Heart rate response and chronotropic incompetence during cardiopulmonary exercise testing in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET) focusing on analyses of heart rate (HR) responses and chronotropic incompetence (CI) could provide early information about treatment’s negative cardiac effects. We examined childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) survivors’ HR response during maximal CPET and identified survivors with CI. A total of 250 childhood ALL survivors underwent a CPET on ergocycle to assess their HR response. We used a multiparametric structure of three methods to assess survivors’ CI, as follows: 1) age-predicted HRmax (APMHR): failure to achieve 85% of the APMHR at the peak of CPET; 2) HR reserve (HRR): failure to achieve 80% of the HRR at the peak of CPET; and 3) metabolic chronotropic relationship (MCR): failure to reach an MCR slope ratio >0.8 at each stage of the CPET. Among 250 childhood ALL survivors, 216 survivors performed a maximum CPET. We observed that 73 males and 74 females did not achieve their predicted HRmax. We found that 6 survivors did not achieve 85% of their APMHR (80.9 ± 3.9%) and had an MCR below 80% (53.9 ± 13.8%). In addition, 16 survivors did not achieve 80% of their HRR (71.0 ± 7.4%) and among them, 15 survivors had an MCR below 80% (61.0 ± 12.1%). Survivors with CI had a significantly lower cardiorespiratory fitness than those without CI. This study shows that survivors are at risk of developing altered HR responses and CI many years after the end of their cancer treatments. These findings highlight the importance of early detection of cardiac damage due to cancer treatments.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".