Reliable categorisation of visual scoring of coronary artery calcification on low-dose CT for lung cancer screening: validation with the standard Agatston score
Abstract
Objectives To validate the reliability of the visual coronary artery calcification score (VCACS) on low-dose CT (LDCT) for concurrent screening of CAC and lung cancer. Methods We enrolled 401 subjects receiving LDCT for lung cancer screening and ECG-gated CT for the Agatston score (AS). LDCT was reconstructed with 3- and 5-mm slice thickness (LDCT-3mm and LDCT-5mm respectively) for VCACS to obtain VCACS-3mm and VCACS-5mm respectively. After a training session comprising 32 cases, two observers performed four-scale VCACS (absent, mild, moderate, severe) of 369 data sets independently, the results were compared with four-scale AS (0, 1-100, 101-400, >400). Results CACs were present in 39.6 % (146/369) of subjects. The sensitivity of VCACS-3mm was higher than for VCACS-5mm (83.6 % versus 74.0 %). The median of AS of the 24 false-negative cases in VCACS-3mm was 2.3 (range 1.1-21.1). The false-negative rate for detecting AS ≥ 10 on LDCT-3mm was 1.9 %. VCACS-3mm had higher concordance with AS than VCACS-5mm (k = 0.813 versus k = 0.685). An extended test of VCACS-3mm for four junior observers showed high inter-observer reliability (intra-class correlation = 0.90) and good concordance with AS (k = 0.662-0.747). Conclusions This study validated the reliability of VCACS on LDCT for lung cancer screening and showed that LDCT-3mm was more feasible than LDCT-5mm for CAD risk stratification. Key points • Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) rarely misses significant coronary artery calcific…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Calcium scores on non-gated CT have reasonably good agreement with dedicated calcium scoring CT.
“despite the fact that calcium scores on non-gated CT have reasonably good agreement with dedicated calcium scoring CT30,31.”
From Deep convolutional neural networks to predict cardiovascular risk from computed tomography (2021) · cites this paper as [30]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Deep convolutional neural networks to predict cardiovascular risk from computed tomography
Zeleznik, R., Foldyna, B., Eslami, P., Weiss, J., Alexander, I., Taron, J., Parmar, C., Alvi, R. M., Banerji, D., Uno, M., et al. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-20966-2 · Cited by 240 · see citing works
Artificial Intelligence in Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring
Aromiwura, A. A., & Kalra, D. K. (2024) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm13123453 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- Huang, Y.-L., Wu, F.-Z., Wang, Y.-C., Ju, Y.-J., Mar, G.-Y., Chuo, C.-C., Lin, H.-S., & Wu, M.-T.
- Affiliations
- Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital (TW)
- National Taiwan University (TW)
- Fooyin University (TW)
- Venue
- European Radiology
- Published
- 2012-12-14
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1226-1233
- ISSN
- 0938-7994 (ISSN-L)
- 1432-1084
- OpenAlex
- W2068989243
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 0.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- European Radiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiation Dose and Imaging
- Keywords
- coronary artery calcification, low-dose CT, lung cancer screening, Agatston score, coronary artery disease risk stratification, inter-rater reliability, slice thickness, concordance
- MeSH terms
- Calcinosis, Coronary Artery Disease, Female, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Taiwan, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Reproducibility of Results, Comorbidity, Incidence, Risk Assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review