History of Cancer and Atrial Cardiopathy: A Secondary Analysis of the ARCADIA Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Approximately 50% of strokes in patients with cancer are classified as cryptogenic after standard evaluation. Atrial cardiopathy could explain some cancer‐related cryptogenic strokes. However, the relationship between cancer and atrial cardiopathy is uncertain. Methods AND RESULTS We conducted a post hoc cross‐sectional analysis of baseline data collected from participants enrolled in ARCADIA (Atrial Cardiopathy and Antithrombotic Drugs in Prevention After Cryptogenic Stroke), a clinical trial conducted from 2018 to 2023 at 185 sites. The analytical cohort presented herein included patients age ≥45 years with cryptogenic ischemic stroke within the past 180 days, of whom a subset had atrial cardiopathy and were randomized into the trial. Atrial fibrillation before enrollment was exclusionary. Linear regression models examined the associations between history of cancer and the atrial cardiopathy biomarkers analyzed in ARCADIA: serum NT‐proBNP (N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide), P‐wave terminal force in ECG lead V 1 , and left atrial diameter index on echocardiogram. Among 3745 patients with cryptogenic stroke, 506 (13.5%) had history of cancer. History of cancer was associated with higher median values of NT‐proBNP (126 versus 103 pg/mL, P <0.001) and left atrial diameter index (1.9 versus 1.8 cm/m 2 , P <0.001) but similar median values of P‐wave terminal force in ECG lead V 1 (3000 versus 3025, P =0.08). After adjusting for demographics, tobacco use, and body mass index, no significant association remained between history of cancer and log‐transformed NT‐proBNP (standardized β $$ \beta $$ , −0.06 [95% CI, −0.15 to 0.02]), P‐wave terminal force in ECG lead V 1 (standardized β $$ \beta $$ , −0.02 [95% CI, −0.11 to 0.08]), or left atrial diameter index (standardized β $$ \beta $$ , 0.06 [95% CI, −0.05 to 0.16]). Conclusions In a multicenter, prospective, cryptogenic stroke cohort, history of cancer was not associated with selected biomarkers for atrial cardiopathy. Registration URL: https://www.ClinicalTrials.gov ; Unique Identifier: NCT03192215.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".