MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402843834 · doi:10.1111/resp.14832

Coronary artery calcification detected on low‐dose computed tomography in high‐risk participants of an Australian lung cancer screening program: A prospective observational study

2024· article· en· W4402843834 on OpenAlexaff
Asha Bonney, Michelle Chua, Mark McCusker, Diane Pascoe, S. Joshi, Daniel Steinfort, Henry Marshall, Jeremy D. Silver, Cheng Xie, Sally Yang, Jack Watson, Paul Fogarty, Emily Stone, Fraser Brims, Annette McWilliams, Xinxin Hu, Christopher Rofe, Brad Milner, Stephen Lam, Kwun M. Fong, Renée Manser

Bibliographic record

VenueRespirology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilUniversity of MelbourneRoyal Melbourne Hospital
KeywordsMedicineLung cancer screeningGuidelineObservational studyLung cancerCoronary artery diseaseInternal medicinePopulationFamily historyProspective cohort studySmoking cessationPhysical therapyPathologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Coronary artery calcification (CAC) is a frequent additional finding on lung cancer screening (LCS) low-dose computed tomography (LDCT). Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of death in LCS participants. We aimed to describe prevalence of incidental CAC detected on LDCT in LCS participants without prior history of coronary artery disease (CAD), evaluate their CVD risk and describe subsequent investigation and management. METHODS: Prospective observational nested cohort study including all participants enrolled at a single Australian site of the International Lung Screen Trial. Baseline LDCTs were reviewed for CAC, and subsequent information collected regarding cardiovascular health. 5-year CVD risk was calculated using the AusCVD risk calculator. RESULTS: 55% (226/408) of participants had CAC on LDCT and no prior history of CAD, including 23% with moderate-severe CAC. Mean age of participants with CAC was 65 years, 68% were male. 53% were currently smoking. Majority were high risk (51%) or intermediate risk (32%) of a cardiovascular event in 5 years. 21% of participants were re-stratified to a higher CVD risk group when CAC detected on LCS was incorporated. Only 10% of participants with CAC received lifestyle advice (only 3% currently smoking received smoking cessation advice). 80% of participants at high-risk did not meet guideline recommendations, with 47% of this group remaining without cholesterol lowering therapy. CONCLUSION: LCS with LDCT offers the potential to identify and communicate CVD risk in this population. This may improve health outcomes for high-risk LCS participants and further personalize management once screening results are known.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRespirologySame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207