MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939203542 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jez067

Long-term prognostic utility of computed tomography coronary angiography in older populations

2019· article· en· W2939203542 on OpenAlexaff
Sonali R. Gnanenthiran, Christopher Naoum, Jonathon Leipsic, Stephan Achenbach, Mouaz H. Al‐Mallah, Daniele Andreini, Jeroen J. Bax, Daniel S. Berman, Matthew J. Budoff, Filippo Cademartiri, Tracy Q. Callister, Hyuk‐Jae Chang, Kavitha M. Chinnaiyan, Benjamin J.W. Chow, Ricardo C. Cury, Augustin DeLago, Gudrun Feuchtner, Martin Hadamitzky, Jöerg Hausleiter, Philipp A Kaufman, Yong‐Jin Kim, Erica Maffei, Hugo Marques, Pedro de Araújo Gonçalves, Gianluca Pontone, Gilbert Raff, Ronen Rubinshtein, Leslee J. Shaw, Todd C. Villines, Heidi Gransar, Yao Lu, Erica C. Jones, Jessica M. Peña, Fay Y. Lin, Leonard Kritharides, James K. Min

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioCoronary artery diseaseStenosisCardiologyConfidence intervalAngiographyInternal medicineComputed tomography angiographyProportional hazards modelRadiologyCoronary angiographyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: The long-term prognostic value of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA)-identified coronary artery disease (CAD) has not been evaluated in elderly patients (≥70 years). We compared the ability of coronary CCTA to predict 5-year mortality in older vs. younger populations. METHODS AND RESULTS: From the prospective CONFIRM (COronary CT Angiography EvaluatioN For Clinical Outcomes: An InteRnational Multicenter) registry, we analysed CCTA results according to age <70 years (n = 7198) vs. ≥70 years (n = 1786). The severity of CAD was classified according to: (i) maximal stenosis degree per vessel: none, non-obstructive (1-49%), or obstructive (>50%); (ii) segment involvement score (SIS): number of segments with plaque. Cox-proportional hazard models assessed the relationship between CCTA findings and time to mortality. At a mean 5.6 ± 1.1 year follow-up, CCTA-identified CAD predicted increased mortality compared with patients with a normal CCTA in both <70 years [non-obstructive hazard ratio (HR) confidence interval (CI): 1.70 (1.19-2.41); one-vessel: 1.65 (1.03-2.67); two-vessel: 2.24 (1.21-4.15); three-vessel/left main: 4.12 (2.27-7.46), P < 0.001] and ≥70 years [non-obstructive: 1.84 (1.15-2.95); one-vessel: HR (CI): 2.28 (1.37-3.81); two-vessel: 2.36 (1.33-4.19); three-vessel/left main: 2.41 (1.33-4.36), P = 0.014]. Similarly, SIS was predictive of mortality in both <70 years [SIS 1-3: 1.57 (1.10-2.24); SIS ≥4: 2.42 (1.65-3.57), P < 0.001] and ≥70 years [SIS 1-3: 1.73 (1.07-2.79); SIS ≥4: 2.45 (1.52-3.93), P < 0.001]. CCTA findings similarly predicted long-term major adverse cardiovascular outcomes (MACE) (all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and late revascularization) in both groups compared with patients with no CAD. CONCLUSION: The presence and extent of CAD is a meaningful stratifier of long-term mortality and MACE in patients aged <70 years and ≥70 years old. The presence of obstructive and non-obstructive disease and the burden of atherosclerosis determined by SIS remain important predictors of prognosis in older populations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.251 · 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.

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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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