TY - JOUR
T1 - Diagnostic Performance of a Machine Learning Algorithm (Asthma/Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease [COPD] Differentiation Classification) Tool Versus Primary Care Physicians and Pulmonologists in Asthma, COPD, and Asthma/COPD Overlap
AU - Kocks, Janwillem W.H.
AU - Cao, Hui
AU - Holzhauer, Björn
AU - Kaplan, Alan
AU - FitzGerald, J. Mark
AU - Kostikas, Konstantinos
AU - Price, David
AU - Reddel, Helen K.
AU - Tsiligianni, Ioanna
AU - Vogelmeier, Claus F.
AU - Bostel, Sebastien
AU - Mastoridis, Paul
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ.
PY - 2023/1/28
Y1 - 2023/1/28
N2 - Background: The differential diagnosis of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) poses a challenge in clinical practice and its misdiagnosis results in inappropriate treatment, increased exacerbations, and potentially death. Objective: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the Asthma/COPD Differentiation Classification (AC/DC) tool compared with primary care physicians and pulmonologists in asthma, COPD, and asthma-COPD overlap. Methods: The AC/DC machine learning-based diagnostic tool was developed using 12 parameters from electronic health records of more than 400,000 patients aged 35 years and older. An expert panel of three pulmonologists and four general practitioners from five countries evaluated 119 patient cases from a prospective observational study and provided a confirmed diagnosis (n = 116) of asthma (n = 53), COPD (n = 43), asthma-COPD overlap (n = 7), or other (n = 13). Cases were then reviewed by 180 primary care physicians and 180 pulmonologists from nine countries and by the AC/DC tool, and diagnostic accuracies were compared with reference to the expert panel diagnoses. Results: Average diagnostic accuracy of the AC/DC tool was superior to that of primary care physicians (median difference, 24%; 95% posterior credible interval: 17% to 29%; P < .0001) and was noninferior and superior (median difference, 12%; 95% posterior credible interval: 6% to 17%; P < .0001 for noninferiority and P = .0006 for superiority) to that of pulmonologists. Average diagnostic accuracies were 73%, 50%, and 61% by AC/DC tool, primary care physicians, and pulmonologists versus expert panel diagnosis, respectively. Conclusion: The AC/DC tool demonstrated superior diagnostic accuracy compared with primary care physicians and pulmonologists in the diagnosis of asthma and COPD in patients aged 35 years and greater and has the potential to support physicians in the diagnosis of these conditions in clinical practice.
AB - Background: The differential diagnosis of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) poses a challenge in clinical practice and its misdiagnosis results in inappropriate treatment, increased exacerbations, and potentially death. Objective: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the Asthma/COPD Differentiation Classification (AC/DC) tool compared with primary care physicians and pulmonologists in asthma, COPD, and asthma-COPD overlap. Methods: The AC/DC machine learning-based diagnostic tool was developed using 12 parameters from electronic health records of more than 400,000 patients aged 35 years and older. An expert panel of three pulmonologists and four general practitioners from five countries evaluated 119 patient cases from a prospective observational study and provided a confirmed diagnosis (n = 116) of asthma (n = 53), COPD (n = 43), asthma-COPD overlap (n = 7), or other (n = 13). Cases were then reviewed by 180 primary care physicians and 180 pulmonologists from nine countries and by the AC/DC tool, and diagnostic accuracies were compared with reference to the expert panel diagnoses. Results: Average diagnostic accuracy of the AC/DC tool was superior to that of primary care physicians (median difference, 24%; 95% posterior credible interval: 17% to 29%; P < .0001) and was noninferior and superior (median difference, 12%; 95% posterior credible interval: 6% to 17%; P < .0001 for noninferiority and P = .0006 for superiority) to that of pulmonologists. Average diagnostic accuracies were 73%, 50%, and 61% by AC/DC tool, primary care physicians, and pulmonologists versus expert panel diagnosis, respectively. Conclusion: The AC/DC tool demonstrated superior diagnostic accuracy compared with primary care physicians and pulmonologists in the diagnosis of asthma and COPD in patients aged 35 years and greater and has the potential to support physicians in the diagnosis of these conditions in clinical practice.
KW - AC/DC tool
KW - Accuracy
KW - Asthma
KW - Asthma/COPD overlap
KW - COPD
KW - Differential diagnosis
KW - Machine learning
KW - Primary care physician
KW - Pulmonologist
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85147880735&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jaip.2023.01.017
DO - 10.1016/j.jaip.2023.01.017
M3 - Article
C2 - 36716998
AN - SCOPUS:85147880735
JO - The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
JF - The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
SN - 2213-2198
ER -