The Association Between Cardiac Mortality and Adjuvant Radiation Therapy Among Older Patients With Stage I Estrogen Positive Breast Cancer: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)–Based Study on Cardiac Mortality and Radiation Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We evaluated the risk of cardiac mortality in older patients who receive adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) for stage I breast cancer to determine whether this risk persists in the modern era. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using the 2000 to 2015 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program data, we performed a population-based cohort study to evaluate the association between adjuvant breast RT, tumor laterality, and cardiac-specific survival (CSS) among patients 60 and older with stage I estrogen receptor positive breast cancer who received breast-conserving surgery and RT. RESULTS: = .56). Cox proportional hazards regression analysis confirmed the lack of association of tumor laterality on adjusted 5-year CSS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.87-1.06), breast-cancer specific survival (HR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.85-1.09), and overall survival (HR = 0.98; 95% CI = 0.94-1.03). There was also no association of inner versus outer quadrant location on adjusted 5-year CSS for right-sided (HR = 1.06; 95% CI = 0.89-1.12) and left-sided breast cancer (HR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.79-1.15). CONCLUSIONS: With modern radiation therapy techniques, older patients who received left-sided RT for stage I estrogen-receptor positive breast cancer do not demonstrate an increased risk of cardiac mortality compared with patients with right-sided breast cancer. RT can be offered to older patients without concern for inducing cardiac-related death.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".