Clinical and genetic associations of deep learning-derived cardiac magnetic resonance-based left ventricular mass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Left ventricular mass is a risk marker for cardiovascular events, and may indicate an underlying cardiomyopathy. Cardiac magnetic resonance is the gold-standard for left ventricular mass estimation, but is challenging to obtain at scale. Here, we use deep learning to enable genome-wide association study of cardiac magnetic resonance-derived left ventricular mass indexed to body surface area within 43,230 UK Biobank participants. We identify 12 genome-wide associations (1 known at TTN and 11 novel for left ventricular mass), implicating genes previously associated with cardiac contractility and cardiomyopathy. Cardiac magnetic resonance-derived indexed left ventricular mass is associated with incident dilated and hypertrophic cardiomyopathies, and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implant. An indexed left ventricular mass polygenic risk score ≥90th percentile is also associated with incident implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implant in separate UK Biobank (hazard ratio 1.22, 95% CI 1.05-1.44) and Mass General Brigham (hazard ratio 1.75, 95% CI 1.12-2.74) samples. Here, we perform a genome-wide association study of cardiac magnetic resonance-derived indexed left ventricular mass to identify 11 novel variants and demonstrate that cardiac magnetic resonance-derived and genetically predicted indexed left ventricular mass are associated with incident cardiomyopathy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".