Back

Screening for patients at risk for cardiac amyloidosis via electronic health records: A multicenter machine learning development and validation study

Spielvogel, C. P.; Kersting, D.; Haberl, D.; Autherith, M.; Hauptmann, L.; Yu, J.; Hennenberg, J.; Kluge, K.; Moon, K.; Settelmeier, S.; Ning, J.; Kumpf, K.; Koefler, M.; Hofer, F.; Mascherbauer, K.; Kammerlander, A.; Traub-Weidinger, T.; Kasprian, G.; Rassaf, T.; Kleesiek, J.; Herrmann, K.; Bartko, P.; Hengstenberg, C.; Hacker, M.; Calabretta, R.; Nitsche, C.

2026-04-28 cardiovascular medicine
10.64898/2026.04.27.26351820 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundTimely detection is crucial to improve outcomes in patients with cardiac amyloidosis (CA) by initiation of life-saving treatments. Although confirmatory bone scintigraphy is highly accurate for CA detection, identifying at-risk patients for referral remains challenging. ObjectivesThis study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning model, Amylo-Detect, using structured multimodal electronic health record (EHR) data to guide referrals for confirmatory scintigraphy and monoclonal protein testing. MethodsConsecutive all-comer patients (n=11,616) referred for bone scintigraphy at the Vienna General Hospital (2010-2023) were retrospectively included. Patients referred before August 2020 formed the development cohort. The remaining patients comprised the internal validation cohort. External validation was performed at the University Hospital Essen (n=1,521). Amylo-Detect was trained using 50 routinely available parameters to predict CA-suggestive uptake (Perugini grade [≥]2) and compared with an existing score and clinical routine. ResultsHigh-grade uptake was present in 388 patients (3.0%). Amylo-Detect demonstrated excellent performance in development (AUC 0.93), independent internal validation (AUC 0.91), and external validation cohort (AUC 0.91), outperforming existing scoring systems and clinical routine. Results were consistent across subgroups, even when crucial predictors were missing. Of the 42/388 (10.8%) patients missed in clinical routine, 12/42 (29%) were additionally detected by Amylo-Detect. The model further conveyed significant prognostic value for mortality and heart failure hospitalization. ConclusionsWe present Amylo-Detect, a validated EHR-based tool for CA risk prediction, available as a web app, allowing application and further evaluation. By improving timely detection and referral, Amylo-Detect promises to address diagnostic delays and improve outcomes. Author summaryCardiac amyloidosis is a progressive and often fatal heart disease that is frequently diagnosed too late, even though effective treatments are now available. A major challenge is recognizing which patients should be referred for specialized testing, because early symptoms are diverse and often non-specific. In this study, we developed and validated a machine learning prediction system, called Amylo-Detect, that uses routinely collected information from electronic health records to identify patients who may be at risk for cardiac amyloidosis. We trained and externally validated the tool using data from 13,137 patients across two hospitals. We found that Amylo-Detect was highly accurate in identifying patients with disease-indicative findings on confirmatory scans and identified a substantial number of patients who were not initially suspected of having cardiac amyloidosis. Amylo-Detect, which we make publicly available via a web app, consistently outperformed existing risk scores and routine clinical decision-making. Our findings suggest that automated analysis of electronic health records can support clinicians in recognizing cardiac amyloidosis earlier, reduce diagnostic delays, and potentially improve patient outcomes by enabling timely treatment.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.6%
2
Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine
42 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.5%
3
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
8.5%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 33%
4.4%
5
The American Journal of Cardiology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.0%
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 33%
3.7%
7
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
8
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.1%
9
Circulation
66 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.6%
10
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.4%
11
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.1%
12
Biomedicines
66 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.1%
13
European Respiratory Journal
54 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.7%
14
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
15
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
16
Genome Medicine
154 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
17
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
18
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
19
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
20
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
21
Heart
10 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.0%
22
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.0%
23
Genetics in Medicine
69 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
24
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.9%
25
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
18 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
26
European Heart Journal
16 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
27
BJGP Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
28
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
29
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
30
Open Heart
19 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%