ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07757425Updated Aug 11, 2026

The Use of Artificial Intelligence-Enhanced Electrocardiograms in the Chest Pain Clinic to Risk Stratify Patients, Provide Rapid Reassurance and Enable a Low-Cost Clinical Pathway

An interventional study of AI-ECG in Angina (Stable) and Chest Pain Atypical Syndrome, sponsored by Jamil Mayet. Not yet recruiting at 2 sites in United Kingdom. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-11.

Sponsored by Jamil Mayet · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
4,000
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Our current pathway for investigating patients with chest pain differs depending on if the pain is cardiac sounding or not. National guidelines advise us that patients with non-cardiac chest pain do not need further tests beyond seeing a clinician and having a test called an electrocardiogram (ECG), but often we do unnecessary additional investigations for these patients. Some of the tests we do involve invasive procedures or radiation, which have associated risks. We have recently developed an artificial intelligence (AI) ECG technology, which has been shown in various studies to reliably predict risk of heart disease, including heart attacks and death, from just one AI-ECG reading, which is a test that is painless with no radiation. We have shown that this AI-ECG is more accurate at predicting outcomes than the standard risk prediction models we use now.

We propose investigating whether this new technology helps to nudge our clinicians to avoid risk averse behaviour so that they undertake fewer unnecessary investigations, by comparing its use to our current treatment pathway.

The main questions our study aims to answer are:

  • Will an AI-ECG assisted chest pain clinic pathway result in lower healthcare resource costs than the standard pathway?
  • Will an AI-ECG assisted chest pain clinic pathway reduce the time from referral to diagnosis and treatment?
  • Will an AI-ECG assisted chest pain clinic pathway perform equally as well as our current pathway in resolving symptoms and preventing future heart disease?

We will randomly allocate half of the patients with non-cardiac pain in our chest pain clinics to have an AI-ECG, using it to determine which patients are low risk and which are higher risk. Feedback from the analysis will be given to the assessing clinician, with our hypothesis being that patients triaged as low risk by the AI-ECG will be reassured and discharged from clinic, with patients identified as higher risk undergoing further investigation.

The other half of patients not allocated to receive an additional AI-ECG test will be managed as usual. All patients' clinical assessment and management plans will be assessed by a Consultant Cardiologist, who will not have access to the AI-ECG data so that there is assurance that all assigned management pathways are clinically safe and appropriate. We will compare the cost spent for each group at one year, as well as how quickly we can provide a diagnosis/management plan to patients, the number of cardiac events and the number of patients prescribed cholesterol and blood pressure lowering medications. We propose that this study will allow us to safely reassure more patients with chest pain more quickly.

Read the detailed description

Our group has been at the forefront of developing AI-ECG models that are actionable, biologically plausible and explainable, with the aim of fostering clinical trust and maximising their potential for integration into routine clinical care. Recently, we developed the artificial-intelligence risk-estimation (AIRE) platform, comprising a series of AI-ECG models capable of predicting time-to-mortality, and further disease-specific AIRE models encompassing a broad range of future cardiovascular conditions from a single 12-lead ECG.

The AIRE platform was developed using the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Centre (BIDMC) dataset, comprising more than 1.1 million ECGs from a secondary care population in Boston, USA. The tool has been externally validated across five large international cohorts from the USA, UK, and Brazil, encompassing diverse demographics, a range of baseline cardiovascular risks, including both primary and secondary care, as well as volunteer populations.

AIRE generates patient-specific survival curves using data from a single 12-lead ECG and can predict time-to-death. In our validation studies, AIRE demonstrated strong predictive performance for cardiovascular (CV) mortality, achieving a concordance-index (c-index) of 0.844 (95% confidence interval, 0.839-0.849). This outperformed current predictive models based on demographic data and traditional risk factors alone, which had a c-index of 0.733 (0.726-0.740).

We believe the rapid access chest pain clinic provides an ideal setting in which to evaluate the clinical translation of this validated AI-ECG technology. Risk prediction is central to clinical-decision making in this population, making it well-suited for assessing the added value of AI-enhanced tools. In low-risk cohorts such as our proposed study population, the high negative predictive value of AIRE offers the potential to confidently reassure patients at the lowest risk, in line with national guidelines. Importantly, we have demonstrated that AIRE can stratify risk even among patients whose ECGs are labelled as normal by clinicians. In this subgroup, the model effectively distinguishes between low- and higher-risk individuals, with a significant difference in mortality observed between these groups.

ORIGINAL HYPOTHESIS

Primary hypothesis

  1. An AI-ECG-assisted chest pain pathway will result in lower healthcare resource cost compared to standard clinical investigation pathways.

    Secondary hypotheses

  2. An AI-ECG-assisted chest pain pathway in patients with non-cardiac sounding chest pain is non-inferior to routine care in terms of:

    1. preventing cardiovascular events and mortality
    2. initiating standard primary prevention medications
    3. achieving overall symptom resolution
  3. An AI-ECG-assisted chest pain pathway in patients with non-cardiac sounding chest pain is superior to routine care in reducing the time from referral to diagnosis with a definitive management plan.

EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS AND DESIGN OF PROPOSED INVESTIGATION Proposal

  1. There is a substantial and growing burden of referrals to chest pain clinics, often resulting in extensive investigations.
  2. For patients with non-cardiac sounding chest pain, a referral and investigation pathway is unlikely to provide a significant clinical benefit over guideline-based care.
  3. Novel AI-guided risk prediction tools have the potential to provide rapid, low-cost reassurance for patients unlikely to benefit from further investigation.

Aims To determine whether AI-ECG screening can facilitate reassurance of patients presenting to rapid access chest pain clinic with non-cardiac sounding chest pain, with less resource utilisation, without adversely affecting cardiovascular outcomes.

Study design This study is a multicentre, prospective, cluster-randomised trial comparing AI-ECG-assisted management with routine care in patients presenting to rapid access chest pain clinics with non-anginal chest pain.

Methodology The majority of rapid access chest pain clinics in North West London are led by specialist chest pain nurses, with support from Consultant Cardiologists. At the start of each week, three of the six participating clinic sites will be randomised to deliver either standard clinical care or an AI-ECG guided pathway. The remaining three sites will be assigned to the alternative pathway, ensuring that each week three sites will use each pathway. All patients meeting the inclusion criteria who present to the clinics during the study will follow the care pathway to which their clinic has been assigned.

In clinics following the AI-ECG guided pathway, patients will be assessed as usual by a clinician, and in addition, undertake a quantitative symptom questionnaire based on the Rose angina classification, which we are planning to embed into an app. This will identify the nature of chest pain symptoms and establish if the chest pain is in keeping with angina or not, in a reproducible, standardised and objective format. As previously discussed, atypical angina is a vague and poorly defined descriptor. Chest pain will be described as either being typical for angina or non-anginal. Patients with typical anginal pain will undergo standard clinical investigation as advised by the treating clinician.

All patients will undergo a 12-lead ECG that is analysed using our AI-ECG model. Patients with typical angina will have clinician determined further investigation without AI analysis feedback, but the AI-ECG predictions will be collated for later sub-analyses. For patients with non-anginal chest pain, the AI-ECG algorithm will risk stratify ECGs and identify a low-risk group. We have defined low risk as having a 2% or lower predicted risk of a major adverse cardiovascular events within 1-year according to the AI-ECG analysis.

Based on analysis of a comparable, age and sex matched cohort in our BIDMC dataset, we predict that around 60% of patients will fall into this low-risk group. Patients with non-anginal chest pain identified as having low-risk ECGs by our AI algorithm will be reassured with no further diagnostic testing.

All patients will undergo standard cardiovascular risk factor assessment and will be counselled on lifestyle modification. Where clinically indicated, primary prevention therapy, including statins, antihypertensives, and diabetic medications, will be recommended in accordance with national guidelines. In the SCOT-HEART study, which addressed the use of CT coronary angiography in a similar patient group, a key weakness was a lower implementation of primary prevention therapy in the control arm compared to the intervention group. We plan to adopt an aggressive approach to primary prevention therapies which we will maintain consistently across study groups, and measure adherence to as a secondary outcome of the trial.

At the end of each week, all clinical assessments and patient management pathways will be reviewed by a Consultant Cardiologist to ensure safety and adherence to clinical standards. The North West London Whole Systems Integrated Care (WSIC) digital information system enables linkage to primary and secondary care records, including presentation, diagnostic and treatment information, as well as mortality outcomes for the 2.3 million population of North West London. We will use WSIC data to assess healthcare utilisation, the occurrence of cardiovascular events, and the prescription of statins and antihypertensives in the 12 months following each patient's assessment.

A subgroup of 500 patients who have consented for follow up will be reviewed via telephone at one year to assess symptom status using the Rose Angina quantitative questionnaire app, consistent with the baseline assessment, and we will perform analysis of these patient-reported outcomes. In addition, we will evaluate patient experience and satisfaction with the assigned care pathway to gain insights into its acceptability, perceived effectiveness, and overall quality from the patient perspective. We propose the utilisation of the app will provide a standardised and objective format for structured analysis of patient reported symptoms, whilst also providing an open platform for qualitative data collection and overall thematic analysis.

02

Conditions studied

  • Angina (Stable)
  • Chest Pain Atypical Syndrome

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Artificial intelligence
  • AI-ECG
  • Risk-stratification
  • Low-risk chest pain
03

In context

Angina, Stable

343 studies on the registry are indexed under Angina, Stable; 56 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 4,000 is above the median of 150 across 230 interventional studies indexed under Angina, Stable.

Browse Angina, Stable studies →

Lead sponsor

This is the only study on the registry with Jamil Mayet as lead sponsor.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Our study population will include all patients aged 18 years and older presenting with non-anginal chest pain (chest pain that is not typical to the heart) to 6 rapid access chest pain clinic sites across North West London. Chest pain typicality will be defined using the standardised Rose Angina questionnaire, based on clinical history.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with typical cardiac (heart-related) chest pain, as defined by the Rose Angina classification
  • Patients with known moderate or severe stenosis (narrowing) in an epicardial coronary artery (the blood vessels supplying the heart)
  • Known left ventricular impairment ( \<50%), otherwise known as heart failure
  • Left bundle branch block (a significant electrical abnormality of the heart on )
  • End-stage kidney failure requiring renal replacement therapy such as dialysis or a kidney transplant
  • Moderate or severe valvular heart disease (serious narrowing or leaking of the heart valves)
  • Paced rhythm at the time of ECG acquisition (lots of patients with pacemakers will fall into this category, but only if their pacemaker is firing at the time the ECG was taken).
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

LVEF (left ventricular ejection fraction)

The share of blood the heart’s main pumping chamber (the left ventricle) pushes out with each beat, measured by an echocardiogram (heart ultrasound) or a MUGA scan. About 50–70% is normal.

ECG (electrocardiogram)

A recording of the heart’s electrical activity, taken with stickers on the chest, arms and legs. It takes a few minutes and does not hurt.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Diagnostic
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
4,000 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    AI-ECG arm

    Patients in this arm will have AI-ECG undertaken alongside their standard care. For patients with non-cardiac chest pain, the clinician will have access to the AI-ECG prediction result denoting the risk level from the ECG. This risk prediction will contribute to their clinical assessment of the patient in addition to history and examination.

    Diagnostic Test: AI-ECG

  • No intervention
    Standard care

    Patients will be reviewed in clinic as per best current practice. Decisions on their further care will be undertaken by clinicians as usual.

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testAI-ECG

    The AI-ECG will take a digital ECG recording and produce a predictive report for risk of cardiovascular disease and death for each patient.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. The healthcare utilisation costs of each pathway over a one-year period.

    The cost of each pathway will be assessed over a one-year period, taking an English NHS perspective. Healthcare resource use will include subsequent consultations with the general practitioner, outpatient cardiology appointments, accident and emergency attendances, inpatient admissions and additional investigations/interventions. This data will be extracted from the Whole Systems Integrated Care (WSIC) dashboard, which captures data on healthcare contacts across the North West London region. Data will be collected at 12 months following enrolment. Resource use will be valued using unit costs of health and social care from the Care and Outcomes Research Centre and national cost collection for the NHS. Differences in healthcare resource use and costs (both planned and unplanned) between the between the AI-ECG and the standard care pathways will be reported at 12 months.

    Time frame: 12 months following enrolment.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Time from referral to completion of the clinical pathway

    Time from referral letter from the General Practitioner to the Rapid Access Chest Pain Clinic service, to the point at which the diagnosis and management plan has been established. Time-to-diagnosis will be assessed using survival analysis techniques (e.g. Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank test, Cox proportional hazards model).

    Time frame: From enrolment to date of established diagnosis and management plan.

  2. Composite outcome of hospital admission with acute coronary syndrome and cardiovascular mortality.

    Outcomes will be followed up for all patients via the Whole Systems Integrated Care (WSIC) data, which will capture any new coded diagnoses and mortality. Cardiovascular events and mortality will be compared using binary logistic regression models.

    Time frame: Measured up to one year from enrolment.

  3. Statin and antihypertensive medication use at one year.

    All prescriptions for patients in the study will be followed up with the Whole Systems Integrated Care (WSIC) data, capturing prescriptions of statin and antihypertensive in both the AI-ECG and control groups. Rate of prescriptions will be compared between groups using chi-square tests or linear regression, depending on data type.

    Time frame: One year from enrolment.

  4. Symptom burden at one year, assessed using the Rose Angina questionnaire-based angina quantification app.

    We plan to utilise a patient-facing phone application to administer a symptom questionnaire at one year. This will also be available in a paper format which can be accessed by patients on request. We will analyse these patient-reported outcomes using qualitative analysis tools in addition to descriptive statistics to report trends.

    Time frame: One year following enrolment.

07

Study locations

2 sites
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Sau A, Pastika L, Sieliwonczyk E, Patlatzoglou K, Ribeiro AH, McGurk KA, Zeidaabadi B, Zhang H, Macierzanka K, Mandic D, Sabino E, Giatti L, Barreto SM, Camelo LDV, Tzoulaki I, O'Regan DP, Peters NS, Ware JS, Ribeiro ALP, Kramer DB, Waks JW, Ng FS. Artificial intelligence-enabled electrocardiogram for mortality and cardiovascular risk estimation: a model development and validation study. Lancet Digit Health. 2024 Nov;6(11):e791-e802. doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(24)00172-9. PubMed 39455192 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — De-identified individual participant data underlying the results reported in this study will be made available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author. Requests will be reviewed by the study investigators and must include a scientifically sound research proposal. Data will be made available following publication of the primary results, subject to applicable ethical, legal, and regulatory requirements. Data will be shared only with researchers whose proposed use is consistent with the informed consent provided by study participants.

Supporting information: Study protocol

Time frame: Start date: Immediately following publication of the primary results for a duration of 3 years.

Access criteria: Data will be shared with researchers whose proposed use is consistent with the informed consent provided by study participants. It will be made available upon reasonable request via email to the corresponding author.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 11, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07757425
Lead sponsor
Jamil Mayet
Collaborators
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust
Responsible party
Jamil Mayet (Professor of Cardiology, Imperial College London) — Sponsor-investigator
First posted
Aug 11, 2026
Start date
Aug 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Jan 2029 (estimated)
Completion
Jan 2029 (estimated)
Last update
Aug 11, 2026

Study contacts

Jamil Mayet, Professor, MBChB
Contact
j.mayet@imperial.ac.uk
+44 020 7594 1006
Fu Siong Ng, Professor, MBBS
Contact
f.ng@imperial.ac.uk
Jamil Mayet, MBChB
principal investigator · Imperial College NHS Healthcare Trust

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Aug 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion