BACKGROUND: We previously reported a microarray-based diagnostic system for heart transplant endomyocardial biopsies (EMBs), using either 3-archetype (3AA)or 4-archetype (4AA)unsupervised algorithms to estimate rejection. In the present study we examined the stability of machine-learning algorithms in new biopsies, compared 3AA vs 4AA algorithms, assessed supervised binary classifiers trained on histologic or molecular diagnoses, created a report combining many scores into an ensemble of estimates, and examined possible automated sign-outs. METHODS: We studied 889 EMBs from 454 transplant recipients at 8 centers: the initial cohort (N = 331)and a new cohort (N = 558). Published 3AA algorithms derived in Cohort 331 were tested in Cohort 558, the 3AA and 4AA models were compared, and supervised binary classifiers were created. RESULTS: A‘lgorithms derived in Cohort 331 performed similarly in new biopsies despite differences in case mix. In the combined cohort, the 4AA model, including a parenchymal injury score, retained correlations with histologic rejection and DSA similar to the 3AA model. Supervised molecular classifiers predicted molecular rejection (areas under the curve [AUCs]>0.87)better than histologic rejection (AUCs <0.78), even when trained on histology diagnoses. A report incorporating many AA and binary classifier scores interpreted by 1 expert showed highly significant agreement with histology (p < 0.001), but with many discrepancies, as expected from the known noise in histology. An automated random forest score closely predicted expert diagnoses, confirming potential for automated signouts. CONCLUSIONS: Molecular algorithms are stable in new populations and can be assembled into an ensemble that combines many supervised and unsupervised estimates of the molecular disease states.
- antibody-mediated rejection
- heart transplant
- T-cell‒mediated rejection
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine