Abstract 10353: Cardioprotection Using Strain-Guided Management of Potentially Cardiotoxic Cancer Therapy: 3 Year Results of the SUCCOUR Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Global longitudinal strain (GLS) can predict cancer therapeutics-related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD) and guide initiation of cardioprotection (CPT) at the time of chemotherapy. No prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) has identified the impact on LV function in survivors. Hypothesis: GLS-guided CPT provides less cardiac dysfunction in survivors of potentially cardiotoxic chemotherapy, compared with usual care. Methods: In this international (28 sites) multicenter prospective RCT, patients (pts) were included if they were administrated anthracyclines and had another risk factor for HF. They were randomly allocated into undergoing GLS-guided CPT for >12% relative reduction in GLS or EF-guided CPT for >10% absolute reduction of EF. Primary endpoint was the change in EF (ΔEF) from baseline to 3 years by 3D echocardiography. Results: Among 331 pts enrolled, 255 (77%, 60±16 years, 95% women) completed 3-year follow-up (123 in EF-guided group and 132 in GLS-guided). Most had breast cancer (236, 93%), 67 (26%) with hypertension and 32 (13%) with diabetes mellitus. A regimen of anthracycline and trastuzumab was the most common chemotherapy regimen (84%). The baseline LVEF was 61±4% with GLS of 20.7±2.3% in the entire population. CPT was administrated in 18 pts (15%) in EF-guided and 41 (31%) in GLS-guided (p=0.02). Most patients showed recovery in EF and GLS after chemotherapy (Figure). ΔEF was -2.0±4.8 in EF-guided and -1.4±5.4 in GLS-guided (p=0.25), but LVEF at 3 years in EF-guided was lower than that of GLS-guided (58.0±5.6% vs 59±4.9%, p=0.043). Ten pts in EF-guided developed CTRCD, and 6 in GLS-guided (p=0.24). Conclusions: Most of the enrolled pts were taking potentially cardiotoxic chemotherapy for breast cancer. Almost all improved LV function over 3 years, and although GLS-guided CPT was associated with higher EF at 3 years, there was no difference in ΔEF compared with EF-guided surveillance.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".