Machine learning identification of risk factors for ischaemic stroke in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction but without atrial fibrillation: A report from WARCEF trial

Abstract Background The prediction of ischaemic stroke in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but without atrial fibrillation (AF) remains challenging and risk stratification based clinical factors alone has limited discrimination. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of machine learning (ML) to identify risk factors for ischaemic stroke in such HFrEF patients. Methods We performed a post-hoc analysis of the WARCEF trial, only including patients without prior history of AF, and censoring those who developed incident AF during follow-up. We evaluated the performance of 9 ML models to identify risk factors for incident stroke, using metrics including area under the curve (AUC), precision, specificity, and decision curve analysis. The importance of each feature in constructing the model was quantified using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values. Results We included 2,213 patients with HFrEF but without AF (mean age 59±12 years; 79% male). Of these, 74 (3.3%) had an ischaemic stroke during mean follow-up of 3.5±1.8 years. Out of the 29 patient-demographics variables, 12 were selected for the ML training. All ML models demonstrated high AUC values, outperforming the CHA2DS2-VASc score (Figure 1). The logistic regression model exhibited a slight deviation from this trend. The XGBoost model achieved an AUC of 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-0.99), while the Random Forest model showed an AUC of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.74-0.96). Similarly, the Support Vector Machine and Light Gradient Boosting Machine models recorded AUCs of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.72-0.97) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.70-0.96), respectively. Each of these models attained precision and specificity scores of 1.0, indicating high performance. These models consistently provided significant net clinical benefits. Key risk factors for stroke identified across these models were creatinine clearance and blood urea nitrogen. The use of warfarin appears to be protective. Conclusions Machine-learning models can identify risk factors for ischaemic stroke in patients with HFrEF but without AF. Worsening renal failure was predictive of an incident stroke, while warfarin use was protective against stroke (Figure 2).Figure 1Figure 2

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Heart Journal
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.2307
Primary Topic
Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Machine learning identification of risk factors for ischaemic stroke in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction but without atrial fibrillation: A report from WARCEF trial

Hiroshi Ishiguchi, John L.P. Thompson, Azmil H. Abdul‐Rahim, Ying X. Gue et al.
European Heart Journal
Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
article

Machine learning identification of risk factors for ischaemic stroke in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction but without atrial fibrillation: A report from WARCEF trial

Hiroshi Ishiguchi, John L.P. Thompson, Azmil H. Abdul‐Rahim, Ying X. Gue, Bin Huang, Yang Chen, S. Homma, G Y H Lip, E Correa
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background The prediction of ischaemic stroke in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but without atrial fibrillation (AF) remains challenging and risk stratification based clinical factors alone has limited discrimination. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of machine learning (ML) to identify risk factors for ischaemic stroke in such HFrEF patients. Methods We performed a post-hoc analysis of the WARCEF trial, only including patients without prior history of AF, and censoring those who developed incident AF during follow-up. We evaluated the performance of 9 ML models to identify risk factors for incident stroke, using metrics including area under the curve (AUC), precision, specificity, and decision curve analysis. The importance of each feature in constructing the model was quantified using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values. Results We included 2,213 patients with HFrEF but without AF (mean age 59±12 years; 79% male). Of these, 74 (3.3%) had an ischaemic stroke during mean follow-up of 3.5±1.8 years. Out of the 29 patient-demographics variables, 12 were selected for the ML training. All ML models demonstrated high AUC values, outperforming the CHA2DS2-VASc score (Figure 1). The logistic regression model exhibited a slight deviation from this trend. The XGBoost model achieved an AUC of 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-0.99), while the Random Forest model showed an AUC of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.74-0.96). Similarly, the Support Vector Machine and Light Gradient Boosting Machine models recorded AUCs of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.72-0.97) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.70-0.96), respectively. Each of these models attained precision and specificity scores of 1.0, indicating high performance. These models consistently provided significant net clinical benefits. Key risk factors for stroke identified across these models were creatinine clearance and blood urea nitrogen. The use of warfarin appears to be protective. Conclusions Machine-learning models can identify risk factors for ischaemic stroke in patients with HFrEF but without AF. Worsening renal failure was predictive of an incident stroke, while warfarin use was protective against stroke (Figure 2).Figure 1Figure 2

European Heart JournalVol. 45(Supplement_1)
Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US), Liverpool John Moores University (GB)
National Institutes of Health
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.