Utility of apical four‐chamber longitudinal strain in the assessment of childhood cancer survivors: A multicenter study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A previous multicenter study showed that longitudinal changes in standard cardiac functional parameters were associated with the development of cardiomyopathy in childhood cancer survivors (CCS). Evaluation of the relationship between global longitudinal strain (GLS) changes and cardiomyopathy risk was limited, largely due to lack of quality apical 2- and 3-chamber views in addition to 4-chamber view. We sought to determine whether apical 4-chamber longitudinal strain (A4LS) alone can serve as a suitable surrogate for GLS in this population. METHODS: A4LS and GLS were measured in echocardiograms with acceptable apical 2-, 3-, and 4-chamber views. Correlation was evaluated using Pearson and Spearman coefficients, and agreement was evaluated with Bland-Altman plots. The ability of A4LS to identify normal and abnormal values compared to GLS as the reference was evaluated. RESULTS: Among a total of 632 reviewed echocardiograms, we identified 130 echocardiograms from 56 patients with adequate views (38% female; mean age at cancer diagnosis 8.3 years; mean follow-up 9.4 years). Correlation coefficients between A4LS and GLS were .89 (Pearson) and .85 (Spearman), with Bland-Altman plot of GLS-A4LS showing a mean difference of -.71 ± 1.8. Compared with GLS as the gold standard, A4LS had a sensitivity of 86% (95% CI 79%-93%) and specificity of 82% (69%-95%) when using normal range cutoffs and 90% (82%-97%) and 70% (58%-81%) when using ±2 standard deviations. CONCLUSION: A4LS performs well when compared with GLS in this population. Given the more recent adoption of apical 2- and 3-chamber views in most pediatric echocardiography laboratories, A4LS is a reasonable stand-alone measurement in retrospective analyses of older study cohorts and echocardiogram biorepositories.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".