MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392826505 · doi:10.1148/ryct.220197

Impact of Smoking on Coronary Volume–to–Myocardial Mass Ratio: An ADVANCE Registry Substudy

2024· article· en· W4392826505 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth R. Holmes, Gaurav S. Gulsin, Timothy Fairbairn, Lynne Koweek, Hitoshi Matsuo, Bjarne Linde Nørgaard, Jesper Møller Jensen, Niels-Peter Rønnow Sand, Koen Nieman, Jeroen J. Bax, Gianluca Pontone, Kavitha M. Chinnaiyan, Mark Rabbat, Tetsuya Amano, Tomohiro Kawasaki, Takashi Akasaka, Hironori Kitabata, Campbell Rogers, Manesh R. Patel, Geoffrey W. Payne, Jonathon Leipsic, Stephanie Sellers

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology Cardiothoracic Imaging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDuke Clinical Research InstituteHeartFlowNovo Nordisk Fonden
KeywordsMedicineVolume (thermodynamics)CardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose To examine the relationship between smoking status and coronary volume–to–myocardial mass ratio (V/M) among individuals with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing CT fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR) analysis. Materials and Methods In this secondary analysis, participants from the ADVANCE registry evaluated for suspected CAD from July 15, 2015, to October 20, 2017, who were found to have coronary stenosis of 30% or greater at coronary CT angiography (CCTA) were included if they had known smoking status and underwent CT-FFR and V/M analysis. CCTA images were segmented to calculate coronary volume and myocardial mass. V/M was compared between smoking groups, and predictors of low V/M were determined. Results The sample for analysis included 503 current smokers, 1060 former smokers, and 1311 never-smokers (2874 participants; 1906 male participants). After adjustment for demographic and clinical factors, former smokers had greater coronary volume than never-smokers (former smokers, 3021.7 mm3 ± 934.0 [SD]; never-smokers, 2967.6 mm3 ± 978.0; P = .002), while current smokers had increased myocardial mass compared with never-smokers (current smokers, 127.8 g ± 32.9; never-smokers, 118.0 g ± 32.5; P = .02). However, both current and former smokers had lower V/M than never-smokers (current smokers, 24.1 mm3/g ± 7.9; former smokers, 24.9 mm3/g ± 7.1; never-smokers, 25.8 mm3/g ± 7.4; P < .001 [unadjusted] and P = .002 [unadjusted], respectively). Current smoking status (odds ratio [OR], 0.74 [95% CI: 0.59, 0.93]; P = .009), former smoking status (OR, 0.81 [95% CI: 0.68, 0.97]; P = .02), stenosis of 50% or greater (OR, 0.62 [95% CI: 0.52, 0.74]; P < .001), and diabetes (OR, 0.67 [95% CI: 0.56, 0.82]; P < .001) were independent predictors of low V/M. Conclusion Both current and former smoking status were independently associated with low V/M. Keywords: CT Angiography, Cardiac, Heart, Ischemia/Infarction Clinical trial registration no. NCT02499679 Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2024

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)0.002
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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.324
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiology Cardiothoracic ImagingSame topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207