nappi C, Gaudieri V, et al. Prognostic value of atherosclerotic burden and coronary vascular function in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017;44:2290‐8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gaudieri V, Nappi C, Acampa W, Zampella E, Assante R, Mannarino T, et al. Added prognostic value of left ventricular shape by gated SPECT imaging in patients with suspected coronary artery disease and normal myocardial perfusion. J Nucl Cardiol 2019;26:1148‐56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Tesche C, De Cecco CN, Stubenrauch A, Jacobs BE, Varga-Szemes A, Litwin SE, et al. Correlation and predictive value of aortic root calcification markers with coronary artery calcification and obstructive coronary artery disease. Radiol Med 2017;122:113‐20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Alexopoulos N, Raggi P. Calcification in atherosclerosis. Nat Rev Cardiol 2009;6:681‐8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Mazurek T, Zhang L, Zalewski A, Mannion JD, Diehl JT, Arafat H, et al. Human epicardial adipose tissue is a source of inflammatory mediators. Circulation 2003;108:2460‐6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Brandt V, Decker J, Schoepf UJ, Varga-Szemes A, Emrich T, Aquino G, et al. Additive value of epicardial adipose tissue quantification to coronary CT angiography-derived plaque characterization and CT fractional flow reserve for the prediction of lesion-specific ischemia. Eur Radiol 2022;32:4243‐52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Benz DC, Giannopoulos AA. Fractional flow reserve as the standard of reference: all that glistens is not gold. J Nucl Cardiol 2020;27:1314‐6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Muthalaly RG, Nerlekar N, Wong DT, Cameron JD, Seneviratne SK, Ko BS. Epicardial adipose tissue and myocardial ischemia assessed by computed tomography perfusion imaging and invasive fractional flow reserve. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2017;11:46‐53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Konstantinou K, Tsioufis C, Koumelli A, Mantzouranis M, Kasiakogias A, Doumas M, et al. Hypertension and patients with acute coronary syndrome: putting blood pressure levels into perspective. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2019;21:1135‐43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Maxfield FR, Tabas I. Role of cholesterol and lipid organization in disease. Nature 2005;438:612‐21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hammoud T, Tanguay JF, Bourassa MG. Management of coronary artery disease: therapeutic options in patients with diabetes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:355‐65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Goldstein BA, Navar AM, Carter RE. Moving beyond regression techniques in cardiovascular risk prediction: applying machine learning to address analytic challenges. Eur Heart J 2017;38:1805‐14.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Megna R, Petretta M, Assante R, Zampella E, Nappi C, Gaudieri V, et al. A comparison among different machine learning pretest approaches to predict stress-induced ischemia at PET/CT myocardial perfusion imaging. Comput Math Methods Med 2021;2021:3551756.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Megna R, Assante R, Zampella E, Gaudieri V, Nappi C, Cuocolo R, et al. Pretest models for predicting abnormal stress single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2021;28:1891‐902.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Arsanjani R, Xu Y, Dey D, Fish M, Dorbala S, Hayes S, et al. Improved accuracy of myocardial perfusion SPECT for the detection of coronary artery disease using a support vector machine algorithm. J Nucl Med 2013;54:549‐55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Yang S, Koo BK, Hoshino M, Lee JM, Murai T, Park J, et al. CT angiographic and plaque predictors of functionally significant coronary disease and outcome using machine learning. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2021;14:629‐41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Li D, Xiong G, Zeng H, Zhou Q, Jiang J, Guo X. Machine learning-aided risk stratification system for the prediction of coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiol 2021;326:30‐4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Petch J, Di S, Nelson W. Opening the black box: the promise and limitations of explainable machine learning in cardiology. Can J Cardiol 2022;38:204‐13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Cuocolo R, Cipullo MB, Stanzione A, Ugga L, Romeo V, Radice L, et al. Machine learning applications in prostate cancer magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol Exp 2019;3:35.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Maron DJ, Mancini GB, Hayes SW, Hartigan PM, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention to reduce ischemic burden: results from the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) trial nuclear substudy. Circulation 2008;117:1283‐91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (82272031, 81871381, PI: Yuetao Wang); Key Research and Development Program of Jiangsu Province (Social Development) (Grant NO. BE2021638, PI: Yuetao Wang); Science and technology project for youth talents of Changzhou Health Committee (QN202212, PI: Wenji Yu)

Author information

Author notes

  1. Wenji Yu, Le Yang are co-first authors.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Institute of Clinical Translation of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Soochow University, No.185, Juqian Street, Changzhou, 213003, Jiangsu, China

    Wenji Yu MD, Le Yang MD, Feifei Zhang MD, Bao Liu MD, Yunmei Shi MD, Jianfeng Wang MD, Xiaoliang Shao MD & Yuetao Wang MD

  2. Department of Cardiology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu, China

    Yongjun Chen MD & Xiaoyu Yang MD

Authors
  1. Wenji Yu MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Le Yang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Feifei Zhang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bao Liu MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yunmei Shi MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jianfeng Wang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Xiaoliang Shao MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yongjun Chen MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Xiaoyu Yang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Yuetao Wang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuetao Wang MD.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

All the authors have nothing to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The authors of this article have provided a PowerPoint file, available for download at SpringerLink, which summarises the contents of the paper and is free for re-use at meetings and presentations. Search for the article DOI on SpringerLink.com.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 101 KB)

Supplementary file2 (PPTX 781 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yu, W., Yang, L., Zhang, F. et al. Machine learning to predict hemodynamically significant CAD based on traditional risk factors, coronary artery calcium and epicardial fat volume. J. Nucl. Cardiol. 30, 2593–2606 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-023-03333-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-023-03333-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation