Cited by 28Cardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

Using machine learning algorithms to review computed tomography scans and assess risk for cardiovascular disease: Retrospective analysis from the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST)

Open access
Stemmer, Amos, Shadmi, Ran, Bregman-Amitai, Orna, Chettrit, David, Blagev, Denitza, Orlovsky, Mila, Deutsch, Lisa, Elnekave, Eldad·2020·PLOS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated that annual screening with low dose CT in high-risk population was associated with reduction in lung cancer mortality. Nonetheless, the leading cause of mortality in the study was from cardiovascular diseases. PURPOSE: To determine whether the used machine learning automatic algorithms assessing coronary calcium score (CCS), level of liver steatosis and emphysema percentage in the lungs are good predictors of cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality and incidence when applied on low dose CT scans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three fully automated machine learning algorithms were used to assess CCS, level of liver steatosis and emphysema percentage in the lung. The algorithms were used on low-dose computed tomography scans acquired from 12,332 participants in NLST. RESULTS: In a multivariate analysis, association between the three algorithm scores and CVD mortality have shown an OR of 1.72 (p = 0.003), 2.62 (p < 0.0001) for CCS scores of 101-400 and above 400 respectively, and an OR of 1.12 (p = 0.044) for level of liver steatosis. Similar results were shown for the incidence of CVD, OR of 1.96 (p < 0.0001), 4.94 (p < 0.0001) for CCS scores of 101-400 and above 400 respectively. Also, emphysema percentage demonstrated an OR of 0.89 (p < 0.0001). Similar results are shown for univariate analyses of the algorithms. CONCLUSION: The three automated machine learning algorithms could help physicians to assess the incidence and risk of CVD mortality in this specific population. Application of these algorithms to existing LDCT scans can provide valuable health care information and assist in future research.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0236021

Cites

29 of 29 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?

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

1 of the 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stemmer, A., Shadmi, R., Bregman-Amitai, O., Chettrit, D., Blagev, D., Orlovsky, M., Deutsch, L., & Elnekave, E.
Affiliations
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
  • University of Utah (US)
Corresponding author
Stemmer, Amos
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2020-08-03
Volume
15
Issue
8
Pages
e0236021
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3047611709
Cited by
27
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Zebra Medical Vision
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Keywords
cardiovascular risk, coronary artery calcium score, hepatic steatosis, emphysema, low-dose CT, automated machine learning, cardiovascular mortality, cardiovascular disease incidence, National Lung Screening Trial, lung cancer screening
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Cigarette Smoking, Cardiovascular Diseases, Coronary Vessels, Emphysema, Fatty Liver, Female, Humans, Liver, Lung, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, United States, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic, Risk Assessment, National Cancer Institute (U.S.), Early Detection of Cancer

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