Clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with primary cardiac angiosarcoma: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Primary cardiac angiosarcomas (PCA) are highly aggressive malignant heart tumors. Previous reports have shown a poor prognosis regardless of management, and no consensus or guidelines exist. It is necessary to clarify this information since patients with PCA have a short survival. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review clinical manifestations, management, and outcomes. We systematically searched in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE. We intended to include cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, cohort studies, and case series that reported clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with PCA. As a methodological approach, we used the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Series and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohorts. We included six studies (five case series, one cohort). The mean/median age ranged from 39 to 48.9 years. Male sex was predominant. The most frequent manifestations were dyspnea (range: 50%-80%), pericardial effusion (29% & 56%), and chest pain (10%-39%). The mean tumor size ranged from 5.8 to 7.2 cm, with the majority of these localized in the right atrium (70-100%). The most common locations of metastasis were the lung (20%-55.6%), liver (10%-22.2%), and bone (10%-20%). Resection (22.9%-94%), and chemotherapy as neoadjuvant or adjuvant (30%-100%) were the most commonly used methods of treatment. Mortality ranged from 64.7% to 100%. PCA often presents late in its course and usually results in poor prognosis. We strongly recommend performing multi-institutional prospective cohorts to better study disease course and treatments to develop consensus, algorithms, and guidelines for this type of sarcoma.
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 | 0.003 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".