Risk Prediction of Coronary Artery Stenosis in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease Based on Logistic Regression and Artificial Neural Network

Abstract

Objective. Coronary heart disease (CHD) is considered an inflammatory relative disease. This study is aimed at analyzing the health information of serum interferon in CHD based on logistic regression and artificial neural network (ANN) model. Method. A total of 155 CHD patients diagnosed by coronary angiography in our department from January 2017 to March 2020 were included. All patients were randomly divided into a training set ( n = 108 ) and a test set ( n = 47 ). Logistic regression and ANN models were constructed using the training set data. The predictive factors of coronary artery stenosis were screened, and the predictive effect of the model was evaluated by using the test set data. All the health information of participants was collected. Expressions of serum IFN-γ, MIG, and IP-10 were detected by double antibody sandwich ELISA. Spearman linear correlation analysis determined the relationship between the interferon and degree of stenosis. The logistic regression model was used to evaluate independent risk factors of CHD. Result. The Spearman correlation analysis showed that the degree of stenosis was positively correlated with serum IFN-γ, MIG, and IP-10 levels. The logistic regression analysis and ANN model showed that the MIG and IP-10 were independent predictors of Gensini score: MIG (95% CI: 0.876~0.934, P < 0.001 ) and IP-10 (95% CI: 1.009~1.039, P < 0.001 ). There was no statistically significant difference between the logistic regression and the ANN model ( P > 0.05 ). Conclusion. The logistic regression model and ANN model have similar predictive performance for coronary artery stenosis risk factors in patients with CHD. In patients with CHD, the expression levels of IFN-γ, IP-10, and MIG are positively correlated with the degree of stenosis. The IP-10 and MIG are independent risk factors for coronary artery stenosis.

Establishment and analysis of artificial neural network diagnosis model for coagulation-related molecular subgroups in coronary artery disease

“…Artificial intelligence facilitates the clinical diagnostic and prognosis prediction processes by classifying and organizing medical knowledge and clinical data (Wong and Monaco, 1995;Jiang et al, 2017). The combined model of machine learning and artificial neural networks utilizing genetic polymorphisms in this study outperforms previous ANN models (Cheng et al, 2022) and other machine learning approaches (Peng et al, 2022) based solely on clinical features when diagnosing CAD patient subgroups. This enhanced diagnostic performance underscores the importance of integrating genetic information into predictive models for CAD.…”

Predicting the risk of acute kidney injury after cardiopulmonary bypass: development and assessment of a new predictive nomogram

“…Although both are popular algorithms in the field of machine learning, they have different advantages in different aspects: Compared with the readability of the model, Logistic regression has a great advantage over neural network. In most cases, because of the complex internal operation mechanism of neural network, the output results are directly obtained from the input, and people can use the knowledge induced by the model without understanding its operation [ 21 ]. We reconstruct the neural network model with the independent variables included in the above logistic regression model.…”

Comparing the performances of support vector machines, artificial neural network, and a logistic regression model for predicting coronary artery diseases: a cross‑sectional study

“…Comparison of ANN and LR models based on AUC index shows that LR model performs relatively better but not statistically signi cant. Cheng X et al [39] conducted a study aimed at predicting the risk of coronary artery stenosis in patients with coronary artery disease using logistic regression and arti cial neural network models. The study showed that the AUC of the LR model was 0.947 and that of the ANN model was 0.958, with no statistically signi cant difference between them, which is consistent with our ndings.…”