MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Computed Tomography Imaging-based Clusters for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Lung Function Decline

2025· article· en· W4410271219 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kalysta Makimoto, J.C. Hogg, J. Bourbeau, W.C. Tan, Miranda Kirby

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary diseaseLung functionComputed tomographyPulmonary function testingLungTomographyLung diseaseRadiologyCOPDObstructive lung diseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Cluster analysis techniques can identify subgroups with distinct characteristics and have been utilized to identify chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) phenotypes. However, it is unknown if computed tomography (CT) imaging-based clusters can identify subgroups of individuals at risk for lung function decline. Methods: Participants from the Canadian Cohort Obstructive Lung Disease study with CT imaging at baseline and clinical data collected at baseline and 3-year follow-up were investigated. Rapid lung function decline was defined as forced-expiratory-volume-in-one-second (FEV1)60mL/year. A total of 130 CT features were extracted, including: 9 conventional CT features (low-attenuation-areas-below -950HU, 15th-percentile-of-the-CT-density-histogram, low-attenuation-cluster, normalized-join-count, theoretic-airway-wall-thickness-for-10mm-lumen-perimeter, wall-area-percent, lumen-area, total-airway-count, and vessel-volume-for-vessels-less-than-5mm2/total-blood-volume) and 121 PyRadiomics features (18 first-order, 14 shape, and 75 texture features from the lung parenchyma and 14 airway shape features). Spearman correlation coefficient and principal component analysis (PCA) was used to select a subset of features for the cluster analysis. First, highly correlated features were removed (|r|>0.80) and the remaining features were used in PCA to identify which features contributed to at least 1% variance. A z-normalization was applied to the selected features. To identify the optimal number of clusters a Hierarchical clustering with the ward method was evaluated. A k-means clustering algorithm was then implemented using the optimal number of clusters identified in the Hierarchical clustering. An ANOVA was used to evaluate differences for clinical and CT imaging features between the clusters; p<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: 750 at-risk smokers and COPD participants were included in this study (N=262 at-risk; N=294 mild-COPD; N=173 moderate-COPD, N=21 severe-COPD). A total of 5 CT features were selected for cluster analysis, WA%, LA, a lung shape, lung texture, and airway shape feature, which identified three unique clusters. Clinical and CT imaging features were significantly different between the clusters (p<0.05). Cluster 1 (n=366) reflected a chronic bronchitis group consisting mainly of females with mild-moderate COPD with significantly reduced lung function. Cluster 2 (n=343) reflected an emphysema group consisting mainly of males with mild COPD and experienced significant lung function decline and compared to cluster 1 (p<.05). Cluster 3 (n=41) reflected a chronic bronchitis-emphysema mixed group consisting of a balance between males and females and was predominantly individuals at-risk and mild COPD. Conclusion: Overall, three unique clusters with distinct imaging phenotypes were identified and may be used for risk stratification for lung function decline, which could allow for interventions to preserve quality of life and reduce disease burden.

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)0.005
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging→French-language works237,207→