MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894464394 · doi:10.2967/jnumed.118.213538

Deep Learning Analysis of Upright-Supine High-Efficiency SPECT Myocardial Perfusion Imaging for Prediction of Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: A Multicenter Study

2018· article· en· W2894464394 on OpenAlexaff
Julián Betancur, Lien-Hsin Hu, Frédéric Commandeur, Tali Sharir, Andrew J. Einstein, Mathews B. Fish, Terrence D. Ruddy, Philipp A. Kaufmann, Albert J. Sinusas, Edward J. Miller, Timothy M. Bateman, Sharmila Dorbala, Marcelo F. Di Carli, Guido Germano, Yuka Otaki, Joanna X. Liang, Balaji Tamarappoo, Damini Dey, Daniel S. Berman, Piotr J. Slomka

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nuclear Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsSupine positionCoronary artery diseaseMyocardial perfusion imagingMedicineCardiologyPerfusionInternal medicinePerfusion scanningRadiologyNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Combined analysis of SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) performed with a solid-state camera on patients in 2 positions (semiupright, supine) is routinely used to mitigate attenuation artifacts. We evaluated the prediction of obstructive disease from combined analysis of semiupright and supine stress MPI by deep learning (DL) as compared with standard combined total perfusion deficit (TPD). Methods: 1,160 patients without known coronary artery disease (64% male) were studied. Patients underwent stress 99mTc-sestamibi MPI with new-generation solid-state SPECT scanners in 4 different centers. All patients had on-site clinical reads and invasive coronary angiography correlations within 6 mo of MPI. Obstructive disease was defined as at least 70% narrowing of the 3 major coronary arteries and at least 50% for the left main coronary artery. Images were quantified at Cedars-Sinai. The left ventricular myocardium was segmented using standard clinical nuclear cardiology software. The contour placement was verified by an experienced technologist. Combined stress TPD was computed using sex- and camera-specific normal limits. DL was trained using polar distributions of normalized radiotracer counts, hypoperfusion defects, and hypoperfusion severities and was evaluated for prediction of obstructive disease in a novel leave-one-center-out cross-validation procedure equivalent to external validation. During the validation procedure, 4 DL models were trained using data from 3 centers and then evaluated on the 1 center left aside. Predictions for each center were merged to have an overall estimation of the multicenter performance. Results: 718 (62%) patients and 1,272 of 3,480 (37%) arteries had obstructive disease. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for prediction of disease on a per-patient and per-vessel basis by DL was higher than for combined TPD (per-patient, 0.81 vs. 0.78; per-vessel, 0.77 vs. 0.73; P < 0.001). With the DL cutoff set to exhibit the same specificity as the standard cutoff for combined TPD, per-patient sensitivity improved from 61.8% (TPD) to 65.6% (DL) (P < 0.05), and per-vessel sensitivity improved from 54.6% (TPD) to 59.1% (DL) (P < 0.01). With the threshold matched to the specificity of a normal clinical read (56.3%), DL had a sensitivity of 84.8%, versus 82.6% for an on-site clinical read (P = 0.3). Conclusion: DL improves automatic interpretation of MPI as compared with current quantitative methods.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations152
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nuclear MedicineSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207