4.2 Article

Hybridizing machine learning in survival analysis of cardiac PET/CT imaging

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR CARDIOLOGY
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12350-023-03359-4

关键词

Machine learning; survival analysis; cardiovascular events; hybrid imaging; PET/CT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study combines machine learning and traditional survival analysis to analyze cardiac PET/CT data and identify patients at risk of myocardial infarction or death.
BackgroundMachine Learning (ML) allows integration of the numerous variables delivered by cardiac PET/CT, while traditional survival analysis can provide explainable prognostic estimates from a restricted number of input variables. We implemented a hybrid ML-and-survival analysis of multimodal PET/CT data to identify patients who developed myocardial infarction (MI) or death in long-term follow up.MethodsData from 739 intermediate risk patients who underwent coronary CT and selectively stress 15O-water-PET perfusion were analyzed for the occurrence of MI and all-cause mortality. Images were evaluated segmentally for atherosclerosis and absolute myocardial perfusion through 75 variables that were integrated through ML into an ML-CCTA and an ML-PET score. These scores were then modeled along with clinical variables through Cox regression. This hybridized model was compared against an expert interpretation-based and a calcium score-based model.ResultsCompared with expert- and calcium score-based models, the hybridized ML-survival model showed the highest performance (CI .81 vs .71 and .64). The strongest predictor for outcomes was the ML-CCTA score.ConclusionPrognostic modeling of PET/CT data for the long-term occurrence of adverse events may be improved through ML imaging score integration and subsequent traditional survival analysis with clinical variables. This hybridization of methods offers an alternative to traditional survival modeling of conventional expert image scoring and interpretation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据