Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42459183›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026

Machine learning and conventional Cox regression to predict target-lesion revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention.

Mona El-Faramawi, Marco Busco, Sören Möller, Lisette Okkels Jensen, Jens Flensted Lassen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mona El-FaramawiDepartment of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Marco BuscoDepartment of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Sciences, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
Sören MöllerEpidemiology, Biostatistics, and Biodemography. Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Lisette Okkels JensenDepartment of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Jens Flensted LassenDepartment of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Despite advances in procedural and medical treatment, the risk of target-lesion revascularization (TLR) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) persists. This study investigated the use of machine learning (ML)-based Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) to predict the risk of short- and long-term clinically driven TLR compared with conventional Cox regression with stepwise variable selection. Methods: The dataset consisted of 24,360 patients with 34,149 Results: Full Cox and stepwise Cox performed equally at 0-1 years (Harrell's C 0.6743). Cox-LASSO provided a minor improvement in predictive performance on the short-term risk of TLR (0.6774). At 1-5 years, stepwise Cox had the best predictive performance (0.6831) and was not outperformed by Cox-LASSO (0.6818). Most identified risk factors for TLR were consistent across conventional Cox models and Cox-LASSO. Survival curves showed separation between high- and low-risk index lesions in all models, as evaluated by the log-rank test. Conclusion: The ML-based Cox-LASSO model did not improve predictive performance over well-specified conventional Cox regression models for short- and long-term TLR. The models demonstrated intermediate predictive performance and suggest that they can support risk stratification after further validation, but they may not yet be precise enough for definitive bedside decision-making for individual patients.

Indexed as

machine learningpercutaneous coronary interventionprediction modelrevascularizationstent failuretarget-lesion revascularization

Identifiers

PMID42459183
PMCPMC13368786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.