Cancer-associated ischemic stroke: current knowledge and future directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Because cancer is a strong prothrombotic, there is an increased risk of thromboembolism, which includes ischemic stroke, especially in the first six to twelve months following a cancer diagnosis. The risk of ischemic stroke differs according to the location and stage of cancer. Given that the risk increases prior to a cancer diagnosis, stroke may be the initial sign of occult cancer. Although data on the risk, treatment, and outcomes of cancer-associated stroke are more limited than those on cancer-associated venous thromboembolism, the condition is still recognized as a thrombotic complication of cancer. Up to 10% of ischemic stroke patients also have a concurrent cancer diagnosis, and these patients seem to have higher short-term mortality and morbidity rates. With more people expected to survive longer after cancer treatment and an increasing number of cancer survivors, the burden of stroke among cancer patients is predicted to rise. This narrative review aims to provide an overview of the pathophysiologic mechanisms, treatment options, and epidemiology of ischemic stroke, including cancer screening for those who have cryptogenic (unexplained) stroke.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".