ArticlePLOS digital health2024
Measurement of breast artery calcification using an artificial intelligence detection model and its association with major adverse cardiovascular events.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond the Coronaries: Utility of Extra-Coronary Calcification for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment in Women.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2026Review
- AI modeling for outbreak prediction: A graph-neural-network approach for identifying vancomycin-resistant enterococcus carriers.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Association between residual cholesterol and vulnerable non-culprit lesions progressing to major adverse cardiovascular events.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast artery calcification (BAC) obtained from standard mammographic images is currently under evaluation to stratify risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in women. Measuring BAC using artificial intelligence (AI) technology, we aimed to determine the relationship between BAC and coronary artery calcification (CAC) severity with Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE). This retrospective study included women who underwent chest computed tomography (CT) within one year of mammography. T-test assessed the associations between MACE and variables of interest (BAC versus MACE, CAC versus MACE). Risk differences were calculated to capture the difference in observed risk and reference groups. Chi-square tests and/or Fisher's exact tests were performed to assess age and ASCVD risk with MACE and to assess BAC and CAC association with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk as a secondary outcome. A logistic regression model was conducted to measure the odds ratio between explanatory variables (BAC and CAC) and the outcome variables (MACE). Out of the 99 patients included in the analysis, 49 patients (49.49%) were BAC positive, with 37 patients (37.37%) CAC positive, and 26 patients (26.26%) had MACE. One unit increase in BAC score resulted in a 6% increased odds of having a moderate to high ASCVD risk >7.5% (p = 0.01) and 2% increased odds of having MACE (p = 0.005). The odds of having a moderate-high ASCVD risk score in BAC positive patients was higher (OR = 4.27, 95% CI 1.58-11.56) than CAC positive (OR = 4.05, 95% CI 1.36-12.06) patients. In this study population, the presence of BAC is associated with MACE and useful in corroborating ASCVD risk. Our results provide evidence to support the potential utilization of AI generated BAC measurements from standard of care mammograms in addition to the widely adopted ASCVD and CAC scores, to identify and risk-stratify women who are at increased risk of CVD and may benefit from targeted prevention measures.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.