SONIA ELISA PRISCO

Dr. SONIA ELISA PRISCO


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

3Years (2024-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
31 October 2024 in Applied Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SMSusanna Mattoni
Susanna Mattoni
MMMaria Francesca Morrone
Maria Francesca Morrone
GGGiuseppe Della Gala
Giuseppe Della Gala
SPSONIA ELISA PRISCO
SONIA ELISA PRISCO
MSMaurizio Sguazzotti
Maurizio Sguazzotti
LSLidia Strigari
Lidia Strigari
(1) Background: The visual and semiquantitative analysis of Technetium-99metastable-3,3-diphospono-1,2-propanodicarboxylic acid (99mTc-DPD) bone scintigraphy is promising for diagnosing cardiac amyloidosis but time-consuming. We validated a faster method, the geometric mean (GM) method with a semi-automated workflow, for heart–whole body (WB) ratio (H/WBr), heart retention (Hr), and WB retention (WBr) calculations compared to the classic method (CM) established in the literature. The capability of semiquantitative scintigraphy indexes to differentiate the etiology in transthyretin-related cardiac amyloidosis (cATTR) patients was investigated. (2) Methods: H/WBr, Hr, and WBr were calculated by extracting counts for WB, kidneys, bladder, and heart on early and late planar image scans and applying background, scan-time, and decay corrections, using CM and GM both on a referring workstation and on a semi-automated workflow in external software. The comparison between CM and GM was assessed with Pearson’s correlation, Lin’s Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC), and Bland–Altman analysis. H/WBr, Hr, and WBr and several clinical variables were used to implement LASSO, Random Forest (RF), and Neural Network (NN) models to predict mutated and wild-type ATTR etiologies. ROC curves and AUC were calculated. (3) Results: Hr, WBr, and H/WBr using CM and GM were highly correlated. Bland–Altman analysis between CM and GM showed biases of 0.12% [CI:0.04%;0.19%] for H/WBr, 0.07% [CI: 0.01%; 0.13%] for Hr, and -0.50% [CI: −1.22%; 0.22%] for WBr. LASSO and NN models had good performance in predicting etiologies with AUC values of 87.3% and 73.6%, respectively. The RF model showed a poorer AUC of 55.8%. (4) Conclusions: The GM in the assisted workflow was validated against the CM. LASSO and NN approaches allowed a good prediction performance to be obtained for patient etiology.