A Pharmaceutical Paradigm for Cardiovascular Composite Risk Assessment Using Novel Radiogenomics Risk Predictors in Precision Explainable Artificial Intelligence Framework: Clinical Trial Tool

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is challenging to diagnose and treat since symptoms appear late during the progression of atherosclerosis. Conventional risk factors alone are not always sufficient to properly categorize at-risk patients, and clinical risk scores are inadequate in predicting cardiac events. Integrating genomic-based biomarkers (GBBM) found in plasma/serum samples with novel non-invasive radiomics-based biomarkers (RBBM) such as plaque area, plaque burden, and maximum plaque height can improve composite CVD risk prediction in the pharmaceutical paradigm. These biomarkers consider several pathways involved in the pathophysiology of atherosclerosis disease leading to CVD.This review proposes two hypotheses: (i) The composite biomarkers are strongly correlated and can be used to detect the severity of CVD/Stroke precisely, and (ii) an explainable artificial intelligence (XAI)-based composite risk CVD/Stroke model with survival analysis using deep learning (DL) can predict in preventive, precision, and personalized (aiP3) framework benefiting the pharmaceutical paradigm.The PRISMA search technique resulted in 214 studies assessing composite biomarkers using radiogenomics for CVD/Stroke. The study presents a XAI model using AtheroEdgeTM 4.0 to determine the risk of CVD/Stroke in the pharmaceutical framework using the radiogenomics biomarkers.Our observations suggest that the composite CVD risk biomarkers using radiogenomics provide a new dimension to CVD/Stroke risk assessment. The proposed review suggests a unique, unbiased, and XAI model based on AtheroEdgeTM 4.0 that can predict the composite risk of CVD/Stroke using radiogenomics in the pharmaceutical paradigm

A Powerful Paradigm for Cardiovascular Risk Stratification Using Multiclass, Multi-Label, and Ensemble-Based Machine Learning Paradigms: A Narrative Review

Background and Motivation: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) causes the highest mortality globally. With escalating healthcare costs, early non-invasive CVD risk assessment is vital. Conventional methods have shown poor performance compared to more recent and fast-evolving Artificial Intelligence (AI) methods. The proposed study reviews the three most recent paradigms for CVD risk assessment, namely multiclass, multi-label, and ensemble-based methods in (i) office-based and (ii) stress-test laboratories. Methods: A total of 265 CVD-based studies were selected using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) model. Due to its popularity and recent development, the study analyzed the above three paradigms using machine learning (ML) frameworks. We review comprehensively these three methods using attributes, such as architecture, applications, pro-and-cons, scientific validation, clinical evaluation, and AI risk-of-bias (RoB) in the CVD framework. These ML techniques were then extended under mobile and cloud-based infrastructure. Findings: Most popular biomarkers used were office-based, laboratory-based, image-based phenotypes, and medication usage. Surrogate carotid scanning for coronary artery risk prediction had shown promising results. Ground truth (GT) selection for AI-based training along with scientific and clinical validation is very important for CVD stratification to avoid RoB. It was observed that the most popular classification paradigm is multiclass followed by the ensemble, and multi-label. The use of deep learning techniques in CVD risk stratification is in a very early stage of development. Mobile and cloud-based AI technologies are more likely to be the future. Conclusions: AI-based methods for CVD risk assessment are most promising and successful. Choice of GT is most vital in AI-based models to prevent the RoB. The amalgamation of image-based strategies with conventional risk factors provides the highest stability when using the three CVD paradigms in non-cloud and cloud-based frameworks

A Pharmaceutical Paradigm for Cardiovascular Composite Risk Assessment Using Novel Radiogenomics Risk Predictors in Precision Explainable Artificial Intelligence Framework: Clinical Trial Tool

Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is challenging to diagnose and treat since symptoms appear late during the progression of atherosclerosis. Conventional risk factors alone are not always sufficient to properly categorize at-risk patients, and clinical risk scores are inadequate in predicting cardiac events. Integrating genomic-based biomarkers (GBBM) found in plasma/serum samples with novel non-invasive radiomics-based biomarkers (RBBM) such as plaque area, plaque burden, and maximum plaque height can improve composite CVD risk prediction in the pharmaceutical paradigm. These biomarkers consider several pathways involved in the pathophysiology of atherosclerosis disease leading to CVD. Objective: This review proposes two hypotheses: (i) The composite biomarkers are strongly correlated and can be used to detect the severity of CVD/Stroke precisely, and (ii) an explainable artificial intelligence (XAI)-based composite risk CVD/Stroke model with survival analysis using deep learning (DL) can predict in preventive, precision, and personalized (aiP 3 ) framework benefiting the pharmaceutical paradigm. Method: The PRISMA search technique resulted in 214 studies assessing composite biomarkers using radiogenomics for CVD/Stroke. The study presents a XAI model using AtheroEdge TM 4.0 to determine the risk of CVD/Stroke in the pharmaceutical framework using the radiogenomics biomarkers. Conclusions: Our observations suggest that the composite CVD risk biomarkers using radiogenomics provide a new dimension to CVD/Stroke risk assessment. The proposed review suggests a unique, unbiased, and XAI model based on AtheroEdge TM 4.0 that can predict the composite risk of CVD/Stroke using radiogenomics in the pharmaceutical paradigm

Bias Investigation in Artificial Intelligence Systems for Early Detection of Parkinson’s Disease: A Narrative Review

Background and Motivation: Diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease (PD) is often based on medical attention and clinical signs. It is subjective and does not have a good prognosis. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has played a promising role in the diagnosis of PD. However, it introduces bias due to lack of sample size, poor validation, clinical evaluation, and lack of big data configuration. The purpose of this study is to compute the risk of bias (RoB) automatically. Method: The PRISMA search strategy was adopted to select the best 39 AI studies out of 85 PD studies closely associated with early diagnosis PD. The studies were used to compute 30 AI attributes (based on 6 AI clusters), using AP(ai)Bias 1.0 (AtheroPointTM, Roseville, CA, USA), and the mean aggregate score was computed. The studies were ranked and two cutoffs (Moderate-Low (ML) and High-Moderate (MH)) were determined to segregate the studies into three bins: low-, moderate-, and high-bias. Result: The ML and HM cutoffs were 3.50 and 2.33, respectively, which constituted 7, 13, and 6 for low-, moderate-, and high-bias studies. The best and worst architectures were “deep learning with sketches as outcomes” and “machine learning with Electroencephalography,” respectively. We recommend (i) the usage of power analysis in big data framework, (ii) that it must undergo scientific validation using unseen AI models, and (iii) that it should be taken towards clinical evaluation for reliability and stability tests. Conclusion: The AI is a vital component for the diagnosis of early PD and the recommendations must be followed to lower the RoB

Role of Artificial Intelligence in Radiogenomics for Cancers in the Era of Precision Medicine

Radiogenomics, a combination of “Radiomics” and “Genomics,” using Artificial Intelligence (AI) has recently emerged as the state-of-the-art science in precision medicine, especially in oncology care. Radiogenomics syndicates large-scale quantifiable data extracted from radiological medical images enveloped with personalized genomic phenotypes. It fabricates a prediction model through various AI methods to stratify the risk of patients, monitor therapeutic approaches, and assess clinical outcomes. It has recently shown tremendous achievements in prognosis, treatment planning, survival prediction, heterogeneity analysis, reoccurrence, and progression-free survival for human cancer study. Although AI has shown immense performance in oncology care in various clinical aspects, it has several challenges and limitations. The proposed review provides an overview of radiogenomics with the viewpoints on the role of AI in terms of its promises for computational as well as oncological aspects and offers achievements and opportunities in the era of precision medicine. The review also presents various recommendations to diminish these obstacles

Deep learning artificial intelligence framework for multiclass coronary artery disease prediction using combination of conventional risk factors, carotid ultrasound, and intraplaque neovascularization

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major healthcare challenge and therefore early risk assessment is vital. Previous assessment techniques use either "conventional CVD risk calculators (CCVRC)" or machine learning (ML) paradigms. These techniques are ad-hoc, unreliable, not fully automated, and have variabilities. We, therefore, introduce AtheroEdge-MCDLAI (AE3.0DL) windows-based platform using multiclass Deep Learning (DL) system

Understanding the bias in machine learning systems for cardiovascular disease risk assessment

Artificial Intelligence (AI), in particular, machine learning (ML) has shown promising results in coronary artery disease (CAD) or cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction. Bias in ML systems is of great interest due to its over-performance and poor clinical delivery. The main objective is to understand the nature of risk-of-bias (RoB) in ML and non-ML studies for CVD risk prediction.PRISMA model was used to shortlisting 117 studies, which were analyzed to understand the RoB in ML and non-ML using 46 and 32 attributes, respectively. The mean score for each study was computed and then ranked into three ML and non-ML bias categories, namely low-bias (LB), moderate-bias (MB), and high-bias (HB), derived using two cutoffs. Further, bias computation was validated using the analytical slope method.Five types of the gold standard were identified in the ML design for CAD/CVD risk prediction. The low-moderate and moderate-high bias cutoffs for 24 ML studies (5, 10, and 9 studies for each LB, MB, and HB) and 14 non-ML (3, 4, and 7 studies for each LB, MB, and HB) were in the range of 1.5 to 1.95. BiasML< Biasnon-ML by ∼43%. A set of recommendations were proposed for lowering RoB.ML showed a lower bias compared to non-ML. For a robust ML-based CAD/CVD prediction design, it is vital to have (i) stronger outcomes like death or CAC score or coronary artery stenosis; (ii) ensuring scientific/clinical validation; (iii) adaptation of multiethnic groups while practicing unseen AI; (iv) amalgamation of conventional, laboratory, image-based and medication-based biomarkers

Understanding the bias in machine learning systems for cardiovascular disease risk assessment: The first of its kind review

Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI), in particular, machine learning (ML) has shown promising results in coronary artery disease (CAD) or cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction. Bias in ML systems is of great interest due to its over-performance and poor clinical delivery. The main objective is to understand the nature of risk-of-bias (RoB) in ML and non-ML studies for CVD risk prediction. Methods: PRISMA model was used to shortlisting 117 studies, which were analyzed to understand the RoB in ML and non-ML using 46 and 32 attributes, respectively. The mean score for each study was computed and then ranked into three ML and non-ML bias categories, namely low-bias (LB), moderate-bias (MB), and high-bias (HB), derived using two cutoffs. Further, bias computation was validated using the analytical slope method. Results: Five types of the gold standard were identified in the ML design for CAD/CVD risk prediction. The low-moderate and moderate-high bias cutoffs for 24 ML studies (5, 10, and 9 studies for each LB, MB, and HB) and 14 non-ML (3, 4, and 7 studies for each LB, MB, and HB) were in the range of 1.5 to 1.95. Bias(ML) &lt; Bias(non-ML )by similar to 43%. A set of recommendations were proposed for lowering RoB. Conclusion: ML showed a lower bias compared to non-ML. For a robust ML-based CAD/CVD prediction design, it is vital to have (i) stronger outcomes like death or CAC score or coronary artery stenosis; (ii) ensuring scientific/ clinical validation; (iii) adaptation of multiethnic groups while practicing unseen AI; (iv) amalgamation of conventional, laboratory, image-based and medication-based biomarkers

A Powerful Paradigm for Cardiovascular Risk Stratification Using Multiclass, Multi-Label, and Ensemble-Based Machine Learning Paradigms: A Narrative Review

Background and Motivation: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) causes the highest mortality globally. With escalating healthcare costs, early non-invasive CVD risk assessment is vital. Conventional methods have shown poor performance compared to more recent and fast-evolving Artificial Intelligence (AI) methods. The proposed study reviews the three most recent paradigms for CVD risk assessment, namely multiclass, multi-label, and ensemble-based methods in (i) office-based and (ii) stress-test laboratories. Methods: A total of 265 CVD-based studies were selected using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) model. Due to its popularity and recent development, the study analyzed the above three paradigms using machine learning (ML) frameworks. We review comprehensively these three methods using attributes, such as architecture, applications, pro-and-cons, scientific validation, clinical evaluation, and AI risk-of-bias (RoB) in the CVD framework. These ML techniques were then extended under mobile and cloud-based infrastructure. Findings: Most popular biomarkers used were office-based, laboratory-based, image-based phenotypes, and medication usage. Surrogate carotid scanning for coronary artery risk prediction had shown promising results. Ground truth (GT) selection for AI-based training along with scientific and clinical validation is very important for CVD stratification to avoid RoB. It was observed that the most popular classification paradigm is multiclass followed by the ensemble, and multi-label. The use of deep learning techniques in CVD risk stratification is in a very early stage of development. Mobile and cloud-based AI technologies are more likely to be the future. Conclusions: AI-based methods for CVD risk assessment are most promising and successful. Choice of GT is most vital in AI-based models to prevent the RoB. The amalgamation of image-based strategies with conventional risk factors provides the highest stability when using the three CVD paradigms in non-cloud and cloud-based frameworks