Traditional Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Individual Prediction of Cardiovascular Events in Childhood Cancer Survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer survivors have an increased risk of heart failure, ischemic heart disease, and stroke. They may benefit from prediction models that account for cardiotoxic cancer treatment exposures combined with information on traditional cardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes. METHODS: Childhood Cancer Survivor Study participants (n = 22 643) were followed through age 50 years for incident heart failure, ischemic heart disease, and stroke. Siblings (n = 5056) served as a comparator. Participants were assessed longitudinally for hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes based on self-reported prescription medication use. Half the cohort was used for discovery; the remainder for replication. Models for each outcome were created for survivors ages 20, 25, 30, and 35 years at the time of prediction (n = 12 models). RESULTS: For discovery, risk scores based on demographic, cancer treatment, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes information achieved areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve and concordance statistics 0.70 or greater in 9 and 10 of the 12 models, respectively. For replication, achieved areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve and concordance statistics 0.70 or greater were observed in 7 and 9 of the models, respectively. Across outcomes, the most influential exposures were anthracycline chemotherapy, radiotherapy, diabetes, and hypertension. Survivors were then assigned to statistically distinct risk groups corresponding to cumulative incidences at age 50 years of each target outcome of less than 3% (moderate-risk) or approximately 10% or greater (high-risk). Cumulative incidence of all outcomes was 1% or less among siblings. CONCLUSIONS: Traditional cardiovascular risk factors remain important for predicting risk of cardiovascular disease among adult-age survivors of childhood cancer. These prediction models provide a framework on which to base future surveillance strategies and interventions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".