header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Research

A PRECISION HEALTH APPROACH FOR OSTEOARTHRITIS: PREDICTION OF RAPID KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS PROGRESSION USING AUTOMATED MACHINE LEARNING

The British Orthopaedic Research Society (BORS) 2023 Meeting, Cambridge, England, 25–26 September 2023.



Abstract

Abstract

Introduction

Precision health aims to develop personalised and proactive strategies for predicting, preventing, and treating complex diseases such as osteoarthritis (OA), a degenerative joint disease affecting over 300 million people worldwide. Due to OA heterogeneity, which makes developing effective treatments challenging, identifying patients at risk for accelerated disease progression is essential for efficient clinical trial design and new treatment target discovery and development.

Objectives

This study aims to create a trustworthy and interpretable precision health tool that predicts rapid knee OA progression based on baseline patient characteristics using an advanced automated machine learning (autoML) framework, “Autoprognosis 2.0”.

Methods

All available 2-year follow-up periods of 600 patients from the FNIH OA Biomarker Consortium were analysed using “Autoprognosis 2.0” in two separate approaches, with distinct definitions of clinical outcomes: multi-class predictions (categorising patients into non-progressors, pain-only progressors, radiographic-only progressors, and both pain and radiographic progressors) and binary predictions (categorising patients into non-progressors and progressors). Models were developed using a training set of 1352 instances and all available variables (including clinical, X-ray, MRI, and biochemical features), and validated through both stratified 10-fold cross-validation and hold-out validation on a testing set of 339 instances. Model performance was assessed using multiple evaluation metrics, such as AUC-ROC, AUC-PRC, F1-score, precision, and recall. Additionally, interpretability analyses were carried out to identify important predictors of rapid disease progression.

Results

Our final models yielded high accuracy scores for both multi-class predictions (AUC-ROC: 0.858, 95% CI: 0.856–0.860; AUC-PRC: 0.675, 95% CI: 0.671–0.679; F1-score: 0.560, 95% CI: 0.554–0.566) and binary predictions (AUC-ROC: 0.717, 95% CI: 0.712–0.722; AUC-PRC: 0.620, 95% CI: 0.616–0.624; F1-score: 0.676, 95% CI: 0.673–0679). Important predictors of rapid disease progression included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores and MRI features. Our models were further successfully validated using a hold-out dataset, which was previously omitted from model development and training (AUC-ROC: 0.877 for multi-class predictions; AUC-ROC: 0.746 for binary predictions). Additionally, accurate ML models were developed for predicting OA progression in a subgroup of patients aged 65 or younger (AUC-ROC: 0.862, 95% CI: 0.861–0.863 for multi-class predictions; AUC-ROC: 0.736, 95% CI: 0.734–0.738 for binary predictions).

Conclusions

This study presents a reliable and interpretable precision health tool for predicting rapid knee OA progression using “Autoprognosis 2.0”. Our models provide accurate predictions and offer insights into important predictors of rapid disease progression. Furthermore, the transparency and interpretability of our methods may facilitate their acceptance by clinicians and patients, enabling effective utilisation in clinical practice. Future work should focus on refining these models by increasing the sample size, integrating additional features, and using independent datasets for external validation.

Declaration of Interest

(b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.