Incremental prognostic utility of coronary CT angiography for asymptomatic patients based upon extent and severity of coronary artery calcium: results from the COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes InteRnational Multicenter (CONFIRM) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Prior evidence observed no predictive utility of coronary CT angiography (CCTA) over the coronary artery calcium score (CACS) and the Framingham risk score (FRS), among asymptomatic individuals. Whether the prognostic value of CCTA differs for asymptomatic patients, when stratified by CACS severity, remains unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: From a 12-centre, 6-country observational registry, 3217 asymptomatic individuals without known coronary artery disease (CAD) underwent CACS and CCTA. Individuals were categorized by CACS as: 0-10, 11-100, 101-400, 401-1000, >1000. For CCTA analysis, the number of obstructive vessels-as defined by the per-patient presence of a ≥50% luminal stenosis-was used to grade the extent and severity of CAD. The incremental prognostic value of CCTA over and above FRS was measured by the likelihood ratio (LR) χ(2), C-statistic, and continuous net reclassification improvement (NRI) for prediction, discrimination, and reclassification of all-cause mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction. During a median follow-up of 24 months (25th-75th percentile, 17-30 months), there were 58 composite end-points. The incremental value of CCTA over FRS was demonstrated in individuals with CACS >100 (LRχ(2), 25.34; increment in C-statistic, 0.24; NRI, 0.62, all P < 0.001), but not among those with CACS ≤100 (all P > 0.05). For subgroups with CACS >100, the utility of CCTA for predicting the study end-point was evident among individuals whose CACS ranged from 101 to 400; the observed predictive benefit attenuated with increasing CACS. CONCLUSION: Coronary CT angiography provides incremental prognostic utility for prediction of mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction for asymptomatic individuals with moderately high CACS, but not for lower or higher CACS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".