MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393550458 · doi:10.1117/12.3007914

Deep learning-based epicardial adipose tissue measurement, maximizing prognostic information from attenuation correction imaging

2024· article· en· W4393550458 on OpenAlexaff
Aakash Shanbhag, Robert J.H. Miller, Aditya Killekar, Mark Lemley, Bryan Bednarski, Serge D. Van Kriekinge, Paul Kavanagh, Attila Fehér, Edward J. Miller, Timothy Bateman, Joanna X. Liang, Valerie Builoff, Daniel S. Berman, Damini Dey, Piotr J. Slomka

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionHazard ratioNuclear medicineAdipose tissueRisk stratificationPopulationInternal medicineProportional hazards modelCardiologyComputed tomographyRadiologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epicardial Adipose Tissue (EAT) volume has been associated with risk of cardiovascular events, but manual annotation is time-consuming and only performed on gated Computed Tomography (CT). We developed a Deep Learning (DL) model to segment EAT from gated and ungated CT, then evaluated the association between EAT volume and death or Myocardial Infarction (MI). We included 7712 patients from three sites, two with ungated CT and one using gated CT. Of those, 500 patients from one site with ungated CT were used for model training and validation and 3,701 patients from the remaining two sites were used for external testing. Threshold for abnormal EAT volume (⪆144mL) was derived in the internal population based on Youden’s index. DL EAT measurements were obtained in ⪅2 seconds compared to approximately 15 minutes for expert annotations. Excellent Spearman correlation between DL and expert reader on an external subset of N=100 gated (0.94, p⪅0.001) and N=100 ungated (0.91, p⪅0.001). During median follow-up of 3.1 years (IQR 2.1 – 4.0), 306(8.3%) patients experienced death or MI in the external testing populations. Elevated EAT volume was associated with an increased risk of death or MI for gated (hazard ratio [HR] 1.72, 95% CI 1.11-2.67) and ungated CT (HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.20 – 2.07), with no significant difference in risk (interaction p-value 0.692). EAT volume measurements provide similar risk stratification from gated and ungated CT. These measurements could be obtained on chest CT performed for a large variety of indications, potentially improving risk stratification.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207