Design of Machine Learning Algorithms and Internal Validation of a Kidney Risk Prediction Model for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/ijgm.s449397
IF: 2.145
2024-05-21
International Journal of General Medicine
Abstract:Ying Wang, 1 Han-Xin Yao, 1 Zhen-Yi Liu, 1 Yi-Ting Wang, 1 Si-Wen Zhang, 2 Yuan-Yuan Song, 1 Qin Zhang, 1 Hai-Di Gao, 1 Jian-Cheng Xu 1 1 Department of Laboratory Medicine, First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, People's Republic of China; 2 Department of Endocrinology & Metabolism, First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, People's Republic of China Correspondence: Jian-Cheng Xu, Department of Laboratory Medicine, First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 130021, People's Republic of China, Tel/Fax +86-043188782595, Email Objective: This study aimed to explore specific biochemical indicators and construct a risk prediction model for diabetic kidney disease (DKD) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: This study included 234 T2D patients, of whom 166 had DKD, at the First Hospital of Jilin University from January 2021 to July 2022. Clinical characteristics, such as age, gender, and typical hematological parameters, were collected and used for modeling. Five machine learning algorithms [Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Gradient Boosting Machine (GBM), Support Vector Machine (SVM), Logistic Regression (LR), and Random Forest (RF)] were used to identify critical clinical and pathological features and to build a risk prediction model for DKD. Additionally, clinical data from 70 patients (n T2D = 20, n DKD = 50) were collected for external validation from the Third Hospital of Jilin University. Results: The RF algorithm demonstrated the best performance in predicting progression to DKD, identifying five major indicators: estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), glycated albumin (GA), Uric acid, HbA1c, and Zinc (Zn). The prediction model showed sufficient predictive accuracy with area under the curve (AUC) values of 0.960 (95% CI: 0.936– 0.984) and 0.9326 (95% CI: 0.8747– 0.9885) in the internal validation set and external validation set, respectively. The diagnostic efficacy of the RF model (AUC = 0.960) was significantly higher than each of the five features screened with the highest feature importance in the RF model. Conclusion: The online DKD risk prediction model constructed using the RF algorithm was selected based on its strong performance in the internal validation. Keywords: diabetic kidney disease, type 2 diabetes, machine learning model, random forest algorithm The prevalence and incidence of type 2 diabetes (T2D), representing more than 90% of all diabetes cases, are rapidly increasing worldwide. 1 Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is a critical microvascular complication of diabetes mellitus with a high prevalence, mortality rate, and substantial financial burden. 2 Approximately one-third of T2D patients can progress to DKD, 3 subsequently leading to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and death. 4 Identifying risk factors and early diagnosis of DKD are crucial for the prevention and treatment of ESKD. Chronic kidney disease leading to ESKD in T2D includes DKD, nondiabetic kidney disease (NDKD), or a combination of DKD and NDKD. Given the different treatment options, renal biopsy histopathology remains the gold standard for distinguishing between DKD and NDKD. 5 However, renal biopsy is cautiously used in clinical diagnosis. In contrast to histopathological biopsy, diagnosing DKD based on clinical, physiological, and biochemical indicators can shorten the diagnostic time, reduce patient discomfort, and minimize medical risks. Therefore, many risk factors involved in the initiation and progression of DKD, such as increasing age, family history, hyperglycemia, hypertension, dyslipidemia, dietary patterns, and lifestyles have been reported. 6 Physiological indicators, such as urinary albumin-to-creatine ratio and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), have been included as screening indicators for the occurrence and grading of DKD in clinical diagnostic guidelines for DKD. Although researchers have studied early predictive markers of DKD, including proteomics and genomics, these new biomarkers are challenging to popularize in clinical setting due to their low sensitivity and specificity in evaluating early DKD. Even the effectiveness of microalbuminuria as a traditional DKD marker and the best opportunity for intervention has recently been questioned. In fact, some biochemical indicators of T2D patients have been considered to provide guidance for the early diagnosis of DKD. The varying presentation of DKD poses challenges for clinicians in terms of accurate detection and selecting appropriate individualized interventions in high-risk individuals. 7 Therefore, it is -Abstract Truncated-
medicine, general & internal