MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of Cardiac Comorbidities in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer Receiving Doxorubicin-Based and Non-Doxorubicin-Based Chemotherapy.

2009· article· en· W1970936041 on OpenAlexaff
Marie‐Hélène Lafeuille, R. McKenzie, Nobila Valentin Yaméogo, Mekré Senbetta, Francis Vekeman, Catherine Tak Piech, Patrick Lefèbvre

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity and mitigation
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMetastatic breast cancerBreast cancerChemotherapyInternal medicineHeart failureDoxorubicinCancerCardiotoxicityMyocardial infarctionCoronary artery diseaseComorbidityOncologyCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Some metastatic breast cancer (MBC) treatments are associated with cardiac toxicity. Real-world data regarding baseline cardiac comorbidities in patients with MBC prior to chemotherapy initiation are scarce. Such information would be useful in guiding treatment decisions. This study aims to describe the cardiac comorbidity profile of patients with MBC initiating doxorubicin-based (DOX) versus non-doxorubicin-based (Non-DOX) chemotherapy regimens from a managed-care perspective.Methods: Medical claims from the Ingenix Impact National Managed Care Database between 07/2002 and 06/2008 were analyzed. Patients included were aged ≥ 18 years, and had ≥ 2 diagnoses for breast cancer as well as ≥ 1 diagnosis for metastatic site within 12 months of chemotherapy initiation. Cardiac comorbidities [hypertension (HTN), cardiac arrhythmia (CAr), coronary artery disease (CAD), congestive heart failure (CHF), and myocardial infarction (MI)] were evaluated within 6 months prior to chemotherapy initiation. Patients were categorized based on receipt of DOX vs. Non-DOX-based chemotherapy.Results: A total of 12,345 patients (Non-DOX: 7,023, DOX: 5,322) formed the study population. Compared with the DOX group, the Non-DOX group was slightly older. Both groups reported a significant proportion of patients with cardiac comorbidities prior to chemotherapy, with significantly greater proportions reported in the Non-DOX group. Mean age (SD)HTNCArCADCHFMINon-DOX (n=7,023)56.9 (10.6)35.7%11.8%5.5%3.5%1.3%DOX (n=5,322)52.1 (9.1)30.8%8.1%3.3%2.0%0.5%P-value<.001<.001<.001<.001<.001<.001 Conclusions: Cardiac comorbidities were commonly reported in women with MBC prior to chemotherapy, with significantly greater proportions reported in the Non-DOX group. Such information is useful to healthcare professionals when considering potential interventions for patients with MBC. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 2078.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicChemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity and mitigationFrench-language works237,207