Primary Care Utilization and Cardiovascular Screening in Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Cardiovascular disease is the leading noncancer cause of premature death among survivors of childhood cancer. Adult survivors of childhood cancer are largely managed by primary care practitioners (PCPs), and health care utilization patterns related to cardiovascular screening are not well described. Objective: To examine screening and health care utilization among survivors of childhood cancer at high risk for cardiovascular complications. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cross-sectional study included participants enrolled in a randomized clinical trial from 2017 to 2021. Abstracted documentation of participants' cancer history, cardiotoxic treatment exposures, and survivorship care plans were obtained from participants' PCPs spanning 2 years preceding trial enrollment. Participants were members of the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study cohort at elevated risk for ischemic heart disease or heart failure, enrolled in a randomized trial focused on improving cardiovascular risk factor control. Data were analyzed from November 2022 to July 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes of interest were numbers of PCP and specialist visits, cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes), risk factor screening, and cardiac testing. Multivariable logistic regression assessed characteristics associated with up-to-date cardiac testing at enrollment. Results: Of 347 enrolled participants, 293 (84.4%) had evaluable medical records (median [range] age, 39.9 [21.5-65.0] years; 149 [50.9%] male) and were included in analyses. At baseline, 238 participants (81.2%) had a documented PCP encounter; 241 participants (82.3%) had undergone blood pressure screening, 179 participants (61.1%) had undergone lipid testing, and 193 participants (65.9%) had undergone diabetes screening. A total of 63 participants (21.5%) had echocardiography completed or planned. Only 198 participants (67.6%) had records referencing a cancer history. PCP documentation of prior cardiotoxic exposures was low compared with known exposures, including radiation therapy (103 participants [35.2%] vs 203 participants [69.3%]; P < .001) and anthracycline chemotherapy (27 participants [9.2%] vs 222 participants [75.8%]; P = .008). Few records referenced a need for cancer-related late effects surveillance (95 records [32.4%]). Independent factors associated with cardiac screening included documentation of increased cardiovascular disease risk (odds ratio [OR], 11.94; 95% CI, 3.37-42.31), a late-effects surveillance plan (OR, 3.92; 95% CI, 1.69-9.11), and existing cardiovascular risk factors (OR per each additional factor, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.32-3.31). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study of adult survivors of childhood cancer at increased risk of cardiovascular disease found low adherence to recommended cardiac testing and documentation of risk for these individuals. Improving accuracy of reporting of survivors' exposures and risks within the medical record may improve screening.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".