Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Adult Survivors of Pediatric Cancer—A Report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer survivors are at higher risk of morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease compared with the general population. METHODS: Eight thousand five hundred ninety-nine survivors (52% male) and 2,936 siblings (46% male) from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study, a retrospectively ascertained, prospectively followed study of persons who survived 5 years after childhood cancer diagnosed from 1970 to 1986, were evaluated for body mass index of > or =30 kg/m(2) based on self-reported heights and weights and self-reported use of medications for hypertension, dyslipidemia, and impaired glucose metabolism. The presence of three or more of the above constituted Cardiovascular Risk Factor Cluster (CVRFC), a surrogate for Metabolic Syndrome. RESULTS: Survivors were more likely than siblings to take medications for hypertension [odds ratio (OR), 1.9; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.6-2.2], dyslipidemia (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3-2.0) or diabetes (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.3). Among these young adults (mean age of 32 years for survivors and 33 years for siblings), survivors were not more likely than siblings to be obese or have CVRFC. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, factors associated with having CVRFC included older age at interview [> or =40 versus <30 years of age (OR, 8.2; 95% CI, 3.5-19.9)], exposure to total body irradiation (OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 1.5-15.8) or radiation to the chest and abdomen (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2-2.4), and physical inactivity (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.6). CONCLUSIONS: Among adult survivors of pediatric cancer, older attained age, exposure to total body irradiation or abdominal plus chest radiation, and a sedentary life-style are associated with CVRFC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".