MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118422970 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv013

Current but not past smoking increases the risk of cardiac events: insights from coronary computed tomographic angiography

2015· article· en· W2118422970 on OpenAlexaff
Rine Nakanishi, Daniel S. Berman, Matthew J. Budoff, Heidi Gransar, Susanne Achenbach, Mouaz H. Al‐Mallah, Daniele Andreini, Filippo Cademartiri, Tracy Q. Callister, Hyuk‐Jae Chang, Victor Cheng, Kavitha M. Chinnaiyan, Benjamin J.W. Chow, Roberto Caldeira Cury, A. Delago, Martin Hadamitzky, Jöerg Hausleiter, Gudrun Feuchtner, Young Jin Kim, Philipp A. Kaufmann, J. Leipsic, Fu-Yuen Lin, Erica Maffei, Gianluca Pontone, Gilbert Raff, L. J. Shaw, Todd C. Villines, A. Dunning, Jeong‐Ki Min

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineMaceHazard ratioCardiologyInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseMyocardial infarctionConfidence intervalProportional hazards modelPercutaneous coronary intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: We evaluated coronary artery disease (CAD) extent, severity, and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) in never, past, and current smokers undergoing coronary CT angiography (CCTA). METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated 9456 patients (57.1 ± 12.3 years, 55.5% male) without known CAD (1588 current smokers; 2183 past smokers who quit ≥3 months before CCTA; and 5685 never smokers). By risk-adjusted Cox proportional-hazards models, we related smoking status to MACE (all-cause death or non-fatal myocardial infarction). We further performed 1:1:1 propensity matching for 1000 in each group evaluate event risk among individuals with similar age, gender, CAD risk factors, and symptom presentation. During a mean follow-up of 2.8 ± 1.9 years, 297 MACE occurred. Compared with never smokers, current and past smokers had greater atherosclerotic burden including extent of plaque defined as segments with any plaque (2.1 ± 2.8 vs. 2.6 ± 3.2 vs. 3.1 ± 3.3, P < 0.0001) and prevalence of obstructive CAD [1-vessel disease (VD): 10.6% vs. 14.9% vs. 15.2%, P < 0.001; 2-VD: 4.4% vs. 6.1% vs. 6.2%, P = 0.001; 3-VD: 3.1% vs. 5.2% vs. 4.3%, P < 0.001]. Compared with never smokers, current smokers experienced higher MACE risk [hazard ratio (HR) 1.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4-2.6, P < 0.001], while past smokers did not (HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.8-1.6, P = 0.35). Among matched individuals, current smokers had higher MACE risk (HR 2.6, 95% CI 1.6-4.2, P < 0.001), while past smokers did not (HR 1.3, 95% CI 0.7-2.4, P = 0.39). Similar findings were observed for risk of all-cause death. CONCLUSION: Among patients without known CAD undergoing CCTA, current and past smokers had increased burden of atherosclerosis compared with never smokers; however, risk of MACE was heightened only in current 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations41
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207