# Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease Improved Prediction by the COME-CCT Pretest Probability Calculator With Cardiac CT

## TL;DR

Combining a new pretest probability calculator with cardiac CT improves accuracy in predicting obstructive coronary artery disease compared to using either method alone.

## Contribution

The COME-CCT-PTP calculator, when combined with CTA, significantly improves obstructive CAD prediction accuracy.

## Key findings

- The COME-CCT-PTP calculator outperformed the Diamond-Forrester model in predicting CAD.
- Combining COME-CCT-PTP with CTA achieved an AUC of 0.86, significantly higher than either method alone.
- Improved prediction was consistent across chest pain subtypes and angina types.

## Abstract

Combining pretest probability (PTP) with computed tomography angiography (CTA) for diagnosing obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) has not yet been determined.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of PTP calculation alone and with CTA for diagnosing CAD.

A total of 65 prospective diagnostic accuracy studies of patients clinically referred to invasive coronary angiography with stable chest pain were included in this international collaborative individual patient data Collaborative Meta-Analysis of Cardiac CT (COME-CCT) meta-analysis. Mixed-effects logistic regression with a data set–specific random intercept for clustering was applied to 4 models: the traditional Diamond-Forrester models, a PTP model based on the COME-CCT data (termed COME-CCT-PTP calculator), a CTA alone model, and a combined COME-CCT-PTP with CTA model.

Individual patient data from 5,332 patients with clinically indicated invasive coronary angiography from 22 countries were included. The COME-CCT-PTP calculator was more accurate than the original Diamond-Forrester model (AUC: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.66-0.69 vs 0.63; 95% CI: 0.62-0.65). The COME-CCT-PTP with CTA model significantly improved accuracy compared with either model alone (AUC: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.85-0.87 vs 0.81; 95% CI: 0.80-0.82). The improved prediction was consistent in decision curve analysis with an increased net benefit for all chest pain subtypes and was almost equally seen in patients with typical or atypical angina (0.85; 95% CI: 0.84-0.86) and nonanginal or other chest discomfort (0.88; 95% CI: 0.86-0.89).

Combining the COME-CCT-PTP calculator with CTA provides more accurate prediction than the PTP or CTA alone for the diagnosis of obstructive CAD, for all chest pain subtypes.