Targeted metabolomic profiling and machine learning-based prediction models for persistent atrial fibrillation : a multi-center observational study


Abstract

Background. Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common cardiac arrhythmia worldwide, carries a high risk of severe complications. Patients diagnosed with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) may progress to persistent atrial fibrillation (PerAF) following a period. We aimed to identify metabolites associated with PerAF using machine learning (ML) and predict the probability of PAF progressing to PerAF, enabling the adjustment of subsequent treatments in clinical practice.

Methods. We enrolled AF patients without any anticoagulant therapy within the last 7 days between July 2020 and July 2022 in two centers in China. Targeted metabolomic profiling was performed on the patient's plasma. Differential metabolites and clinical features were identified through univariate and multivariate analyses. Patients were divided into discovery and validation cohorts (70%:30%). Four ML models ( logistic regression, random forest, XGBoost, and LightGBM) were developed for PerAF prediction. Model predictive performance was measured mainly by AUC.

Results. One hundred patients (65 PerAF, 35 PAF) were enrolled. Eight metabolites (kynurenine, N-Acetylaspartic acid, glyceric acid, adipic acid, citramalic acid, malic acid, isocitric acid, and oxoglutaric acid) and two clinical features ( NT-proBNP and uric acid ) had significant associations with PerAF. Pathway enrichment analysis highlighted alterations in the citrate cycle and glyoxylate/dicarboxylate metabolism. XGBoost was chosen for establishing the final model, since its predictive performance outperformed that of other algorithms. The model based on clinical parameters, metabolites, and demographics achieved the highest AUC in the discovery cohort ( 0.751 [ 95% CI 0.6 31~0.8 67 ] ) and validation cohort (0.985 [95% CI 0.940~1.000] ). A simplified model with three features (NT-proBNP, citramalic acid, and uric acid) retained robust performance.

Conclusions. This study shows strengths in identifying eight PerAF-related metabolites via targeted metabolomics and ML, and developing accurate predictive models (including a simplified, clinically feasible model ) to guide early PerAF intervention. Future directions include large-scale multi-center validation, incorporating more confounders, and using multiple platforms to deeply explore AF-related metabolic alterations.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].