Back

Agentic Autodiscovery of Diastolic Dysfunction Phenotypes from Surface Electrocardiogram

Jamthikar, A. D.; Shanmugham, A.; Singh, S.; Radhakrishnan, A.; Dong, J.; Maganti, K.; Yanamala, N.; Sengupta, P.

2026-06-23 cardiovascular medicine
10.64898/2026.06.17.26355897 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) is a major determinant of heart failure (HF), yet its assessment relies on multiparametric echocardiography, limiting scalability. We previously demonstrated that generative artificial intelligence (AI) can synthesize tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) waveforms from the 12-lead ECG. The growing complexity of candidate architecture creates a need for automated model-discovery frameworks. Objectives: To evaluate agentic AI-based auto-discovery for ECG-based LVDD assessment using either raw ECG or synthetic TDI waveforms. Methods: Two attention-based agentic AI architectures were developed using an automated large language model-driven refinement framework that optimized transfer-learning and multimodal architectures through autonomous proposal, validation, and selection of candidate model configurations. Development was performed in 1,011 paired ECG-echocardiography studies and externally validated in 983 patients using two reference frameworks: (i) data-driven phenogroups and (ii) the 2025 ASE Diastolic Function Guidelines. External validation was performed in CODE-15% (n=219,567) for HF-related mortality and EchoNext (n=35,718) for structural heart disease associations. Results: Despite the modest cohort size, the ECG-based agentic search achieved area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) of 0.87 (95% CI: 0.85-0.89) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80-0.86) for phenogroup and guideline-based LVDD severity classification. Corresponding AUCs for the synthetic TDI-based model were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.80-0.85) and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.77-0.84), respectively. In large-scale external validation, both models stratified incident HF mortality with subdistribution hazard ratios ranging 5.5 to 9.5 (Gray's p<0.001 for all). Time-dependent discrimination for incident HF mortality exceeded a publicly available convolutional neural network model (ECG2HF) ({Delta}AUC range: +0.14 to +0.20). Both models demonstrated consistent associations with structural heart disease outcomes. Conclusions: Agentic auto-discovery enabled data-efficient assessment of LVDD from surface ECG by combining physiologically informed transfer learning with autonomous architecture optimization, achieving robust external generalizability. This approach may facilitate broader access to diastolic function assessment beyond conventional echocardiography.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
32.1%
2
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
14.3%
3
Circulation
66 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
14.0%
50% of probability mass above
4
JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 40%
3.2%
6
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.0%
7
Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine
42 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.3%
8
Medical Image Analysis
33 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.0%
9
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.6%
10
Genome Medicine
154 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.6%
11
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.6%
12
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
13
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
14
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
15
European Heart Journal
16 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
16
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 53%
0.9%
17
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
18
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 27%
0.9%
19
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 68%
0.7%
20
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
21
Journal of Translational Medicine
46 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%