The Machine Learning Models in Major Cardiovascular Adverse Events Prediction Based on Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography: Systematic Review

Background Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has emerged as the first-line noninvasive imaging test for patients at high risk of coronary artery disease (CAD). When combined with machine learning (ML), it provides more valid evidence in diagnosing major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). Radiomics provides informative multidimensional features that can help identify high-risk populations and can improve the diagnostic performance of CCTA. However, its role in predicting MACEs remains highly debated. Objective We evaluated the diagnostic value of ML models constructed using radiomic features extracted from CCTA in predicting MACEs, and compared the performance of different learning algorithms and models, thereby providing clinical recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of MACEs. Methods We comprehensively searched 5 online databases, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Elsevier, CNKI, and PubMed, up to September 10, 2024, for original studies that used ML models among patients who underwent CCTA to predict MACEs and reported clinical outcomes and endpoints related to it. Risk of bias in the ML models was assessed by the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, while the radiomics quality score (RQS) was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the radiomics prediction model development and validation. We also followed the TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis) guidelines to ensure transparency of ML models included. Meta-analysis was performed using Meta-DiSc software (version 1.4), which included the I² score and Cochran Q test, along with StataMP 17 (StataCorp) to assess heterogeneity and publication bias. Due to the high heterogeneity observed, subgroup analysis was conducted based on different model groups. Results Ten studies were included in the analysis, 5 (50%) of which differentiated between training and testing groups, where the training set collected 17 kinds of models and the testing set gathered 26 models. The pooled area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve for ML models predicting MACEs was 0.7879 in the training set and 0.7981 in the testing set. Logistic regression (LR), the most commonly used algorithm, achieved an AUROC of 0.8229 in the testing group and 0.7983 in the training group. Non-LR models yielded AUROCs of 0.7390 in the testing set and 0.7648 in the training set, while the random forest (RF) models reached an AUROC of 0.8444 in the training group. Conclusions Study limitations included a limited number of studies, high heterogeneity, and the types of included studies. The performance of ML models for predicting MACEs was found to be superior to that of general models based on basic feature extraction and integration from CCTA. Specifically, LR-based ML diagnostic models demonstrated significant clinical potential, particularly when combined with clinical features, and are worth further validation through more clinical trials. Trial Registration PROSPERO CRD42024596364; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024596364