Treffer: Development of an interpretable machine learning model for early prediction of aortic stiffness risk in health examination populations.
Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2023 Mar 1;30(4):290-292. (PMID: 36384026)
J Hypertens. 2021 Dec 1;39(12):2361-2369. (PMID: 34343145)
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2021 Jan 13;21(1):34. (PMID: 33441079)
Cardiol Res Pract. 2024 Dec 19;2024:4944517. (PMID: 39734755)
Cells. 2021 Jul 23;10(8):. (PMID: 34440638)
Am J Nephrol. 2020;51(3):201-215. (PMID: 32023606)
J Atheroscler Thromb. 2020 Jun 1;27(6):611-619. (PMID: 31597887)
Cardiovasc Res. 2018 Mar 15;114(4):529-539. (PMID: 29394331)
J Hypertens. 2020 Nov;38(11):2161-2168. (PMID: 32694334)
Hypertension. 2022 May;79(5):1045-1056. (PMID: 35168368)
Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2023 Sep 2;22(1):237. (PMID: 37660030)
BMJ. 2016 Jan 25;352:i6. (PMID: 26810254)
Hypertension. 2024 Sep;81(9):1986-1995. (PMID: 38934112)
Circulation. 2024 Jul 23;150(4):e65-e88. (PMID: 38832505)
Biomedicines. 2023 Feb 16;11(2):. (PMID: 36831118)
EBioMedicine. 2024 May;103:105107. (PMID: 38632024)
Stat Methods Med Res. 2019 Aug;28(8):2455-2474. (PMID: 29966490)
Int J Mol Sci. 2022 Apr 02;23(7):. (PMID: 35409326)
Biomolecules. 2022 Apr 04;12(4):. (PMID: 35454131)
Heart Lung Circ. 2021 Nov;30(11):1694-1701. (PMID: 34503918)
J Hypertens. 2012 Mar;30(3):445-8. (PMID: 22278144)
Atherosclerosis. 2019 Apr;283:7-12. (PMID: 30771558)
Hypertension. 2024 Jan;81(1):183-192. (PMID: 37975229)
Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024 Jan 8;25(1):7. (PMID: 39077652)
Obes Surg. 2021 Oct;31(10):4461-4469. (PMID: 34319469)
Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2025 Sep 1;10(1):282. (PMID: 40887468)
Curr Hypertens Rep. 2024 Mar;26(3):131-140. (PMID: 38159167)
Biomedicines. 2021 Jun 25;9(7):. (PMID: 34202201)
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2020 Oct 29;7:544302. (PMID: 33330638)
Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2020 May;40(5):1034-1043. (PMID: 31875700)
Medicina (Kaunas). 2020 Sep 08;56(9):. (PMID: 32911665)
Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2021 Jan;41(1):68-75. (PMID: 33000520)
Atherosclerosis. 2024 Nov;398:118592. (PMID: 39383625)
Am J Hypertens. 2020 Nov 3;33(11):1003-1010. (PMID: 32530466)
Eur Heart J. 2018 Sep 1;39(33):3021-3104. (PMID: 30165516)
Circ Res. 2021 Apr 2;128(7):864-886. (PMID: 33793325)
Am J Public Health. 2010 Dec;100(12):2464-72. (PMID: 20966369)
Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Nov 23;8:765924. (PMID: 34888327)
Eur Heart J. 2010 Oct;31(19):2338-50. (PMID: 20530030)
Curr Med Chem. 2019;26(9):1644-1664. (PMID: 29848265)
Weitere Informationen
Background: Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) is the gold standard for assessing aortic stiffness, but its complexity, time consumption, and privacy concerns limit its application in routine health examinations. This study aimed to develop an interpretable machine learning model based on readily accessible indicators, providing an alternative screening tool for institutions unable to perform cfPWV measurements.
Methods: A total of 261 participants were enrolled as the development cohort and randomly divided into training and testing sets (7:3 ratio), with 101 additional participants as an independent external validation set. Aortic stiffness was defined as cfPWV ≥10 m/s. Features were selected by combining univariate logistic regression, recursive feature elimination with random forest (RFE-RF), and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) methods. Six machine learning models were constructed: logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), support vector machine (SVM), Naive Bayes (NB), and K-nearest neighbours (KNN). Internal validation was performed using 5-fold cross-validation, and performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA). The optimal model was validated on the external set, and interpretability was analyzed using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Subsequently, the model was deployed as an interactive, web-based application utilizing the Streamlit framework in Python.
Results: Seven key variables were selected: Age, body mass index (BMI), mean arterial pressure (MAP), fasting blood glucose (FBG), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), glomerular filtration rate (GFR), and aspartate aminotransferase (AST). The XGBoost model achieved the best performance with an AUC of 0.903 (95% CI: 0.830-0.975) on the testing set and a mean AUC of 0.979 (95% CI: 0.960-0.997) in 5-fold cross-validation on the training set. External validation demonstrated robust generalizability (AUC = 1.000). DCA indicated a favourable clinical net benefit, and SHAP analysis quantified feature contributions.
Conclusion: This study developed a high-performance XGBoost model based on routine health examination indicators and further implemented an accessible web-based calculator to support clinical decision-making in settings without direct access to cfPWV measurement. The calculator is available at: https://lgezijo5wyivqrnt2zrkcm.streamlit.app/.
(© 2026 Zhou, Sun, Qian, Ma, Kong, Li, Zhang and Li.)
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.