MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160569045 · doi:10.1200/jco.2009.26.7294

Role of Three-Dimensional Echocardiography in Breast Cancer: Comparison With Two-Dimensional Echocardiography, Multiple-Gated Acquisition Scans, and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging

2010· article· en· W2160569045 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity and mitigation
Canadian institutionsSt. Boniface Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionTrastuzumabCardiologyInternal medicineMagnetic resonance imagingBreast cancerNuclear medicineRadiologyCancerHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: In patients with breast cancer, the administration of doxorubicin and trastuzumab is associated with an increased risk of cardiotoxicity. Although multiple-gated acquisition (MUGA) scans and two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) are conventional methods for baseline and serial assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in these patients, little is known about the use of real-time three-dimensional TTE (RT3D TTE) in this clinical setting. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of MUGA, 2D TTE, and RT3D TTE for determining LVEF in comparison to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR). METHODS: Between 2007 and 2009 inclusive, 50 female patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer received adjuvant trastuzumab after doxorubicin. Serial MUGA, 2D TTE, RT3D TTE, and CMR were performed at baseline, 6, and 12 months after the initiation of trastuzumab. RESULTS: A comparison of left ventricular end diastolic volume (LVEDV) demonstrated a modest correlation between 2D TTE and CMR (r = 0.64 at baseline; r = 0.69 at 12 months, respectively). A comparison of LVEDV between RT3D TTE and CMR demonstrated a stronger correlation (r = 0.87 at baseline; r = 0.95 at 12 months, respectively). Although 2D TTE demonstrated a weak correlation with CMR for LVEF assessment (r = 0.31 at baseline, r = 0.42 at 12 months, respectively), both RT3D TTE and MUGA showed a strong correlation when compared with CMR (r = 0.91 at baseline; r = 0.90 at 12 months, respectively). CONCLUSION: As compared with conventional MUGA, RT3D TTE is a feasible, accurate, and reproducible alternate imaging modality for the serial monitoring of LVEF in patients with breast cancer.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score0.761

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.324 · 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