MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 17218: Radiation Therapy is not Associated With Incident Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Thoracic Cancer

2015· article· en· W2887609306 on OpenAlexaff
Robert W. Lentz, Brandon Chalazan, Matthew J. Kolek, Eric Farber‐Eger, Quinn S. Wells, Javid J. Moslehi, Dawood Darbar

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity and mitigation
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapyAtrial fibrillationHazard ratioInternal medicineRetrospective cohort studyProportional hazards modelCardiologyConfidence intervalSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Radiotherapy for thoracic cancer causes incidental cardiac exposure and increases risk of ischemic heart disease. Less clear is whether radiotherapy similarly increases risk of arrhythmias. Radiotherapy induces cardiac inflammation and fibrosis, which are risk factors for atrial fibrillation (AF). Hypothesis: In patients with thoracic tumors, radiotherapy is associated with incident AF. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of electronic medical records (EMR) of patients who had a primary tumor of the breast, lung, mediastinum, or esophagus diagnosed between 1994 and 2014, did not have AF at time of diagnosis, and did not have previous thoracic radiotherapy. Patients were followed for incident AF until the end of the EMR or death. Incident AF was determined using a validated algorithm with a positive predictive value of 95.6%. After multiple imputation of missing variables, the association between radiotherapy and incident AF was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. Results: 4163 patients were included in the analysis. Mean (SD) age was 61.2 (13.3) years and 71% were women; 600 underwent radiotherapy. After a median (25 th -75 th percentile) 796 (255-2032) days of follow-up, the incidence of AF was 6.8% with and 6.2% without radiotherapy (P=0.538). After adjustment for potential confounders, radiotherapy was not associated with incident AF [hazard ratio (HR): 1.02, 95% confidence interval: 0.72-1.44]. Age [HR (per year): 1.05 (1.04-1.06), P=6.0*10 -15 ], male sex [HR: 2.44 (1.80-3.30), P=9.5*10 -9 ], coronary artery disease [HR: 1.42 (1.06-1.92), P=0.02], hypertension [HR: 6.44 (2.04-20.3), P=0.001], and heart failure [HR: 3.20 (2.31-4.44), P=3.4*10 -12 ] were associated with incident AF. Among 3908 patients with unilateral breast or lung tumors, radiotherapy was not associated with incident AF [HR: 1.23 (0.79-1.92)] and tumor laterality did not modify the effect (P for interaction: 0.201). Conclusions: In this large retrospective cohort study, radiotherapy for thoracic tumors was not associated with incident AF. Rather, previously described AF risk factors were the most important drivers of AF risk. Larger studies with extended follow-up may further elucidate whether thoracic radiotherapy is a risk factor for AF.

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)0.005
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicChemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity and mitigationFrench-language works237,207