Back

Cross-Domain Knowledge Transfer from Expert-Annotated Gated CT via Synthetic Ungated CT Improves Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring on CT Attenuation Correction Scans

Shanbhag, A.; Miller, R. J.; Killekar, A.; Marcinkiewicz, A. M.; Zhou, J.; Lemley, M.; Kamagate, A.; Van Kriekinge, S. D.; Kavanagh, P. B.; Feher, A.; Miller, E. J.; Liang, J. X.; Berman, D. S.; Dey, D.; Leahy, R. M.; Slomka, P.

2026-07-06 radiology and imaging
10.64898/2026.07.02.26356002 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) is an established measure of coronary atherosclerosis from computed tomography (CT). While deep learning (DL) can quantify CAC from non-dedicated CT, the accuracy is limited by image quality. Purpose: We derived and validated a novel method for DL CAC segmentation on ultra-low dose CT attenuation correction (CTAC) scans that is trained with synthetic low-dose, ungated images. Materials and Methods: Models were trained using one center and externally tested in two other centers. Synthetic, ungated CT scans were generated so that expert segmentations from dedicated CAC scans could be used as ground truth for perfectly registered synthetic images through knowledge adaptation (KAD-CAC). We evaluated agreement between CAC scoring methods vs expert readers on a per-patient and per-vessel basis, as well as associations with the primary outcome of death or myocardial infarction (MI). Results: The DL models were externally tested on 5969 patients with a median age of 64 (IQR 56 - 73), of whom 50.2% were male. The KAD-CAC model had higher Cohens kappa K (0.86, 95% CI 0.85 - 0.87) compared to previous convolutional LSTM model (K 0.78, 95% CI 0.76 - 0.80, p<0.01), or models trained with only gated images (K 0.81, 95% CI 0.80 - 0.82, p<0.01). Net reclassification improvement for CAC stratified risk of death or MI, was greatest for the KAD-CAC model over baseline including age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, family history, smoking, stress total perfusion deficit, and left ventricular ejection fraction. Conclusion: We use paired synthetic ungated scans to transfer expert gated CAC annotations into the ungated domain, resulting in substantially better vessel-level CAC scoring and improved risk stratification.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 18%
9.9%
2
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 4%
9.9%
3
European Radiology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.8%
4
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.4%
5
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
6.8%
6
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.5%
7
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 37%
3.3%
50% of probability mass above
8
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
9
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
10
Science Translational Medicine
127 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
11
eBioMedicine
183 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
12
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
13
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
71 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
14
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
15
Medical Image Analysis
35 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
16
European Heart Journal
22 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.4%
17
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
18
Journal of Medical Imaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
19
Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism
42 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
20
Photoacoustics
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
21
Circulation
74 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
22
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.1%
23
PLOS Digital Health
106 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
24
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.0%
25
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 30%
0.9%
26
SLAS Technology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
27
Imaging Neuroscience
282 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
28
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 64%
0.9%
29
Journal of the American Heart Association
140 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
30
Diagnostics
50 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%