MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410426514 · doi:10.1016/j.landig.2025.02.002

AI-based volumetric six-tissue body composition quantification from CT cardiac attenuation scans for mortality prediction: a multicentre study

2025· article· en· W4410426514 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jirong Yi, Anna M Marcinkiewicz, Aakash Shanbhag, Robert J.H. Miller, Jolien Geers, Wenhao Zhang, Aditya Killekar, Nipun Manral, Mark Lemley, Mikołaj Buchwald, Jacek Kwieciński, Jianhang Zhou, Paul Kavanagh, Joanna X. Liang, Valerie Builoff, Terrence D. Ruddy, Andrew J. Einstein, Attila Fehér, Edward J. Miller, Albert J. Sinusas, Daniel S. Berman, Damini Dey, Piotr J. Slomka

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Digital Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineAttenuationNuclear medicineRadiologyBiomedical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: CT attenuation correction (CTAC) scans are routinely obtained during cardiac perfusion imaging, but currently only used for attenuation correction and visual calcium estimation. We aimed to develop a novel artificial intelligence (AI)-based approach to obtain volumetric measurements of chest body composition from CTAC scans and to evaluate these measures for all-cause mortality risk stratification. METHODS: We applied AI-based segmentation and image-processing techniques on CTAC scans from a large international image-based registry at four sites (Yale University, University of Calgary, Columbia University, and University of Ottawa), to define the chest rib cage and multiple tissues. Volumetric measures of bone, skeletal muscle, subcutaneous adipose tissue, intramuscular adipose tissue (IMAT), visceral adipose tissue (VAT), and epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) were quantified between automatically identified T5 and T11 vertebrae. The independent prognostic value of volumetric attenuation and indexed volumes were evaluated for predicting all-cause mortality, adjusting for established risk factors and 18 other body composition measures via Cox regression models and Kaplan-Meier curves. FINDINGS: The end-to-end processing time was less than 2 min per scan with no user interaction. Between 2009 and 2021, we included 11 305 participants from four sites participating in the REFINE SPECT registry, who underwent single-photon emission computed tomography cardiac scans. After excluding patients who had incomplete T5-T11 scan coverage, missing clinical data, or who had been used for EAT model training, the final study group comprised 9918 patients. 5451 (55%) of 9918 participants were male and 4467 (45%) of 9918 participants were female. Median follow-up time was 2·48 years (IQR 1·46-3·65), during which 610 (6%) patients died. High VAT, EAT, and IMAT attenuation were associated with an increased all-cause mortality risk (adjusted hazard ratio 2·39, 95% CI 1·92-2·96; p<0·0001, 1·55, 1·26-1·90; p<0·0001, and 1·30, 1·06-1·60; p=0·012, respectively). Patients with high bone attenuation were at reduced risk of death (0·77, 0·62-0·95; p=0·016). Likewise, high skeletal muscle volume index was associated with a reduced risk of death (0·56, 0·44-0·71; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: CTAC scans obtained routinely during cardiac perfusion imaging contain important volumetric body composition biomarkers that can be automatically measured and offer important additional prognostic value. FUNDING: The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Digital HealthSame topicCardiovascular Disease and AdiposityFrench-language works237,207