MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4210749224 · doi:10.1161/str.53.suppl_1.wp213

Abstract WP213: Risk For Recurrent Stroke In Subjects Newly Diagnosed With Cancer Varies Significantly According To Previous History Of Stroke

2022· article· en· W4210749224 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ronda Lun, Joshua O. Cerasuolo, Marc Carrier, Peter L. Gross, Moira K. Kapral, Michel Shamy, Rinku Sutradhar, Deborah Siegal

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityOttawa Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Hazard ratioCancerCohortIncidence (geometry)PopulationCohort studyInternal medicineRisk factorFamily historyCumulative incidenceProportional hazards modelConfidence intervalEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cancer is an important yet understudied risk factor for ischemic stroke. We sought to examine the relationship between previous stroke and risk for future stroke in individuals newly diagnosed with cancer. Methods: Using a provincial administrative database, we conducted a population-based matched cohort study of adults in Ontario, Canada, from 2010-2019. Individuals with a new diagnosis of cancer and a history of ischemic stroke were matched (1:4) by age, sex, year of cancer diagnosis, cancer stage, and cancer site to cancer patients without a history of stroke. The cohort was followed until death, stroke, or March 31, 2020, whichever occurred first. Cumulative incidence function (CIF) curves were created for the incidence of stroke (primary outcome), with the date of cancer diagnosis as the index date. Sub-distribution adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated, where death was treated as a competing event. We further stratified those with a history of stroke by the timing of their most recent stroke: 0-1 years, 1-2 years, 2-5 years, or 5-10 years. Regression analyses were adjusted for baseline characteristics. Results: We examined 65,525 individuals with a new diagnosis of cancer, including 13,105 with a history of ischemic stroke and 52,420 without; the incidence of stroke outcome following cancer diagnosis was 5.5% and 1.8%, respectively. Cancer patients with a history of previous stroke had an increased risk for stroke after cancer diagnosis compared to those without a history of stroke (aHR 2.70 95%CI [2.42-3.00]). Individuals with stroke within the preceding 1 year of the cancer diagnosis had the highest risk of recurrent stroke with aHR 3.64 (95%CI 3.17-4.17). Conclusion: Individuals who have a history of stroke prior to a diagnosis of cancer were more likely to suffer stroke after cancer diagnosis, especially if that stroke had occurred within the year preceding the cancer diagnosis. This finding has potentially important implications for advancing strategies to prevent stroke in patients with cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→