Cited by 2Cardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics

Agatston-2.0: A next-generation AI-based coronary calcium quantification approach to improve risk stratification among individuals with zero Agatston scores – Part I

Open access
Naghavi, Morteza, Azimi, Amir, Atlas, Kyle, Reeves, Anthony P., Zhang, Chenyu, Mirjalili, Seyed Reza, Mozafarybazargany, Mohammadhossein, Jolfayi, Amir Ghaffari +24 more·2026·American Journal of Preventive Cardiology

Abstract

Background: A coronary artery calcium (CAC) score of zero using the conventional Agatston scoring method (Agatston-1.0) is associated with very low cardiovascular risk (the "Power of Zero"); however, a small proportion of individuals with CAC=0 still develop coronary heart disease (CHD). Agatston-1.0 relies on thick slices (2.5-3 mm) and a fixed attenuation threshold (≥130 HU), which may miss early, small, low-density, or partially calcified coronary plaques. Agatston-2.0 is an artificial intelligence (AI) framework for automated coronary segmentation and continuous voxel-wise calcium quantification without fixed thresholds, applicable to CT scans with slice thickness ≥0.2 mm and generating an AI-derived CAC score (AI-CAC). Objectives: To evaluate the prognostic value of Agatston-2.0 for risk stratification among individuals with a baseline CAC=0. Methods: We pooled 3,965 participants with CAC=0 from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA, n=2,816) and the Framingham Heart Study (FHS, n=1,149). Associations with incident CHD were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models with up to 20 years of follow-up. Results: An AI-CAC score>0 was detected in 862 participants (21.7%) in population with CAC=0. Participants with AI-CAC>0 had higher 20-year CHD incidence than those with AI-CAC=0 (7.7% vs. 3.8%, p<0.0001). After adjustment for traditional risk factors, AI-CAC>0 remained independently associated with incident CHD (HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.18-2.47). AI-CAC also predicted progression to positive CAC score (adjusted HR 1.95, 95% CI 1.70-2.24). Conclusions: The Agatston-2.0 framework identifies clinically meaningful coronary calcification in individuals classified as CAC=0. If validated in additional cohorts, Agatston-2.0 could become the new standard for coronary calcium scoring.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajpc.2026.101698

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • AI methods may detect subthreshold coronary calcification not captured by conventional Agatston scoring, as in the Agatston 2.0 framework, which uses a relative-density approach with internal calibration to extend assessment below the conventional 130-HU threshold, potentially refining risk stratification within the zero CAC category.

    “AI methods may also detect subthreshold coronary calcification not captured by conventional Agatston scoring, as in the Agatston 2.0 framework, which uses a relative-density approach with internal calibration to extend assessment below the conventional 130-HU threshold, potentially refining risk stratification within the zero CAC category.58”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [9]Naghavi M. Wong N.D. McConnell M.V. Maron D.J. Nasir K. Henschke C.I. Coronary artery calcium (CAC) imaging as a diagnostic test: insurance coverage implications JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2025 41379038
  2. [17]Joshi P.H. Blaha M.J. Budoff M.J. Miedema M.D. McClelland R.L. Lima J.A. The 10-year prognostic value of zero and minimal CAC JACC: Cardiovasc Imaging 10 8 2017 957 958 28797418
  3. [45]Kim S.Y. Suh Y.J. Lee H-J Kim YJ. Prognostic value of coronary artery calcium scores from 1.5 mm slice reconstructions of electrocardiogram-gated computed tomography scans in asymptomatic individuals Sci Rep 12 1 2022 7198 PMC9064982 35504936

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Naghavi, M., Azimi, A., Atlas, K., Reeves, A. P., Zhang, C., Mirjalili, S. R., Mozafarybazargany, M., Jolfayi, A. G., Hashemi, A., Atlas, T., Wasserthal, J., Vliegenthart, R., Henschke, C. I., Yankelevitz, D. F., Branch, A. D., Roy, S. K., Rana, J. S., Fayad, Z. A., Mechanic, O., Nieman, K., Narula, J., Mehran, R., Shah, P. K., Rumberger, J. A., Sr, K. A. W., Raggi, P., Maron, D. J., McConnell, M. V., Kloner, R. A., Budoff, M. J., Wong, N. D., & Agatston, A. S.
Affiliations
  • Cornell University (US)
  • Laboratory for Research on Enterprise and Decisions (TN)
  • University Hospital of Basel (CH)
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • The Lundquist Institute (US)
  • Kaiser Permanente Oakland Medical Center (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • University of Houston (US)
  • Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
  • University of Alberta (CA)
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
Corresponding author
Naghavi, Morteza
Venue
American Journal of Preventive Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2026-12
Volume
30
Pages
101698
ISSN
2666-6677 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7163637978
Cited by
2
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 2
FWCI
9.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Preventive Cardiology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
NIH
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Keywords
coronary artery calcium, coronary artery calcium score, incident coronary heart disease, cardiovascular risk prediction

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