ArticleFrontiers in immunology2022
Validity of Machine Learning in Predicting Giant Cell Arteritis Flare After Glucocorticoids Tapering.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review on Artificial Intelligence in Rheumatology Practice: From Implementation Concerns to Imaging and Clinical Application.International journal of rheumatic diseases · 2026Pooled it
- Application of machine learning approaches in predicting clinical outcomes in older adults - a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC geriatrics · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Diagnostic Challenges and Modern Therapeutic Strategies in Giant Cell Arteritis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Understanding the patient experience of newly diagnosed giant cell arteritis.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2026Article
- Oculoplastics and Augmented Intelligence: A Literature Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Machine Learning for Predicting Recurrent Course in Uveitis Using Baseline Clinical Characteristics.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Vasculitides: A Systematic Review.ACR open rheumatology · 2025Review
- Review
- Drug Burden Index Is a Modifiable Predictor of 30-Day Hospitalization in Community-Dwelling Older Adults With Complex Care Needs: Machine Learning Analysis of InterRAI Data.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2024Article
- Clinical characteristics and courses of Korean patients with giant cell arteritis: a multi-center retrospective study.Journal of rheumatic diseases · 2024Article
- Utilization of interpretable machine learning model to forecast the risk of major adverse kidney events in elderly patients in critical care.Renal failure · 2023Article
- Machine learning applied to MRI evaluation for the detection of lymph node metastasis in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2023Article
- An AI-Powered Clinical Decision Support System to Predict Flares in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Pilot Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A machine learning approach applied to gynecological ultrasound to predict progression-free survival in ovarian cancer patients.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Inferential statistical methods failed in identifying reliable biomarkers and risk factors for relapsing giant cell arteritis (GCA) after glucocorticoids (GCs) tapering. A ML approach allows to handle complex non-linear relationships between patient attributes that are hard to model with traditional statistical methods, merging them to output a forecast or a probability for a given outcome. Objective: The objective of the study was to assess whether ML algorithms can predict GCA relapse after GCs tapering. Methods: GCA patients who underwent GCs therapy and regular follow-up visits for at least 12 months, were retrospectively analyzed and used for implementing 3 ML algorithms, namely, Logistic Regression (LR), Decision Tree (DT), and Random Forest (RF). The outcome of interest was disease relapse within 3 months during GCs tapering. After a ML variable selection method, based on a XGBoost wrapper, an attribute core set was used to train and test each algorithm using 5-fold cross-validation. The performance of each algorithm in both phases was assessed in terms of accuracy and area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Results: The dataset consisted of 107 GCA patients (73 women, 68.2%) with mean age ( ± SD) 74.1 ( ± 8.5) years at presentation. GCA flare occurred in 40/107 patients (37.4%) within 3 months after GCs tapering. As a result of ML wrapper, the attribute core set with the least number of variables used for algorithm training included presence/absence of diabetes mellitus and concomitant polymyalgia rheumatica as well as erythrocyte sedimentation rate level at GCs baseline. RF showed the best performance, being significantly superior to other algorithms in accuracy (RF 71.4% vs LR 70.4% vs DT 62.9%). Consistently, RF precision (72.1%) was significantly greater than those of LR (62.6%) and DT (50.8%). Conversely, LR was superior to RF and DT in recall (RF 60% vs LR 62.5% vs DT 47.5%). Moreover, RF AUROC (0.76) was more significant compared to LR (0.73) and DT (0.65). Conclusions: RF algorithm can predict GCA relapse after GCs tapering with sufficient accuracy. To date, this is one of the most accurate predictive modelings for such outcome. This ML method represents a reproducible tool, capable of supporting clinicians in GCA patient management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.