Patient-Specific Myocardial Infarction Risk Thresholds From AI-Enabled Coronary Plaque Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Plaque quantification from coronary computed tomography angiography has emerged as a valuable predictor of cardiovascular risk. Deep learning can provide automated quantification of coronary plaque from computed tomography angiography. We determined per-patient age- and sex-specific distributions of deep learning-based plaque measurements and further evaluated their risk prediction for myocardial infarction in external samples. METHODS: In this international, multicenter study of 2803 patients, a previously validated deep learning system was used to quantify coronary plaque from computed tomography angiography. Age- and sex-specific distributions of coronary plaque volume were determined from 956 patients undergoing computed tomography angiography for stable coronary artery disease from 5 cohorts. Multicenter external samples were used to evaluate associations between coronary plaque percentiles and myocardial infarction. RESULTS: =0.001) were at increased risk of myocardial infarction compared with patients below the 50th percentile. Similar relationships were seen for most plaque volumes and persisted in multivariable analyses adjusting for clinical characteristics, coronary artery calcium, stenosis, and plaque volume, with adjusted hazard ratios ranging from 2.38 to 2.50 for patients in the ≥75th percentile of total plaque volume. CONCLUSIONS: Per-patient age- and sex-specific distributions for deep learning-based coronary plaque volumes are strongly predictive of myocardial infarction, with the highest risk seen in patients with coronary plaque volumes in the ≥75th percentile.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".