Automated CT biomarkers for opportunistic prediction of future cardiovascular events and mortality in an asymptomatic screening population: a retrospective cohort study.


Journal

The Lancet. Digital health
ISSN: 2589-7500
Titre abrégé: Lancet Digit Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101751302

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 2020
Historique:
entrez: 1 9 2020
pubmed: 31 8 2020
medline: 31 8 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Body CT scans are frequently performed for a wide variety of clinical indications, but potentially valuable biometric information typically goes unused. We investigated the prognostic ability of automated CT-based body composition biomarkers derived from previously-developed deep-learning and feature-based algorithms for predicting major cardiovascular events and overall survival in an adult screening cohort, compared with clinical parameters. Mature and fully-automated CT-based algorithms with pre-defined metrics for quantifying aortic calcification, muscle density, visceral/subcutaneous fat, liver fat, and bone mineral density (BMD) were applied to a generally-healthy asymptomatic outpatient cohort of 9223 adults (mean age, 57.1 years; 5152 women) undergoing abdominal CT for routine colorectal cancer screening. Longitudinal clinical follow-up (median, 8.8 years; IQR, 5.1-11.6 years) documented subsequent major cardiovascular events or death in 19.7% (n=1831). Predictive ability of CT-based biomarkers was compared against the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) and body mass index (BMI). Significant differences were observed for all five automated CT-based body composition measures according to adverse events (p<0.001). Univariate 5-year AUROC (with 95% CI) for automated CT-based aortic calcification, muscle density, visceral/subcutaneous fat ratio, liver density, and vertebral density for predicting death were 0.743(0.705-0.780)/0.721(0.683-0.759)/0.661(0.625-0.697)/0.619 (0.582-0.656)/0.646(0.603-0.688), respectively, compared with 0.499(0.454-0.544) for BMI and 0.688(0.650-0.727) for FRS (p<0.05 for aortic calcification vs. FRS and BMI); all trends were similar for 2-year and 10-year ROC analyses. Univariate hazard ratios (with 95% CIs) for highest-risk quartile versus others for these same CT measures were 4.53(3.82-5.37) /3.58(3.02-4.23)/2.28(1.92-2.71)/1.82(1.52-2.17)/2.73(2.31-3.23), compared with 1.36(1.13-1.64) and 2.82(2.36-3.37) for BMI and FRS, respectively. Similar significant trends were observed for cardiovascular events. Multivariate combinations of CT biomarkers further improved prediction over clinical parameters (p<0.05 for AUROCs). For example, by combining aortic calcification, muscle density, and liver density, the 2-year AUROC for predicting overall survival was 0.811 (0.761-0.860). Fully-automated quantitative tissue biomarkers derived from CT scans can outperform established clinical parameters for pre-symptomatic risk stratification for future serious adverse events, and add opportunistic value to CT scans performed for other indications.

Sections du résumé

Background
Body CT scans are frequently performed for a wide variety of clinical indications, but potentially valuable biometric information typically goes unused. We investigated the prognostic ability of automated CT-based body composition biomarkers derived from previously-developed deep-learning and feature-based algorithms for predicting major cardiovascular events and overall survival in an adult screening cohort, compared with clinical parameters.
Methods
Mature and fully-automated CT-based algorithms with pre-defined metrics for quantifying aortic calcification, muscle density, visceral/subcutaneous fat, liver fat, and bone mineral density (BMD) were applied to a generally-healthy asymptomatic outpatient cohort of 9223 adults (mean age, 57.1 years; 5152 women) undergoing abdominal CT for routine colorectal cancer screening. Longitudinal clinical follow-up (median, 8.8 years; IQR, 5.1-11.6 years) documented subsequent major cardiovascular events or death in 19.7% (n=1831). Predictive ability of CT-based biomarkers was compared against the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) and body mass index (BMI).
Findings
Significant differences were observed for all five automated CT-based body composition measures according to adverse events (p<0.001). Univariate 5-year AUROC (with 95% CI) for automated CT-based aortic calcification, muscle density, visceral/subcutaneous fat ratio, liver density, and vertebral density for predicting death were 0.743(0.705-0.780)/0.721(0.683-0.759)/0.661(0.625-0.697)/0.619 (0.582-0.656)/0.646(0.603-0.688), respectively, compared with 0.499(0.454-0.544) for BMI and 0.688(0.650-0.727) for FRS (p<0.05 for aortic calcification vs. FRS and BMI); all trends were similar for 2-year and 10-year ROC analyses. Univariate hazard ratios (with 95% CIs) for highest-risk quartile versus others for these same CT measures were 4.53(3.82-5.37) /3.58(3.02-4.23)/2.28(1.92-2.71)/1.82(1.52-2.17)/2.73(2.31-3.23), compared with 1.36(1.13-1.64) and 2.82(2.36-3.37) for BMI and FRS, respectively. Similar significant trends were observed for cardiovascular events. Multivariate combinations of CT biomarkers further improved prediction over clinical parameters (p<0.05 for AUROCs). For example, by combining aortic calcification, muscle density, and liver density, the 2-year AUROC for predicting overall survival was 0.811 (0.761-0.860).
Interpretation
Fully-automated quantitative tissue biomarkers derived from CT scans can outperform established clinical parameters for pre-symptomatic risk stratification for future serious adverse events, and add opportunistic value to CT scans performed for other indications.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32864598
doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30025-X
pmc: PMC7454161
mid: NIHMS1574244
doi:

Substances chimiques

Biomarkers 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, N.I.H., Intramural

Langues

eng

Pagination

e192-e200

Subventions

Organisme : Intramural NIH HHS
ID : Z01 CL040004
Pays : United States

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Références

Circulation. 2008 Feb 12;117(6):743-53
pubmed: 18212285
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2019 Aug;44(8):2921-2928
pubmed: 30976827
Radiology. 2018 Aug;288(2):318-328
pubmed: 29944078
JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Nov 1;2(11):e1914718
pubmed: 31702797
Br J Radiol. 2018 Sep;91(1089):20170968
pubmed: 29557216
Radiology. 2019 Jun;291(3):781-791
pubmed: 30990384
JAMA Cardiol. 2017 Nov 1;2(11):1236-1246
pubmed: 28975197
JAMA Oncol. 2019 Jul 1;5(7):967-972
pubmed: 31095251
N Engl J Med. 2003 Dec 4;349(23):2191-200
pubmed: 14657426
Ann Intern Med. 2013 Apr 16;158(8):588-95
pubmed: 23588747
Circulation. 2015 Oct 27;132(17):1639-47
pubmed: 26294660
N Engl J Med. 2019 Apr 4;380(14):1347-1358
pubmed: 30943338
Gastroenterology. 2005 Dec;129(6):1832-44
pubmed: 16344052
J Am Coll Radiol. 2010 Oct;7(10):754-73
pubmed: 20889105
Radiology. 2019 Nov;293(2):334-342
pubmed: 31526254
N Engl J Med. 2007 Oct 4;357(14):1403-12
pubmed: 17914041
Br J Radiol. 2019 Aug;92(1100):20190327
pubmed: 31199670
Radiology. 2017 Dec;285(3):713-718
pubmed: 29155639
Acad Radiol. 2020 Mar;27(3):311-320
pubmed: 31126808
N Engl J Med. 2016 Sep 29;375(13):1216-9
pubmed: 27682033
N Engl J Med. 2007 Nov 29;357(22):2277-84
pubmed: 18046031
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Apr;208(4):754-760
pubmed: 28125274
J Bone Miner Res. 2018 May;33(5):860-867
pubmed: 29314261
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Dec 16;18(12):e323
pubmed: 27986644
N Engl J Med. 2011 Feb 24;364(8):719-29
pubmed: 21345101
Med Image Anal. 2012 Jul;16(5):933-51
pubmed: 22465077
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2011 Mar-Apr;35(2):212-6
pubmed: 21412092
Radiology. 2019 Jan;290(1):108-115
pubmed: 30277443
Sci Rep. 2018 Jul 27;8(1):11369
pubmed: 30054580
Radiology. 2019 May;291(2):360-367
pubmed: 30912719
Br J Radiol. 2019 Feb;92(1094):20180726
pubmed: 30433815
Sci Rep. 2019 Nov 15;9(1):16884
pubmed: 31729403
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Sep 10;74(10):e177-e232
pubmed: 30894318
N Engl J Med. 2006 Dec 21;355(25):2631-9
pubmed: 17182988
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018 Sep;211(3):W151-W157
pubmed: 30016142

Auteurs

Perry J Pickhardt (PJ)

The University of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health, Madison, WI.

Peter M Graffy (PM)

The University of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health, Madison, WI.

Ryan Zea (R)

The University of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health, Madison, WI.

Scott J Lee (SJ)

The University of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health, Madison, WI.

Jiamin Liu (J)

Imaging Biomarkers and Computer-Aided Diagnosis Laboratory, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, MD.

Veit Sandfort (V)

Imaging Biomarkers and Computer-Aided Diagnosis Laboratory, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, MD.

Ronald M Summers (RM)

Imaging Biomarkers and Computer-Aided Diagnosis Laboratory, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, MD.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH