Incremental Value of Myocardial Work over Global Longitudinal Strain in the Surveillance for Cancer-Treatment-Related Cardiac Dysfunction: A Case–Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The load dependence of global longitudinal strain (GLS) means that changes in systolic blood pressure (BP) between visits may confound the diagnosis of cancer-treatment-related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD). We sought to determine whether the estimation of myocardial work, which incorporates SBP, could overcome this limitation. In this case–control study, 44 asymptomatic patients at risk of CTRCD underwent echocardiography at baseline and after oncologic treatment. CTRCD was defined on the basis of the change in the ejection fraction. Those with CTRCD were divided into subsets with and without a follow-up SBP increment >20 mmHg (CTRCD+BP+ and CTRCD+BP−), and matched with patients without CTRCD (CTRCD−BP+ and CTRCD−BP−). The work index (GWI), constructive work (GCW), wasted work (GWW), and work efficiency (GWE) were assessed in addition to the GLS. The largest increases in the GWI and GCW at follow-up were found in CTRCD−BP+ patients. The CTRCD+BP− patients demonstrated significantly larger decreases in GWI and GCW than their CTRCD+BP+ and CTRCD−BP− peers. ROC analysis for the discrimination of LV functional changes in response to increased afterload in the absence of cardiotoxicity revealed higher AUCs for GCW (AUC = 0.97) and GWI (AUC = 0.93) than GLS (AUC = 0.73), GWW (AUC = 0.51), or GWE (AUC = 0.63, all p-values < 0.001). GCW (OR: 1.021; 95% CI: 1.001–1.042; p < 0.04) was the only feature independently associated with CTRCD−BP+. Myocardial work is superior to GLS in the serial assessments in patients receiving cardiotoxic chemotherapy. The impairment of GLS in the presence of an increase in GWI and GCW indicates the impact of elevated afterload on LV performance in the absence of actual myocardial impairment.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".