Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2019 Dec 31;14(12):e0227324.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227324. eCollection 2019.

Applications of machine learning in decision analysis for dose management for dofetilide

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Applications of machine learning in decision analysis for dose management for dofetilide

Andrew E Levy et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: Initiation of the antiarrhythmic medication dofetilide requires an FDA-mandated 3 days of telemetry monitoring due to heightened risk of toxicity within this time period. Although a recommended dose management algorithm for dofetilide exists, there is a range of real-world approaches to dosing the medication.

Methods and results: In this multicenter investigation, clinical data from the Antiarrhythmic Drug Genetic (AADGEN) study was examined for 354 patients undergoing dofetilide initiation. Univariate logistic regression identified a starting dofetilide dose of 500 mcg (OR 5.0, 95%CI 2.5-10.0, p<0.001) and sinus rhythm at the start of dofetilide loading (OR 2.8, 95%CI 1.8-4.2, p<0.001) as strong positive predictors of successful loading. Any dose-adjustment during loading (OR 0.19, 95%CI 0.12-0.31, p<0.001) and a history coronary artery disease (OR 0.33, 95%CI 0.19-0.59, p<0.001) were strong negative predictors of successful dofetilide loading. Based on the observation that any dose adjustment was a significant negative predictor of successful initiation, we applied multiple supervised approaches to attempt to predict the dose adjustment decision, but none of these approaches identified dose adjustments better than a probabilistic guess. Principal component analysis and cluster analysis identified 8 clusters as a reasonable data reduction method. These 8 clusters were then used to define patient states in a tabular reinforcement learning model trained on 80% of dosing decisions. Testing of this model on the remaining 20% of dosing decisions revealed good accuracy of the reinforcement learning model, with only 16/410 (3.9%) instances of disagreement.

Conclusions: Dose adjustments are a strong determinant of whether patients are able to successfully initiate dofetilide. A reinforcement learning algorithm informed by unsupervised learning was able to predict dosing decisions with 96.1% accuracy. Future studies will apply this algorithm prospectively as a data-driven decision aid.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Dose patterns of dofetilide.
A schematic of the most common dosing approaches for dofetilide (color-coded rows) among patients who were successfully initiated (discharged on medicine0. The numbers in each individual cell correspond to the number of electrical cardioversion procedures performed after that specific dose within that specific dosing scheme. 29 patients with atypical dosing regimens (i.e. increases in dose) are excluded. The bottom row represents patients who were not successfully initiated on Dofetilide (n = 44).
Fig 2
Fig 2. Principal component analysis.
A. Cumulative and per-component variance explained for each sequential principal component (PC). B. Cluster analysis based on within-cluster sum-of-squares.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Hogendoorn W, Moll FL, Sumpio BE, Hunink MG. Clinical Decision Analysis and Markov Modeling for Surgeons: An Introductory Overview. Annals of surgery. 2016;264(2):268–74. Epub 2016/01/13. 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001569 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Alagoz O, Hsu H, Schaefer AJ, Roberts MS. Markov decision processes: a tool for sequential decision making under uncertainty. Medical decision making: an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making. 2010;30(4):474–83. Epub 2010/01/02. 10.1177/0272989x09353194 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kaelbling LP, Littman ML, AW. M. Reinforcement Learning: A Survey. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 1996;(4):237–85.
    1. Silver D, Schrittwieser J, Simonyan K, Antonoglou I, Huang A, Guez A, et al. Mastering the game of Go without human knowledge. Nature. 2017;550(7676):354–9. Epub 2017/10/21. 10.1038/nature24270 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mnih V, Kavukcuoglu K, Silver D, Rusu AA, Veness J, Bellemare MG, et al. Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. Nature. 2015;518(7540):529–33. Epub 2015/02/27. 10.1038/nature14236 . - DOI - PubMed

Publication types