Subtyping hospitalized patients with hypokalemia by machine learning consensus clustering and associated mortality risks

Machine learning algorithms identify hypokalaemia risk in people with hypertension in the United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2018

BACKGROUND

Hypokalaemia is a side-effect of diuretics. We aimed to use machine learning to identify features predicting hypokalaemia risk in hypertensive patients.

METHODS

Participants with hypertension in the United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2018 were included for analysis. To select the most suitable algorithm, we tested and evaluated five machine learning algorithms commonly employed in epidemiological studies: Logistic Regression, k-Nearest Neighbor, Random Forest, Recursive Partitioning and Regression Trees, and eXtreme Gradient Boosting. These algorithms were accessed using a set of 38 screened features. We then selected the key hypokalaemia-associated features in the hypertension group and their cardiovascular diseases (CVD) subgroup using the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) values. Using SHAP values, the key features and their impact pattern on hypokalaemia risk were determined.

RESULTS

A total of 25,326 hypertensive participants were included for analysis, of whom 4,511 had known CVD. The Random Forest algorithm had the highest AUROC (hypertension dataset: 0.73 [95%CI, 0.71-0.76]; CVD subgroup: 0.72 [95%CI, 0.66-0.78]). Moreover, the nomogram based on the top twelve key features screened by random forest retained good performance: age, sex, race, poverty income ratio, body mass index, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, non-potassium-sparing diuretics use and duration, renin-angiotensin blockers use and duration, and CVD history in hypertension dataset; while in CVD subgroup, the additional key features were comorbid diabetes, education level, smoking status, and use of bronchodilators.

CONCLUSION

Our predictive model based on the random forest algorithm performed best among the tested and evaluated five algorithms. Hypokalaemia-associated key features have been identified in hypertensive patients and the subgroup with CVD. These findings from machine learning facilitate the development of artificial intelligence to highlight hypokalaemia risk in hypertension patients.

Clinical Phenotypes of Dual Kidney Transplant Recipients in the United States as Identified through Machine Learning Consensus Clustering

Background and Objectives: Our study aimed to cluster dual kidney transplant recipients using an unsupervised machine learning approach to characterize donors and recipients better and to compare the survival outcomes across these various clusters. Materials and Methods: We performed consensus cluster analysis based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 2821 dual kidney transplant recipients from 2010 to 2019 in the OPTN/UNOS database. We determined the important characteristics of each assigned cluster and compared the post-transplant outcomes between clusters. Results: Two clinically distinct clusters were identified by consensus cluster analysis. Cluster 1 patients was characterized by younger patients (mean recipient age 49 ± 13 years) who received dual kidney transplant from pediatric (mean donor age 3 ± 8 years) non-expanded criteria deceased donor (100% non-ECD). In contrast, Cluster 2 patients were characterized by older patients (mean recipient age 63 ± 9 years) who received dual kidney transplant from adult (mean donor age 59 ± 11 years) donor with high kidney donor profile index (KDPI) score (59% had KDPI ≥ 85). Cluster 1 had higher patient survival (98.0% vs. 94.6% at 1 year, and 92.1% vs. 76.3% at 5 years), and lower acute rejection (4.2% vs. 6.1% within 1 year), when compared to cluster 2. Death-censored graft survival was comparable between two groups (93.5% vs. 94.9% at 1 year, and 89.2% vs. 84.8% at 5 years). Conclusions: In summary, DKT in the United States remains uncommon. Two clusters, based on specific recipient and donor characteristics, were identified through an unsupervised machine learning approach. Despite varying differences in donor and recipient age between the two clusters, death-censored graft survival was excellent and comparable. Broader utilization of DKT from high KDPI kidneys and pediatric en bloc kidneys should be encouraged to better address the ongoing organ shortage.

Characteristics of Kidney Recipients of High Kidney Donor Profile Index Kidneys as Identified by Machine Learning Consensus Clustering

Background: Our study aimed to characterize kidney transplant recipients who received high kidney donor profile index (KDPI) kidneys using unsupervised machine learning approach. Methods: We used the OPTN/UNOS database from 2010 to 2019 to perform consensus cluster analysis based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 8935 kidney transplant recipients from deceased donors with KDPI ≥ 85%. We identified each cluster’s key characteristics using the standardized mean difference of >0.3. We compared the posttransplant outcomes among the assigned clusters. Results: Consensus cluster analysis identified 6 clinically distinct clusters of kidney transplant recipients from donors with high KDPI. Cluster 1 was characterized by young, black, hypertensive, non-diabetic patients who were on dialysis for more than 3 years before receiving kidney transplant from black donors; cluster 2 by elderly, white, non-diabetic patients who had preemptive kidney transplant or were on dialysis less than 3 years before receiving kidney transplant from older white donors; cluster 3 by young, non-diabetic, retransplant patients; cluster 4 by young, non-obese, non-diabetic patients who received dual kidney transplant from pediatric, black, non-hypertensive non-ECD deceased donors; cluster 5 by low number of HLA mismatch; cluster 6 by diabetes mellitus. Cluster 4 had the best patient survival, whereas cluster 3 had the worst patient survival. Cluster 2 had the best death-censored graft survival, whereas cluster 4 and cluster 3 had the worst death-censored graft survival at 1 and 5 years, respectively. Cluster 2 and cluster 4 had the best overall graft survival at 1 and 5 years, respectively, whereas cluster 3 had the worst overall graft survival. Conclusions: Unsupervised machine learning approach kidney transplant recipients from donors with high KDPI based on their pattern of clinical characteristics into 6 clinically distinct clusters.

Distinct Phenotypes of Kidney Transplant Recipients in the United States with Limited Functional Status as Identified through Machine Learning Consensus Clustering

Background: There have been concerns regarding increased perioperative mortality, length of hospital stay, and rates of graft loss in kidney transplant recipients with functional limitations. The application of machine learning consensus clustering approach may provide a novel understanding of unique phenotypes of functionally limited kidney transplant recipients with distinct outcomes in order to identify strategies to improve outcomes. Methods: Consensus cluster analysis was performed based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 3205 functionally limited kidney transplant recipients (Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) < 40% at transplant) in the OPTN/UNOS database from 2010 to 2019. Each cluster’s key characteristics were identified using the standardized mean difference. Posttransplant outcomes, including death-censored graft failure, patient death, and acute allograft rejection were compared among the clusters Results: Consensus cluster analysis identified two distinct clusters that best represented the clinical characteristics of kidney transplant recipients with limited functional status prior to transplant. Cluster 1 patients were older in age and were more likely to receive deceased donor kidney transplant with a higher number of HLA mismatches. In contrast, cluster 2 patients were younger, had shorter dialysis duration, were more likely to be retransplants, and were more likely to receive living donor kidney transplants from HLA mismatched donors. As such, cluster 2 recipients had a higher PRA, less cold ischemia time, and lower proportion of machine-perfused kidneys. Despite having a low KPS, 5-year patient survival was 79.1 and 83.9% for clusters 1 and 2; 5-year death-censored graft survival was 86.9 and 91.9%. Cluster 1 had lower death-censored graft survival and patient survival but higher acute rejection, compared to cluster 2. Conclusion: Our study used an unsupervised machine learning approach to characterize kidney transplant recipients with limited functional status into two clinically distinct clusters with differing posttransplant outcomes.