BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making· 2026Q1
Development and external validation of an explainable machine learning model for risk stratification of patients with chronotropic incompetence undergoing exercise stress SPECT-MPI: a dual-center study
- 0citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
An explainable XGBoost machine learning model, integrating clinical, exercise, and SPECT-MPI data, accurately stratified cardiovascular risk in patients with chronotropic incompetence, achieving a 5-year AUC of 0.884 in external validation, outperforming traditional models.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Developed and externally validated an explainable XGBoost survival model for MACE prediction in chronotropic incompetence patients undergoing SPECT-MPI.
- The model integrated clinical (dyslipidemia, diabetes), exercise (heart rate recovery), and perfusion imaging (summed motion score, TPD) data.
- Achieved a 5-year AUC of 0.884 in external validation, outperforming Cox models (0.834) and clinical-only XGBoost (0.811).
- Identified five key predictors: dyslipidemia, diabetes, summed motion score, TPD, and heart rate recovery at 3 min (HRR3).
- The model demonstrated robust risk stratification, with clearly separated risk groups in both derivation and validation cohorts.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract Background Chronotropic incompetence is associated with increased cardiovascular risk in patients undergoing exercise stress single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT-MPI). However, prognostic tools integrating clinical, exercise, and perfusion imaging information in this population remain limited. We aimed to develop and externally validate an explainable machine-learning model for predicting major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Methods This retrospective dual-center study included 1,060 patients with chronotropic incompetence (heart rate reserve < 80%) undergoing exercise stress SPECT-MPI (derivation cohort, n = 765; external validation cohort, n = 295). The primary endpoint was composite MACE. Five survival algorithms were evaluated using strict five-fold nested cross-validation. All data-dependent preprocessing, LASSO-Cox stability selection, sample-weight selection, and hyperparameter optimization were confined to the corresponding outer-training folds, and internal performance was estimated from patient-level out-of-fold (OOF) predictions. The optimal algorithm was selected using a composite score integrating discrimination and prediction-error metrics. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis was used for model interpretation. Results During a median follow-up of 63 months, 180 MACE events occurred. XGBoost achieved the highest composite score, with a nested OOF censoring-weighted C-index of 0.889 (95% CI, 0.861–0.917) and mean cumulative/dynamic AUC of 0.919 (95% CI, 0.892–0.943). Full-derivation stability selection retained five predictors: dyslipidaemia, diabetes, summed motion score, total perfusion deficit (TPD), and heart rate recovery at 3 min (HRR3). In the external cohort, the 5-year cumulative/dynamic AUC was 0.884 (95% CI, 0.818–0.933), compared with 0.834 for a Cox model using the same five predictors, 0.826 for TPD-plus-HRR3 XGBoost, and 0.811 for clinical-only XGBoost. Derivation-defined risk groups remained clearly separated for MACE in both cohorts (log-rank P < 0.001). Sensitivity analyses, including reintroduction of all six medication variables, supported the robustness of the final predictor set and model performance. Conclusions An explainable XGBoost survival model integrating clinical, exercise, and SPECT-MPI information provided robust risk stratification in patients with chronotropic incompetence and maintained discrimination in independent external validation. The model was implemented as a web-based research calculator. Its use should remain restricted to patients meeting the study eligibility criteria, excluding those with prior myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization, pending further prospective multicenter validation. Clinical trial number Not applicable.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Complementary and alternative medicine
Complementary and alternative medicineMedicine