The Predictive Value of 2D Myocardial Strain for Epirubicin-Induced Cardiotoxicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. Although epirubicin has significantly improved outcome in breast cancer (BC) patients, it is responsible for myocardial dysfunction that affects patients’ quality of life. The use of 2D global longitudinal strain (GLS) has been reported to detect early myocardial dysfunction. The aim of this study was to evaluate how GLS changes can predict cardiotoxicity. Methods. We conducted a prospective study from March 2018 to March 2020 on 66 patients with no cardiovascular risk factors, who presented with BC and received epirubicin. We measured left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and GLS before chemotherapy, at three months (T3), and at 12 months (T12) from the last epirubicin infusion. Chemotherapy-Related-Cardiac-Dysfunction (CTRCD) was defined as a decrease of 10% in LVEF to a value below 53% according to ASE and EACI 2014 expert consensus. Results. The mean age at diagnosis was 47 ± 9 years old. At baseline, median LVEF was 70% and median GLS was −21%. Shortly after chemotherapy completion, two patients presented with symptomatic heart failure while asymptomatic CTRCD was revealed in three other patients at T12. Three months after the last epirubicin infusion, median LVEF was 65%, median GLS was −19%, and median GLS variation was 5%. However, in patients who presented with subsequent CTRCD, median GLS at T3 was −16% and median GLS variation was 19% ( p = 0.002 and p < 0.001 , respectively, when compared to patients who did not develop cardiotoxicity). Persistent GLS decrease at T3 was an independent predictor of CTRCD at T12. Age and left-sided thoracic irradiation did not increase the risk of cardiotoxicity in our study while the cumulative dose of epirubicin significantly affected cardiologic findings ( p = 0.001 ). Conclusion. This was the first North African study that assesses the value of measuring GLS to early detect cardiotoxicity. Patients whose GLS remained decreased after 3 months from anthracyclines-base chemotherapy had an increased risk for developing subsequent CTRCD. Further studies with larger sample size are warranted to identify the best cardioprotective molecules to be initiated in these patients before LVEF declines.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".