MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395462323 · doi:10.1101/2024.04.23.24305735

Holistic AI analysis of hybrid cardiac perfusion images for mortality prediction

2024· preprint· en· W4395462323 on OpenAlexaff
Anna M. Michałowska, Wenhao Zhang, Aakash Shanbhag, Robert J.H. Miller, Mark A. Lemley, Giselle Ramirez, Mikołaj Buchwald, Aditya Killekar, Paul Kavanagh, Attila Feher, Edward J. Miller, Andrew J. Einstein, Terrence D. Ruddy, Joanna X. Liang, Valerie Builoff, David Ouyang, Daniel S. Berman, Damini Dey, Piotr J. Slomka

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsCardiologyPerfusionComputer scienceInternal medicineArtificial intelligenceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: While low-dose computed tomography scans are traditionally used for attenuation correction in hybrid myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), they also contain additional anatomic and pathologic information not utilized in clinical assessment. We seek to uncover the full potential of these scans utilizing a holistic artificial intelligence (AI)-driven image framework for image assessment. Methods: Patients with SPECT/CT MPI from 4 REFINE SPECT registry sites were studied. A multi-structure model segmented 33 structures and quantified 15 radiomics features for each on CT attenuation correction (CTAC) scans. Coronary artery calcium and epicardial adipose tissue scores were obtained from separate deep-learning models. Normal standard quantitative MPI features were derived by clinical software. Extreme Gradient Boosting derived all-cause mortality risk scores from SPECT, CT, stress test, and clinical features utilizing a 10-fold cross-validation regimen to separate training from testing data. The performance of the models for the prediction of all-cause mortality was evaluated using area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUCs). Results: Of 10,480 patients, 5,745 (54.8%) were male, and median age was 65 (interquartile range [IQR] 57-73) years. During the median follow-up of 2.9 years (1.6-4.0), 651 (6.2%) patients died. The AUC for mortality prediction of the model (combining CTAC, MPI, and clinical data) was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [0.74-0.87]), which was higher than that of an AI CTAC model (0.78 [0.71-0.85]), and AI hybrid model (0.79 [0.72-0.86]) incorporating CTAC and MPI data (p<0.001 for all). Conclusion: In patients with normal perfusion, the comprehensive model (0.76 [0.65-0.86]) had significantly better performance than the AI CTAC (0.72 [0.61-0.83]) and AI hybrid (0.73 [0.62-0.84]) models (p<0.001, for all).CTAC significantly enhances AI risk stratification with MPI SPECT/CT beyond its primary role - attenuation correction. A comprehensive multimodality approach can significantly improve mortality prediction compared to MPI information alone in patients undergoing cardiac SPECT/CT.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207