Scoring of Coronary Artery Disease Characteristics on Coronary CT Angiograms by Using Machine Learning.

Background Coronary CT angiography contains prognostic information but the best method to extract these data remains unknown. Purpose To use machine learning to develop a model of vessel features to discriminate between patients with and without subsequent death or cardiovascular events. Performance was compared with that of conventional scores. Materials and Methods Coronary CT angiography was analyzed by radiologists into four features for each of 16 coronary segments. Four machine learning model types were explored. Five conventional vessel scores were computed for comparison including the Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS) score. The National Death Index was retrospectively queried from January 2004 through December 2015. Outcomes were all-cause mortality, coronary heart disease deaths, and coronary deaths or nonfatal myocardial infarctions. Score performance was assessed by using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results Between February 2004 and November 2009, 6892 patients (4452 men [mean age ± standard deviation, 51 years ± 11] and 2440 women [mean age, 57 years ± 12]) underwent coronary CT angiography (median follow-up, 9.0 years; interquartile range, 8.2-9.8 years). There were 380 deaths of all causes, 70 patients died of coronary artery disease, and 43 patients reported nonfatal myocardial infarctions. For all-cause mortality, the AUC was 0.77 (95% confidence interval: 0.76, 0.77) for machine learning (k-nearest neighbors) versus 0.72 (95% confidence interval: 0.72, 0.72) for CAD-RADS (P < .001). For coronary artery heart disease deaths, AUC was 0.85 (95% confidence interval: 0.84, 0.85) for machine learning versus 0.79 (95% confidence interval: 0.78, 0.80) for CAD-RADS (P < .001). When deciding whether to start statins, if the choice is made to tolerate treating 45 patients to be sure to include one patient who will later die of coronary disease, the use of the machine learning score ensures that 93% of patients with events will be administered the drug; if CAD-RADS is used, only 69% will be treated. Conclusion Compared with Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System and other scores, machine learning methods better discriminated patients who subsequently experienced an adverse event from those who did not. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Schoepf and Tesche in this issue.

[1]  J. Stehli,et al.  Prognostic value of coronary CT angiography on long-term follow-up of 6.9 years , 2014, The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging.

[2]  Mouaz Al-Mallah,et al.  Age- and sex-related differences in all-cause mortality risk based on coronary computed tomography angiography findings results from the International Multicenter CONFIRM (Coronary CT Angiography Evaluation for Clinical Outcomes: An International Multicenter Registry) of 23,854 patients without know , 2011, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  Udo Hoffmann,et al.  Assessment of coronary remodeling in stenotic and nonstenotic coronary atherosclerotic lesions by multidetector spiral computed tomography. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[4]  Konstantin Nikolaou,et al.  Meta-analysis and systematic review of the long-term predictive value of assessment of coronary atherosclerosis by contrast-enhanced coronary computed tomography angiography. , 2011, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  J. Stehli,et al.  Long-term prognostic performance of low-dose coronary computed tomography angiography with prospective electrocardiogram triggering , 2017, European Radiology.

[6]  Piotr J. Slomka,et al.  Quantitative global plaque characteristics from coronary computed tomography angiography for the prediction of future cardiac mortality during long-term follow-up , 2017, European heart journal cardiovascular Imaging.

[7]  Steve Halligan,et al.  Disadvantages of using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to assess imaging tests: A discussion and proposal for an alternative approach , 2015, European Radiology.

[8]  Kevin M. Johnson,et al.  Accuracy of statin assignment using the 2013 AHA/ACC Cholesterol Guideline versus the 2001 NCEP ATP III guideline: correlation with atherosclerotic plaque imaging. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[9]  D. Berman,et al.  Long-term prognostic impact of CT-Leaman score in patients with non-obstructive CAD: Results from the COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes InteRnational Multicenter (CONFIRM) study. , 2017, International journal of cardiology.

[10]  D. Berman,et al.  Optimized prognostic score for coronary computed tomographic angiography: results from the CONFIRM registry (COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter Registry). , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[11]  D. Berman,et al.  Age-related risk of major adverse cardiac event risk and coronary artery disease extent and severity by coronary CT angiography: results from 15 187 patients from the International Multisite CONFIRM Study. , 2014, European heart journal cardiovascular Imaging.

[12]  R. Cury,et al.  ACR appropriateness criteria asymptomatic patient at risk for coronary artery disease. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[13]  Richard Simon,et al.  Bias in error estimation when using cross-validation for model selection , 2006, BMC Bioinformatics.

[14]  B. Chow,et al.  Appropriate Use Criteria for Cardiac Computed Tomography: Does Computed Tomography Have Incremental Value in All Appropriate Use Criteria Categories? , 2017, Journal of thoracic imaging.

[15]  Taylor M. Duguay,et al.  Prognostic implications of coronary CT angiography-derived quantitative markers for the prediction of major adverse cardiac events. , 2016, Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography.

[16]  D. Berman,et al.  The Coronary Artery Disease-Reporting and Data System (CAD-RADS): Prognostic and Clinical Implications Associated With Standardized Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Reporting. , 2018, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[17]  Yao Lu,et al.  Maximization of the usage of coronary CTA derived plaque information using a machine learning based algorithm to improve risk stratification; insights from the CONFIRM registry. , 2018, Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography.

[18]  Ilan Gottlieb,et al.  Prognostic performance of coronary computed tomography angiography in asymptomatic individuals as compared to symptomatic patients with an appropriate indication. , 2017, Journal of cardiovascular computed tomography.