MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exposure to Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation From Cardiac Procedures and Malignancy Risk in Adults With Congenital Heart Disease

2017· article· en· W2778048303 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreMontreal Heart Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicinePopulationCancerInternal medicineCumulative incidenceOdds ratioConfidence intervalHeart diseaseHazard ratioMalignancyCohort

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Adults with congenital heart disease (CHD) are exposed to increasing amounts of low-dose ionizing radiation (LDIR) from cardiac procedures. Cancer prevalence in this population is higher than in the general population. This study estimates the association between LDIR exposure from cardiac procedures and incident cancer in adult patients with CHD. Methods: The study population derived from the Quebec Congenital Heart Disease Database. We measured cumulative numbers of LDIR-related cardiac procedures for each patient until 1 year before the time of cancer diagnosis or administrative censoring. To assess the association between LDIR exposure and cancer risk, we conducted a nested case-control study and matched cancer cases with controls on sex, CHD severity, birth year, and age. Results: The study included 24 833 adult patients with CHD aged 18 to 64 years from 1995 to 2009. In >250 791 person-years of follow-up, 602 cancer cases were observed (median age, 55.4 years). The cumulative incidence of cancer estimated up to 64 years of age was 15.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.2–16.5). Cases had more LDIR-related cardiac procedures than controls (1410 versus 921 per 1000 adult patients with CHD, P <0.0001). Cumulative LDIR exposure was independently associated with cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.08 per procedure; 95% CI, 1.04–1.13). Similar results were obtained by using dose estimates for LDIR exposure (OR, 1.10 per 10 mSv; 95% CI, 1.05–1.15) with a possible dose-related response. The effect measure was in the same direction, and the association was persistent for exposure from ≥6 procedures in all sensitivity analyses: after excluding most smoking-related cancer cases (OR, 1.10 per procedure; 95% CI, 1.05–1.16 and OR when exposure from ≥6 procedures, 3.08; 95% CI, 1.77–5.37), and after applying a 3-year lag period (OR, 1.09 per procedure; 95% CI, 1.03–1.14 and OR when exposure from ≥6 procedures: 2.58; 95% CI, 1.43–4.69). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first large population-based study to analyze and document the association between LDIR-related cardiac procedures and incident cancer in the population of adults with CHD. Confirmations of these findings by prospective studies are needed to reinforce policy recommendations for radiation surveillance in patients with CHD where no regulation currently exists. Physicians ordering and performing cardiac imaging should ensure that exposure is as low as reasonably achievable without sacrificing quality of care.

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)0.000
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.235 · 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