ArticleCirculation. Genomic and precision medicine2025
Machine Learning-Based Plasma Protein Risk Score Improves Atrial Fibrillation Prediction Over Clinical and Genomic Models.
Article in Circulation. Genomic and precision medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Freely available genomic datasets for atrial fibrillation research: current resources and analytical pipeline.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Pooled it
- The gut-heart axis in atrial fibrillation: Pathophysiology, evidence, and therapeutic potential.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Review
- Epicardial adipose tissue radiomic features from pre-procedural CT to predict atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation for pulmonary vein isolation.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- From acute diagnosis to longitudinal risk stratification: a paradigm shift in the clinical role of cardiac biomarkers.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- The Roles of EDA2R in Ageing and Disease.Aging cell · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence in the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical factors discriminate incident atrial fibrillation (AF) risk with moderate accuracy, with only modest improvement after incorporation of polygenic risk scores. Whether emerging large-scale proteomic profiling can augment AF risk estimation is unknown.
methodsIn the UK Biobank cohort, we derived and validated a machine learning model to predict incident AF risk using serum proteins (Pro-AF). We compared Pro-AF to a validated clinical risk score (Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology-Atrial Fibrillation, CHARGE-AF) and an AF polygenic risk score. Models were evaluated in a multiply resampled test set from nested cross-validation (internal test set), and a sample of UK Biobank participants separate from model development (hold-out test set). Metrics included discrimination of 5-year incident AF using time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and net reclassification.
resultsTrained in 32 631 UK Biobank participants, Pro-AF predicts incident AF using 121 protein levels (out of 2911 protein analytes). When assessed in the internal test set comprising 30 632 individuals (mean age 57±8 years, 54% women, 2045 AF events) and hold-out test set comprising 13 998 individuals (mean age 57±8 years, 54% women, 870 AF events), discrimination of 5-year incident AF was highest using Pro-AF (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve internal: 0.761 [95% CI, 0.745-0.780], hold-out: 0.763 [0.734-0.784]), followed by CHARGE-AF (0.719 [0.700-0.737]; 0.702 [0.668-0.730]) and the polygenic risk score (0.686 [0.668-0.702]; 0.682 [0.660-0.710]). AF risk estimates were well-calibrated, and the addition of Pro-AF led to substantial continuous net reclassification improvement over CHARGE-AF (eg, internal test set 0.410 [0.330-0.492]). A simplified Pro-AF including only the 5 most influential proteins (NT-proBNP [N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide], EDA2R [ectodysplasin A2 receptor], NPPB [B-type natriuretic peptide], BCAN [brevican core protein], and GDF15 [growth/differentiation factor 15]), retained favorable discriminative value (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve internal: 0.750 [0.733-0.768]; hold-out: 0.759 [0.732-0.790]).
conclusionsA machine learning-based protein score discriminates 5-year incident AF risk favorably compared with clinical and genetic risk factors. Large-scale proteomic analysis may assist in the prioritization of individuals at risk for AF for screening and related preventive interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.