MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391972224 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jeae045

Automated vessel-specific coronary artery calcification quantification with deep learning in a large multi-centre registry

2024· article· en· W4391972224 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle C. Williams, Aakash Shanbhag, Jianhang Zhou, Anna M. Michałowska, Mark Lemley, Robert J.H. Miller, Aditya Killekar, Parker Waechter, Heidi Gransar, Serge D. Van Kriekinge, Valerie Builoff, Attila Fehér, Edward J. Miller, Timothy M. Bateman, Damini Dey, Daniel S. Berman, Piotr J. Slomka

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of HealthNarodowa Agencja Wymiany AkademickiejBritish Heart Foundation
KeywordsCalcificationMedicineArteryInternal medicineCardiologyArtificial intelligenceRadiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Vessel-specific coronary artery calcification (CAC) is additive to global CAC for prognostic assessment. We assessed accuracy and prognostic implications of vessel-specific automated deep learning (DL) CAC analysis on electrocardiogram (ECG) gated and attenuation correction (AC) computed tomography (CT) in a large multi-centre registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: Vessel-specific CAC was assessed in the left main/left anterior descending (LM/LAD), left circumflex (LCX), and right coronary artery (RCA) using a DL model trained on 3000 gated CT and tested on 2094 gated CT and 5969 non-gated AC CT. Vessel-specific agreement was assessed with linear weighted Cohen's Kappa for CAC zero, 1-100, 101-400, and >400 Agatston units (AU). Risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was assessed during 2.4 ± 1.4 years follow-up, with hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). There was strong to excellent agreement between DL and expert ground truth for CAC in LM/LAD, LCX and RCA on gated CT [0.90 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.92); 0.70 (0.68 to 0.73); 0.79 (0.77 to 0.81)] and AC CT [0.78 (0.77 to 0.80); 0.60 (0.58 to 0.62); 0.70 (0.68 to 0.71)]. MACE occurred in 242 (12%) undergoing gated CT and 841(14%) of undergoing AC CT. LM/LAD CAC >400 AU was associated with the highest risk of MACE on gated (HR 12.0, 95% CI 7.96, 18.0, P < 0.001) and AC CT (HR 4.21, 95% CI 3.48, 5.08, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Vessel-specific CAC assessment with DL can be performed accurately and rapidly on gated CT and AC CT and provides important prognostic information.

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 score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.277
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations23
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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