» Articles » PMID: 36974761

Prognostic Value of Machine-Learning-Based PRAISE Score for Ischemic and Bleeding Events in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Overview
Date 2023 Mar 28
PMID 36974761
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background The PRAISE (Prediction of Adverse Events Following an Acute Coronary Syndrome) score is a machine-learning-based model for predicting 1-year all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3/5 bleeding. Its utility in an unselected Asian population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome remains unknown. We aimed to validate the PRAISE score in a real-world Asian population. Methods and Results A total of 6412 consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome were prospectively included. The PRAISE scores were compared with established scoring systems (GRACE [Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events] 2.0, PRECISE-DAPT (Predicting Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent Dual Antiplatelet Therapy), and PARIS [Patterns of Non-Adherence to Anti-Platelet Regimen in Stented Patients]) to evaluate their discrimination, calibration, and reclassification. The risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 12.24 [95% CI, 5.32-28.15]) and recurrent acute myocardial infarction (HR, 3.92 [95% CI, 1.76-8.73]) was greater in the high-risk group than in the low-risk group. The C-statistics for death, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding were 0.75 (0.67-0.83), 0.61 (0.52-0.69), and 0.62 (0.46-0.77), respectively. The observed to expected ratio of death, myocardial infarction, and major bleeding was 0.427, 0.260, and 0.106, respectively. Based on the decision curve analysis, the PRAISE score displayed a slightly greater net benefit for the 1-year risk of death (5%-10%) than the GRACE score did. Conclusions The PRAISE score showed limited potential for risk prediction in our validation cohort with acute coronary syndrome. As a result, new prediction models or model refitting are required with improved discrimination and accuracy in risk prediction.

Citing Articles

Contrastive learning with transformer for adverse endpoint prediction in patients on DAPT post-coronary stent implantation.

Li F, Sun Z, Abdelhameed A, Duan T, Rasmy L, Hu X Front Cardiovasc Med. 2025; 11:1460354.

PMID: 39872877 PMC: 11769931. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1460354.


Machine learning approaches for risk prediction after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Zaka A, Mutahar D, Gorcilov J, Gupta A, Kovoor J, Stretton B Eur Heart J Digit Health. 2025; 6(1):23-44.

PMID: 39846069 PMC: 11750198. DOI: 10.1093/ehjdh/ztae074.


Validation of machine learning-based risk stratification scores for patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with percutaneous coronary intervention.

Molenaar M, Selder J, Schmidt A, Asselbergs F, Nieuwendijk J, van Dalfsen B Eur Heart J Digit Health. 2024; 5(6):702-711.

PMID: 39563909 PMC: 11570391. DOI: 10.1093/ehjdh/ztae071.


Using the Super Learner algorithm to predict risk of major adverse cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with myocardial infarction.

Zhu X, Zhang P, Jiang H, Kuang J, Wu L BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024; 24(1):59.

PMID: 38459490 PMC: 10921576. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-024-02179-5.


Prognostic Impact of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Older Patients Hospitalized with Acute Myocardial Infarction: Real-World Findings from the Lombardy Health Database.

Marenzi G, Cosentino N, Resta M, Lucci C, Bonomi A, Trombara F J Clin Med. 2023; 12(17).

PMID: 37685696 PMC: 10488530. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12175629.

References
1.
Wang H, Gao R, Xu B, Yang Y, Yin D, Wang Y . Benefit-risk profile of extended dual antiplatelet therapy beyond 1 year in patients with high risk of ischemic or bleeding events after PCI. Platelets. 2020; 32(4):533-541. DOI: 10.1080/09537104.2020.1774052. View

2.
Riley R, Debray T, Collins G, Archer L, Ensor J, van Smeden M . Minimum sample size for external validation of a clinical prediction model with a binary outcome. Stat Med. 2021; 40(19):4230-4251. DOI: 10.1002/sim.9025. View

3.
Wang H, Dou K, Guan C, Xie L, Huang Y, Zhang R . New Insights Into Long- Versus Short-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration in Patients After Stenting for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Findings From a Prospective Observational Study. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2022; 15(6):e011536. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.121.011536. View

4.
Neumann F, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning A, Benedetto U . 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2018; 40(2):87-165. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394. View

5.
Costa F, van Klaveren D, James S, Heg D, Raber L, Feres F . Derivation and validation of the predicting bleeding complications in patients undergoing stent implantation and subsequent dual antiplatelet therapy (PRECISE-DAPT) score: a pooled analysis of individual-patient datasets from clinical trials. Lancet. 2017; 389(10073):1025-1034. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30397-5. View