Cardiovascular risk factor control among cancer survivors: A population-based survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
6535 Background: Cardiovascular disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in long-term survivors of cancer. Whereas the burden of cardiovascular disease has been described in cancer survivors, the control of modifiable cardiovascular risk factors in this population is unknown. Methods: We used the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES 1999–2006) data to examine the rate of control of modifiable cardiac risk factors amongst US cancer survivors compared with propensity matched adult controls with no history of cancer. The modifiable cardiac risk factors (blood pressure, cholesterol, BMI, exercise, smoking) were considered to be controlled if they met the AHA/ACC guideline recommendations. Results: A total of 1,227 cancer survivors and 3,672 age, sex, and comorbidity matched controls were identified, representing 11.9 million cancer survivors and 31.2 million controls. Compared to age, sex and comorbidity matched controls cancer survivors were more likely to be current smokers (34.5% vs. 28.8%, p = 0.021), and more likely to have their BMI at target (32.8% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.034). There was no significant difference in the rate of blood pressure control (69.4% vs. 69.2%, p = 0.88), cholesterol control (47.6% vs. 48.2%, p = 0.80) or adherence to exercise recommendations (24.4% vs. 24.6%, p = 0.89). Younger cancer survivors (age 20–40 y) were 2.8 times more likely to be smokers than controls, whereas older cancer survivors (age 60–80y) were 1.2 times more likely to be smokers than controls. Compared with recent cancer survivors (10 years from diagnosis) were more likely to have optimal blood pressure control (73.3% vs. 65.5%, p = 0.02), however there was no difference in smoking rates, cholesterol, exercise or weight control with duration of cancer survival. Conclusions: Overall the control of modifiable cardiac risk factors was similar between survivors and controls, but was suboptimal in both groups. This study identified smoking cessation, particularly amongst young cancers survivors, as an important area of focus for improvement in survivorship care. No significant financial relationships to disclose.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".