Radiation‐Induced Cardiovascular Disease: Review of an Underrecognized Pathology
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radiation therapy demonstrates a clear survival benefit in the treatment of several malignancies. However, cancer survivors can develop a wide array of cardiotoxic complications related to radiation. This pathology is often underrecognized by clinicians and there is little known on how to manage this population. Radiation causes fibrosis of all components of the heart and significantly increases the risk of coronary artery disease, cardiomyopathy, valvulopathy, arrhythmias, and pericardial disease. Physicians should treat other cardiovascular risk factors aggressively in this population and guidelines suggest obtaining regular imaging once symptomatology is established. Patients with radiation-induced cardiovascular disease tend to do worse than their traditional counterparts for the same interventions. However, there is a trend toward fewer complications and lower mortality with catheter-based rather than surgical approaches, likely because radiation makes these patients poor surgical candidates. When appropriate, these patients should be referred for percutaneous management of valvulopathy and coronary disease.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it