MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622015154 · doi:10.1177/2048872617706501

Prevalence and outcome of patients with cancer and acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a BleeMACS substudy

2017· article· en· W2622015154 on OpenAlexaff
Mario Iannaccone, Fabrizio D’Ascenzo, Paolo Vadalà, Stephen B. Wilton, Patrizia Noussan, Francesco Colombo, Sergio Raposeiras‐Roubín, Emad Abu Assi, José Ramón González‐Juanatey, Josè P.S. Henriques, Jorge Saucedo, Wouter J. Kikkert, Iván J. Núñez‐Gil, Albert Ariza‐Solé, Xiantao Song, Dimitrios Alexopoulos, Christoph Liebetrau, Tetsuma Kawaji, Claudio Moretti, Roberto Garbo, Zenon Huczek, Shaoping Nie, Toshiharu Fujii, Luis CL Correia, Masa‐aki Kawashiri, José María García‐Acuña, Danielle A. Southern, Emilio Alfonso, Belén Terol, Alberto Garay, Dongfeng Zhang, Yalei Chen, Ioanna Xanthopoulou, Neriman Osman, Helge Möllmann, Hiroki Shiomi, Francesca Giordana, Michał Kowara, Krzysztof J. Filipiak‬, Xiao Wang, Yan Yan, Jingyao Fan, Yuji Ikari, Takuya Nakahashi, Kenji Sakata, Fiorenzo Gaita, Masakazu Yamagishi, Oliver Kalpak, Saško Kedev

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal Acute Cardiovascular Care · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity and mitigation
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineAcute coronary syndromeMyocardial infarctionClinical endpointPercutaneous coronary interventionHazard ratioCardiologyCancerRelative riskConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The prevalence and outcome of patients with cancer that experience acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have to be determined. METHODS AND RESULTS: The BleeMACS project is a multicentre observational registry enrolling patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention worldwide in 15 hospitals. The primary endpoint was a composite event of death and re-infarction after one year of follow-up. Bleedings were the secondary endpoint. 15,401 patients were enrolled, 926 (6.4%) in the cancer group and 14,475 (93.6%) in the group of patients without cancer. Patients with cancer were older (70.8±10.3 vs. 62.8±12.1 years, P<0.001) with more severe comorbidities and presented more frequently with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction compared with patients without cancer. After one year, patients with cancer more often experienced the composite endpoint (15.2% vs. 5.3%, P<0.001) and bleedings (6.5% vs. 3%, P<0.001). At multiple regression analysis the presence of cancer was the strongest independent predictor for the primary endpoint (hazard ratio (HR) 2.1, 1.8-2.5, P<0.001) and bleedings (HR 1.5, 1.1-2.1, P=0.015). Despite patients with cancer generally being undertreated, beta-blockers (relative risk (RR) 0.6, 0.4-0.9, P=0.05), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (RR 0.5, 0.3-0.8, P=0.02), statins (RR 0.3, 0.2-0.5, P<0.001) and dual antiplatelet therapy (RR 0.5, 0.3-0.9, P=0.05) were shown to be protective factors, while proton pump inhibitors (RR 1, 0.6-1.5, P=0.9) were neutral. CONCLUSION: Cancer has a non-negligible prevalence in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, with a major risk of cardiovascular events and bleedings. Moreover, these patients are often undertreated from clinical despite medical therapy seems to be protective. Registration:The BleeMACS project (NCT02466854).

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)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations118
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal Acute Cardiovascular CareSame topicChemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity and mitigationFrench-language works237,207