MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411917234 · doi:10.1101/2025.06.19.25329944

Multicenter Evaluation of Interpretable AI for Coronary Artery Disease Diagnosis from PET Biomarkers

2025· preprint· en· W4411917234 on OpenAlexaff
Wenhao Zhang, Jacek Kwieciński, Aakash Shanbhag, Robert J.H. Miller, Giselle Ramirez, Jirong Yi, Donghee Han, Damini Dey, Dominika Grodecka, Kajetan Grodecki, Mark A. Lemley, Paul Kavanagh, Joanna X. Liang, Jianhang Zhou, Valerie Builoff, Jon Hainer, Sylvain Carre, Leanne Barrett, Andrew J. Einstein, Stacey Knight, Steve Mason, Viet T. Le, Wanda Acampa, Samuel Wopperer, Panithaya Chareonthaitawee, Daniel S. Berman, Marcelo F. Di Carli, Piotr J. Slomka

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineCoronary artery diseaseEjection fractionInternal medicineReceiver operating characteristicCardiologyMyocardial perfusion imagingArea under the curvePositron emission tomographyVentricleMyocardial infarctionRadiologyCADNuclear medicineHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Positron emission tomography (PET)/CT for myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) provides multiple imaging biomarkers, often evaluated separately. We developed an artificial intelligence (AI) model integrating key clinical PET MPI parameters to improve the diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: From 17,348 patients undergoing cardiac PET/CT across four sites, we retrospectively enrolled 1,664 subjects who had invasive coronary angiography within 180 days and no prior CAD. Deep learning was used to derive coronary artery calcium score (CAC) from CT attenuation correction maps. XGBoost machine learning model was developed using data from one site to detect CAD, defined as left main stenosis ≥50% or ≥70% in other arteries. The model utilized 10 image-derived parameters from clinical practice: CAC, stress/rest left ventricle ejection fraction, stress myocardial blood flow (MBF), myocardial flow reserve (MFR), ischemic and stress total perfusion deficit (TPD), transient ischemic dilation ratio, rate pressure product, and sex. Generalizability was evaluated in the remaining three sites-chosen to maximize testing power and capture inter-site variability-and model performance was compared with quantitative analyses using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Patient-specific predictions were explained using shapley additive explanations. Results: There was a 61% and 53% CAD prevalence in the training (n=386) and external testing (n=1,278) set, respectively. In the external evaluation, the AI model achieved a higher AUC (0.83 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.81-0.85]) compared to clinical score by experienced physicians (0.80 [0.77-0.82], p=0.02), ischemic TPD (0.79 [0.77-0.82], p<0.001), MFR (0.75 [0.72-0.78], p<0.001), and CAC (0.69 [0.66-0.72], p<0.001). The models' performances were consistent in sex, body mass index, and age groups. The top features driving the prediction were stress/ischemic TPD, CAC, and MFR. Conclusion: AI integrating perfusion, flow, and CAC scoring improves PET MPI diagnostic accuracy, offering automated and interpretable predictions for CAD diagnosis.

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)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207