Underdiagnosis and Undertreatment of Modifiable Cardiovascular Risk Factors Among Survivors of Childhood Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Determine the prevalence and predictors associated with underdiagnosis and undertreatment of modifiable cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors (hypertension, dyslipidemia, glucose intolerance/diabetes) among adult survivors of childhood cancer at high risk of premature CVD. Methods and Results This was a cross‐sectional study of adult‐aged survivors of childhood cancer treated with anthracyclines or chest radiotherapy, recruited across 9 US metropolitan regions. Survivors completed questionnaires and in‐home clinical assessments. The comparator group was a matched sample from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Multivariable logistic regression estimated the risk (odds ratios) of CVD risk factor underdiagnosis and undertreatment among survivors compared with the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Survivors (n=571; median age, 37.7 years and 28.5 years from cancer diagnosis) were more likely to have a preexisting CVD risk factor than the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (n=345; P <0.05 for all factors). While rates of CVD risk factor underdiagnosis were similar (27.1% survivors versus 26.1% National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; P =0.73), survivors were more likely undertreated (21.0% versus 13.9%, P =0.007; odds ratio, 1.8, 95% CI, 1.2–2.7). Among survivors, the most underdiagnosed and undertreated risk factors were hypertension (18.9%) and dyslipidemia (16.3%), respectively. Men and survivors who were overweight/obese were more likely to be underdiagnosed and undertreated. Those with multiple adverse lifestyle factors were also more likely undertreated (odds ratio, 2.2, 95% CI, 1.1–4.5). Greater health‐related self‐efficacy was associated with reduced undertreatment (odds ratio, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3–0.8). Conclusions Greater awareness of among primary care providers and cardiologists, combined with improving self‐efficacy among survivors, may mitigate the risk of underdiagnosed and undertreated CVD risk factors among adult‐aged survivors of childhood cancer. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03104543.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".