Machine Learning-based Development and Validation of a Scoring System for Screening High-Risk Esophageal Varices.

BACKGROUND & AIMS Many patients with cirrhosis who undergo esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) screening for esophageal varices (EVs) are found to have no or only small EVs. Endoscopic screening for EVs is therefore a potentially deferrable procedure that increases patient risk and healthcare cost. We developed and validated a scoring system, based on readily-available data, to identify patients with EVs varices that need treatment. METHODS We collected data from 238 patients with cirrhosis undergoing screening EGD from January 2016 through December 2017 at 3 separate hospitals in Los Angeles (training cohort). We collected data on patient sex, age, race/ethnicity, platelet counts, and levels of hemoglobin, serum sodium, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, international normalized ratio, albumin, urea nitrogen, and creatinine. We also included etiology of cirrhosis, presence of ascites, and presence of hepatic encephalopathy. We used a random forest algorithm to identify factors significantly associated with the presence of EVs and varices that needed treatment (VNT) and calculated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). We called this algorithm the EVendo score. We tested the accuracy of EVendo in a prospective study of 109 patients undergoing screening EGDs at the same medical centers from January 2018 through December 2018 (validation cohort). RESULTS We developed an algorithm that identified patients with EVs and VNT based on international normalized ratio, level of aspartate aminotransferase, platelet counts, urea nitrogen, hemoglobin, and presence of ascites. The EVendo system identified patients with EVs in the training set with an AUROC of 0.84, patients with EVs in the validation set with and AUROC of 0.82, and EVs in patients with cirrhosis Child-Turcotte-Pugh class A (n = 235) with an AUROC of 0.81. The system identified patients with VNT in the training set with an AUROC of 0.74, VNT in the validation set with and AUROC of 0.75, VNT in patients with cirrhosis Child-Turcotte-Pugh class A with and AUROC of 0.75. An EVendo score below 3.90 would have spared 30.5% patients from EGDs, missing only 2.8% of VNT. The same cutoff would have spared 40.0% of patients with Child-Turcotte-Pugh class A cirrhosis from EGDs, missing only 1.1% of VNT. CONCLUSIONS We identified an algorithm, called the EVendo score, that can be used to identify patients with EVs and VNT based on readily available data from patients with cirrhosis. This system could help patients at low risk for VNT avoid unnecessary EGDs.

[1]  T. Therneau,et al.  A model to predict survival in patients with end‐stage liver disease , 2001 .

[2]  F. Nakao,et al.  Sedation during upper GI endoscopy in cirrhotic outpatients: a randomized, controlled trial comparing propofol and fentanyl with midazolam and fentanyl. , 2011, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[3]  G. Cioni,et al.  A prospective study of the ability of three endoscopic classifications to predict hemorrhage from esophageal varices. , 1992, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[4]  E Testa,et al.  Platelet count/spleen diameter ratio: proposal and validation of a non-invasive parameter to predict the presence of oesophageal varices in patients with liver cirrhosis , 2003, Gut.

[5]  N. Chalasani,et al.  Predictors of large esophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis , 1999, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[6]  M. Varma,et al.  Platelet count to spleen diameter ratio for the diagnosis of esophageal varices: Is it feasible? , 2008, Canadian journal of gastroenterology = Journal canadien de gastroenterologie.

[7]  R. Testa,et al.  Platelet Count/Spleen Diameter Ratio for the Noninvasive Diagnosis of Esophageal Varices: Results of a Multicenter, Prospective, Validation Study , 2006, The American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[8]  J. Bosch,et al.  Noninvasive tools and risk of clinically significant portal hypertension and varices in compensated cirrhosis: The “Anticipate” study , 2016, Hepatology.

[9]  J. Bosch,et al.  Portal hypertensive bleeding in cirrhosis: Risk stratification, diagnosis, and management: 2016 practice guidance by the American Association for the study of liver diseases , 2017, Hepatology.

[10]  J. Montaner,et al.  Development of a simple noninvasive index to predict significant fibrosis in patients with HIV/HCV coinfection , 2006, Hepatology.

[11]  R. Franchis Expanding consensus in portal hypertension Report of the Baveno VI Consensus Workshop: Stratifying risk and individualizing care for portal hypertension , 2015 .

[12]  H. Mulcahy,et al.  Prediction of Esophageal Varices in Patients With Cirrhosis , 2002, Journal of clinical gastroenterology.

[13]  Y. Liaw,et al.  Hepatitis B flares in chronic hepatitis B: pathogenesis, natural course, and management. , 2014, Journal of hepatology.

[14]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[15]  K. Suk Hepatic venous pressure gradient: clinical use in chronic liver disease , 2014, Clinical and molecular hepatology.

[16]  G. Casazza,et al.  Platelet count, spleen length, and platelet count-to-spleen length ratio for the diagnosis of oesophageal varices in people with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. , 2017, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[17]  J. Bosch,et al.  Expanding the Baveno VI criteria for the screening of varices in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease , 2017, Hepatology.

[18]  A. Ponte,et al.  The Baveno VI criteria for predicting esophageal varices: validation in real life practice. , 2017, Revista espanola de enfermedades digestivas : organo oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Patologia Digestiva.