Machine learning to optimize the diagnostic performance of natriuretic peptides for acute heart failure across age groups

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentrations are influenced by age, which may influence the diagnostic performance of this peptide. Machine learning approaches incorporating NT-proBNP and age as continuous measures may have improved diagnostic performance. METHODS: We pooled individual patient-level data for 10 369 patients [median age 73 years (25th-75th percentile: 59-82)] with suspected acute heart failure across fourteen studies. The diagnostic performance of guideline-recommended NT-proBNP thresholds (uniform rule-out threshold of 300 pg/mL and age-stratified rule-in thresholds of 450, 900, and 1800 pg/mL for patients <50, 50-75, and >75 years, respectively) and the Collaboration for the Diagnosis and Evaluation of Heart Failure (CoDE-HF) machine learning model were evaluated using random effects meta-analysis across age groups. RESULTS: Overall, 43.9% (4549/10 369) of patients had an adjudicated diagnosis of acute heart failure. The negative predictive value (NPV) of the rule-out threshold of 300 pg/mL was lower in older patients [NPV 88.7% (confidence interval (CI) 84.2-92.1%) in patients ≥80 years vs 98.9% (97.6-99.5%) <50 years]. Conversely, the positive predictive value (PPV) of age-stratified rule-in thresholds was lower in younger patients [PPV 62.0% (56.2-67.5%) in those <50 years vs 79.6% (70.7-86.3%) ≥80 years]. CoDE-HF was more accurate than guideline-recommended thresholds across all age groups, with NPV and PPV ranging from 96.4% to 99.5% (93.8-99.8% CIs) and 81.1% to 84.2% (74.7-90.4% CIs), respectively. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of guideline-recommended thresholds of NT-proBNP varies significantly with age. A decision-support tool incorporating NT-proBNP with age as a continuous variable provides a more consistent and accurate approach.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.