MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Coronary artery disease extent, severity and risk among active smokers, past smokers and non-smokers: a prospective study of 13,372 patients undergoing coronary CT angiography

2013· article· en· W2076158959 on OpenAlexaff
Rine Nakanishi, Matthew J. Budoff, Heidi Gransar, Mouaz H. Al‐Mallah, Filippo Cademartiri, Benjamin J.W. Chow, Jöerg Hausleiter, H. Raff, Daniel S. Berman, James K. Min

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMaceCoronary artery diseaseInternal medicineCardiologyProspective cohort studyMyocardial infarctionRisk factorPercutaneous coronary intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Although smoking is an established risk factor for major cardiac adverse events (MACE), the relative risk of current versus past smoking is poorly understood. We evaluated coronary artery disease (CAD) extent, severity and risk of MACE for active smokers and past smokers undergoing coronary CT angiography (CCTA). Methods: From a prospective multicenter international study, we enrolled patients without known CAD who underwent CCTA [2853 current smokers (21%); 3175 past smokers who quit >3 months prior to CCTA (24%); and 7344 non-smokers (55%)]. By risk-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for age, gender, risk-factors, segment involvement score, ≥50% stenosis, we related smoking status to incident risk of MACE, as defined by death, myocardial infarction or unstable angina. We further performed 1:1:1 propensity matching for 1000 current smokers, past smokers and non-smokers each to evaluate MACE risk amongst individuals who were of similar age, gender, CAD risk factors and symptom presentation. Results: 13372 patients (56.2±12.8 years, 51% male) were followed for 2.0±0.9 years follow-up, with 279 (2.1%) MACE occurring. Compared to non-smokers, current and past smokers had higher prevalence of obstructive CAD (≥50%) [1-vessel disease (VD); 11.2% vs. 16.6% vs. 16.2%, p<0.001, 2VD; 4.8% vs. 7.3% vs. 7.8%, p<0.001, 3VD; 2.3% vs. 5.1% vs. 5.0%, p<0.001]. Current smokers experienced higher risk of MACE compared to non-smokers (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.4-2.5, p<0.001), while past smokers did not (HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.9-1.6, p=0.29). Even amongst matched individuals, current smoking was associated with MACE risk (HR 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.4, p=0.01), while past smoking was not (HR1.0, 95% CI 0.5-2.1, p=0.98). Conclusion: While both current and past smokers possess a greater prevalence, extent and severity of CAD compared to non-smokers, current smokers experience higher risk of MACE than past smokers and non-smokers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→