MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interaction of AI-Enabled Quantitative Coronary Plaque Volumes on Coronary CT Angiography, FFR <sub>CT</sub> , and Clinical Outcomes: A Retrospective Analysis of the ADVANCE Registry

2024· article· en· W4392709431 on OpenAlexaff
James Dundas, Jonathon Leipsic, Timothy Fairbairn, Nicholas Ng, Vida Sussman, Ilana Guez, Rachael Rosenblatt, Lynne Koweek, Pamela S. Douglas, Mark Rabbat, Gianluca Pontone, Kavitha M. Chinnaiyan, Bernard De Bruyne, Jeroen J. Bax, Tetsuya Amano, Koen Nieman, Campbell Rogers, Hironori Kitabata, Niels Peter Rønnow Sand, Tomohiro Kawasaki, Sarah Mullen, Whitney Huey, Hitoshi Matsuo, Manesh R. Patel, Bjarne Linde Nørgaard, Amir Ahmadi, Γεώργιος Τζίμας

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Imaging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronary angiographyRadiologyRetrospective cohort studyFractional flow reserveCardiologyAngiographyAcute coronary syndromeInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Luminal stenosis, computed tomography–derived fractional-flow reserve (FFR CT ), and high-risk plaque features on coronary computed tomography angiography are all known to be associated with adverse clinical outcomes. The interactions between these variables, patient outcomes, and quantitative plaque volumes have not been previously described. METHODS: Patients with coronary computed tomography angiography (n=4430) and one-year outcome data from the international ADVANCE (Assessing Diagnostic Value of Noninvasive FFR CT in Coronary Care) registry underwent artificial intelligence–enabled quantitative coronary plaque analysis. Optimal cutoffs for coronary total plaque volume and each plaque subtype were derived using receiver-operator characteristic curve analysis. The resulting plaque volumes were adjusted for age, sex, hypertension, smoking status, type 2 diabetes, hyperlipidemia, luminal stenosis, distal FFR CT , and translesional delta-FFR CT . Median plaque volumes and optimal cutoffs for these adjusted variables were compared with major adverse cardiac events, late revascularization, a composite of the two, and cardiovascular death and myocardial infarction. RESULTS: At one year, 55 patients (1.2%) had experienced major adverse cardiac events, and 123 (2.8%) had undergone late revascularization (&gt;90 days). Following adjustment for age, sex, risk factors, stenosis, and FFR CT , total plaque volume above the receiver-operator characteristic curve–derived optimal cutoff (total plaque volume &gt;564 mm 3 ) was associated with the major adverse cardiac event/late revascularization composite (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.515 [95% CI, 1.093–2.099]; P =0.0126), and both components. Total percent atheroma volume greater than the optimal cutoff was associated with both major adverse cardiac event/late revascularization (total percent atheroma volume &gt;24.4%; hazard ratio, 2.046 [95% CI, 1.474–2.839]; P &lt;0.0001) and cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction (total percent atheroma volume &gt;37.17%, hazard ratio, 4.53 [95% CI, 1.943–10.576]; P =0.0005). Calcified, noncalcified, and low-attenuation percentage atheroma volumes above the optimal cutoff were associated with all adverse outcomes, although this relationship was not maintained for cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction in analyses stratified by median plaque volumes. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of the ADVANCE registry using artificial intelligence–enabled quantitative plaque analysis shows that total plaque volume is associated with one-year adverse clinical events, with incremental predictive value over luminal stenosis or abnormal physiology by FFR CT . REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02499679.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

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

Citations41
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular ImagingSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207