Aprendizaje automático para la estratificación del riesgo de accidente cerebrovascular utilizando datos multiómicos:...

Stroke is a complex, multidimensional disorder influenced by interacting inflammatory, immune, coagulation, endothelial, and metabolic pathways. Single-omics approaches seldom capture this complexity, whereas multiomics techniques provide complementary insights but generate high-dimensional and correlated feature spaces. Machine learning (ML) offers strategies to manage these challenges; however, the predictive accuracy and reproducibility of multiomics-based ML models for stroke remain poorly characterized.

This review aimed to conduct a systematic evaluation of ML models using multiomics data for stroke risk stratification and comprehensive patterns in discriminatory performance, integration strategies, and validation and reporting practices to inform future methodological development.

We conducted a comprehensive literature search following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 recommendations. Studies published from January 2000 to July 2025 were identified across 9 databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE Ultimate, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, ACM Digital Library, and IEEE Xplore. Eligible studies included adults with ischemic, hemorrhagic, or unspecified stroke as the prediction target; applied at least 2 omics layers; and reported ML performance metrics. Risk of bias was assessed using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, while reporting quality was evaluated using Minimum Information for Medical AI Reporting. The primary outcome was the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.

A total of 7 studies (n=40,274) published between 2022 and 2025 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All studies combined 2 omics layers, most often using middle-level integration with dyads such as metabolomics-proteomics and metabolomics-lipidomics. Supervised ML algorithms across studies included support vector machines, tree-based ensembles, generalized linear models, and deep learning architectures. Three studies reported external validation of the integrated multiomics model, while 1 study conducted only an external assessment of a single marker rather than validation of the integrated model. Three studies reported an assessment of calibration, and clinically prespecified operating points were rarely described. Reported areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve varied by prediction task, ranging from 0.75 to 0.96 for acute diagnosis models and from 0.75 to 0.97 for onset risk prediction models; the highest externally validated performance was achieved by a support vector machine trained on a metabolomics-proteomics dyad in mixed stroke types (ischemic and hemorrhagic).

Multiomics ML models showed high apparent discrimination for stroke risk stratification, but current evidence remains methodologically limited. Small sample sizes, heterogeneous designs, and incomplete reporting currently hinder the reproducibility and generalizability of multiomics ML models for stroke risk prediction. To advance the field, future studies should adopt leakage-resistant evaluation frameworks, conduct site-specific external validations, and benchmark against both single-omics and clinical baselines to demonstrate incremental value. Well-designed, transparently reported investigations will be essential to move multiomics ML models from exploratory promise toward clinically actionable tools in precision stroke care.