Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29055639›Full record

ArticleJACC. Cardiovascular imaging2018

Prognostic Value of Combined Clinical and Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Data Using Machine Learning.

Julian Betancur, Yuka Otaki, Manish Motwani, Mathews B Fish, Mark Lemley, Damini Dey, Heidi Gransar, Balaji Tamarappoo, Guido Germano, Tali Sharir and 2 more

Abstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in JACC. Cardiovascular imaging, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 107 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
107citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
15.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

107 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 229 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Artificial Intelligence in Nuclear Cardiology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Artificial intelligence: Applications in cardio-oncology and potential impact on racial disparities.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2024
    Article
  20. Review

47 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Julian BetancurDepartments of Imaging, Medicine, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Yuka OtakiDepartments of Imaging, Medicine, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Manish MotwaniDepartments of Imaging, Medicine, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Mathews B FishOregon Heart and Vascular Institute, Sacred Heart Medical Center, Springfield, Oregon.
Mark LemleyOregon Heart and Vascular Institute, Sacred Heart Medical Center, Springfield, Oregon.
Damini DeyDepartments of Imaging, Medicine, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Heidi GransarDepartments of Imaging, Medicine, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Balaji TamarappooDepartments of Imaging, Medicine, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Guido GermanoDepartments of Imaging, Medicine, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Tali SharirDepartment of Nuclear Cardiology, Assuta Medical Centers, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Daniel S BermanDepartments of Imaging, Medicine, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
Piotr J SlomkaDepartments of Imaging, Medicine, and Biomedical Sciences, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California. Electronic address: Piotr.Slomka@cshs.org.
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center · USProvidence Sacred Heart Medical Center · USAssuta Medical Center · IL

Funding

Quantitative Prediction of Disease and Outcomes from Next Generation SPECT and CTR01HL089765 · NHLBI · CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER · PI SLOMKA, PIOTR J · 2007 to 2021
$6.1M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL089765
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study evaluated the added predictive value of combining clinical information and myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging (MPI) data using machine learning (ML) to predict major adverse cardiac events (MACE).

backgroundTraditionally, prognostication by MPI has relied on visual or quantitative analysis of images without objective consideration of the clinical data. ML permits a large number of variables to be considered in combination and at a level of complexity beyond the human clinical reader.

methodsA total of 2,619 consecutive patients (48% men; 62 ± 13 years of age) who underwent exercise (38%) or pharmacological stress (62%) with high-speed SPECT MPI were monitored for MACE. Twenty-eight clinical variables, 17 stress test variables, and 25 imaging variables (including total perfusion deficit [TPD]) were recorded. Areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) for MACE prediction were compared among: 1) ML with all available data (ML-combined); 2) ML with only imaging data (ML-imaging); 3) 5-point scale visual diagnosis (physician [MD] diagnosis); and 4) automated quantitative imaging analysis (stress TPD and ischemic TPD). ML involved automated variable selection by information gain ranking, model building with a boosted ensemble algorithm, and 10-fold stratified cross validation.

resultsDuring follow-up (3.2 ± 0.6 years), 239 patients (9.1%) had MACE. MACE prediction was significantly higher for ML-combined than ML-imaging (AUC: 0.81 vs. 0.78; p < 0.01). ML-combined also had higher predictive accuracy compared with MD diagnosis, automated stress TPD, and automated ischemic TPD (AUC: 0.81 vs. 0.65 vs. 0.73 vs. 0.71, respectively; p < 0.01 for all). Risk reclassification for ML-combined compared with visual MD diagnosis was 26% (p < 0.001).

conclusionsML combined with both clinical and imaging data variables was found to have high predictive accuracy for 3-year risk of MACE and was superior to existing visual or automated perfusion assessments. ML could allow integration of clinical and imaging data for personalized MACE risk computations in patients undergoing SPECT MPI.

Indexed as

Machine LearningTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-PhotonAgedAged, 80 and overCardiovascular DiseasesCoronary CirculationExercise TestFemaleHealth StatusHemodynamicsHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial Perfusion ImagingPredictive Value of TestsPrognosismachine learningmajor adverse cardiac event(s)SPECT myocardial imaging

Identifiers

PMID29055639
PMCPMC5902657
OpenAlexW2765106267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.