MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150382419 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jet132

Age-related risk of major adverse cardiac event risk and coronary artery disease extent and severity by coronary CT angiography: results from 15 187 patients from the International Multisite CONFIRM Study

2014· article· en· W2150382419 on OpenAlexaff
Ryo Nakazato, Reza Arsanjani, Susanne Achenbach, Heidi Gransar, Victor Cheng, A. Dunning, F. Y. Lin, Mouaz H. Al‐Mallah, Matthew J. Budoff, Tracy Q. Callister, Hyuk‐Jae Chang, Filippo Cademartiri, Kavitha M. Chinnaiyan, Benjamin J.W. Chow, Augustin DeLago, Martin Hadamitzky, J. Hausleiter, Philipp A. Kaufmann, Gil Raff, L. J. Shaw, Todd C. Villines, Roberto Caldeira Cury, G. Feuchtner, Young Jin Kim, Jonathon Leipsic, Daniel S. Berman, Jeong‐Ki Min

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMaceMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseStenosisMyocardial infarctionHazard ratioRevascularizationProportional hazards modelAngiographyClinical endpointRadiologyConfidence intervalPercutaneous coronary interventionClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Prior studies evaluating the prognostic utility of cardiac CT angiography (CCTA) have been largely constrained to an all-cause mortality endpoint, with other cardiac endpoints generally not reported. To this end, we sought to determine the relationship of extent and severity of coronary artery disease (CAD) by CCTA to risk of incident major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) (defined as death, myocardial infarction, and late revascularization). METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified subjects without prior known CAD who underwent CCTA and were followed for MACE. CAD by CCTA was defined as none (0% luminal stenosis), mild (1-49% luminal stenosis), moderate (50-69% luminal stenosis), or severe (≥70% luminal stenosis), and ≥50% luminal stenosis was considered as obstructive. CAD severity was judged on per-patient, per-vessel, and per-segment basis. Time to MACE was estimated using univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Among 15 187 patients (57 ± 12 years, 55% male), 595 MACE events (3.9%) occurred at a 2.4 ± 1.2 year follow-up. In multivariable analyses, an increased risk of MACE was observed for both non-obstructive [hazard ratio (HR) 2.43, P < 0.001] and obstructive CAD (HR: 11.21, P < 0.001) when compared with patients with normal CCTA. Risk-adjusted MACE increased in a dose-response relationship based on the number of vessels with obstructive CAD ≥50%, with increasing hazards observed for non-obstructive (HR: 2.54, P < 0.001), obstructive one-vessel (HR: 9.15, P < 0.001), two-vessel (HR: 15.00, P < 0.001), or three-vessel or left main (HR: 24.53, P < 0.001) CAD. Among patients stratified by age <65 vs. ≥65 years, older individuals experienced higher risk-adjusted hazards for MACE for non-obstructive, one-, and two-vessel, with similar event rates for three-vessel or left main (P < 0.001 for all) compared with normal individuals age <65. Finally, there was a dose relationship of CAD findings by CCTA and MACE event rates with each advancing decade of life. CONCLUSION: Among individuals without known CAD, non-obstructive, and obstructive CAD are associated with higher MACE rates, with different risk profiles based on age.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations112
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular ImagingSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207