Clinical phenotypes among patients with normal cardiac perfusion using unsupervised learning: a retrospective observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) is one of the most common cardiac scans and is used for diagnosis of coronary artery disease and assessment of cardiovascular risk. However, the large majority of MPI patients have normal results. We evaluated whether unsupervised machine learning could identify unique phenotypes among patients with normal scans and whether those phenotypes were associated with risk of death or myocardial infarction. METHODS: Patients from a large international multicenter MPI registry (10 sites) with normal perfusion by expert visual interpretation were included in this cohort analysis. The training population included 9849 patients, and external testing population 12,528 patients. Unsupervised cluster analysis was performed, with separate training and external testing cohorts, to identify clusters, with four distinct phenotypes. We evaluated the clinical and imaging features of clusters and their associations with death or myocardial infarction. FINDINGS: Patients in Clusters 1 and 2 almost exclusively underwent exercise stress, while patients in Clusters 3 and 4 mostly required pharmacologic stress. In external testing, the risk for Cluster 4 patients (20.2% of population, unadjusted hazard ratio [HR] 6.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.64-8.20) was higher than the risk associated with pharmacologic stress (HR 3.03, 95% CI 2.53-3.63), or previous myocardial infarction (HR 1.82, 95% CI 1.40-2.36). INTERPRETATION: Unsupervised learning identified four distinct phenotypes of patients with normal perfusion scans, with a significant proportion of patients at very high risk of myocardial infarction or death. Our results suggest a potential role for patient phenotyping to improve risk stratification of patients with normal imaging results. FUNDING: This work was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute at the National Institutes of Health [R35HL161195 to PS]. The REFINE SPECT database was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute at the National Institutes of Health [R01HL089765 to PS]. MCW was supported by the British Heart Foundation [FS/ICRF/20/26002].
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".