Back

AI-Driven Personalization of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration Post-PCI: A Novel Approach Balancing Ischemic and Bleeding Risks in the UAE Population

Iftikhar, H.

2025-03-18 cardiovascular medicine
10.1101/2025.03.16.25324067 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPrecision-guided dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains a clinical challenge. Current risk stratification methods lack personalization, underscoring the need for advanced predictive tools. We developed and validated an artificial intelligence (AI) framework (LightGBM, random forest [RF], logistic regression [LR]) to optimize DAPT duration using multinational datasets. MethodsStructured clinical data from 5,000 patients (Bayanat Data Portal, UAE; MIMIC-IV PhysioNet, global) were analyzed. The dataset was split into training (70%), validation (15%), and test (15%) sets, ensuring balanced outcomes. Primary endpoints were ischemic and bleeding events over 37 months. Models predicted outcomes and recommended patient-specific DAPT durations. Performance was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC), Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and feature importance. Calibration and cross-validation ensured generalizability, while cost-effectiveness was assessed via healthcare utilization and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). ResultsKey predictors included obesity, prior myocardial infarction, and CYP2C19 genetic risk. LightGBM outperformed conventional risk scores (AUC 0.89 vs. 0.75; *p* < 0.001). AI-guided DAPT significantly improved event-free survival (log-rank *p* < 0.01), reducing overtreatment in low-risk patients and bleeding in high-risk groups. The AI strategy yielded cost savings (17,150 AED/patient) and superior cost-effectiveness (ICER: -451,315 AED/QALY). ConclusionAI-driven DAPT personalization enhances risk prediction, treatment safety, and clinical outcomes post-PCI. This framework demonstrates real-world potential, particularly when incorporating regional data for tailored decisions. Prospective validation is warranted to confirm these findings. Clinical PerspectiveO_LITherapeutic Gap: Existing DAPT guidelines provide wide-ranging approvals, but personalized therapy remains a limitation due to interpatient unpredictability in ischemic and bleeding risk. C_LIO_LINovelty of AI Implementation: This study exceptionally integrates AI-driven models trained on both UAE-specific and worldwide datasets to enhance DAPT duration selection. C_LIO_LIImproved Risk Stratification: Machine learning algorithms exhibit conventional risk assessment tools in evaluating ischemic and bleeding measures, allowing a more accurate balance of security and effectiveness. C_LIO_LIClinical Translational Potential: Using both regional and global data ensures diverse population applicability while preserving culturally and epidemiologically adapted application. C_LIO_LIEconomic Influence: Cost-effectiveness analysis validates that AI-driven DAPT modifications reduce unnecessary treatment and health care insignificance while ensuring cardiovascular protection. C_LI Clinical ImplicationsO_LIPatient-tailored Antiplatelet Regimens: AI-based models qualify individualized clinical management strategy, affecting beyond standardized Fixed-duration DAPT paradigms. C_LIO_LIAttenuation of Complications: Evidence-based treatment span lowers ischemia-vulnerable patients while preserving coagulation stability in those with favorable risk profiles. C_LIO_LIData-Driven Clinical Optimization: Healthcare providers can utilize computational risk stratification to calibrate pharmacotherapeutic precision, facilitating treatment persistence and efficacy measures. C_LIO_LIGeographically tailored care innovations: Conclusions propose a model for machine learning incorporation in Middle Eastern heart care. C_LIO_LIProspective Investigative Priorities: Results provide the foundation for longitudinal validations of AI-driven risk assessment in multinational samples. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.