Cardiovascular Events and Mortality in Patients Undergoing Adjuvant Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer: a Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: We performed a systematic review to quantify the cardiovascular risk of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) for breast cancer.Methods: A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to July 2020.Results: The literature search produced 7363 reports, of which 76 met our inclusion criteria.In studies comparing left-sided RT with right-sided RT, 7 of 35 (20%) studies found increased cardiovascular mortality, and 8 of 28 (29%) studies found increased cardiovascular events.In studies comparing patients who received RT with those who did not, 7 of 26 (27%) studies found increased cardiovascular mortality, and 5 of 22 (23%) studies found increased cardiovascular events.Conclusion: Most of the studies that found significant associations between laterality and cardiovascular risks included treatment periods that started prior to 1985, suggesting that modern RT techniques have minimised the cardiac exposure in breast cancer patients receiving RT.However, more focused studies must be conducted to investigate the long-term cardiovascular risk associated with modern RT techniques.
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 | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".