Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction in Cancer Patients and Survivors. A Scientific Statement of the Heart Failure Association of the ESC and the ESC Council of Cardio-Oncology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is increasingly recognized in cancer patients and survivors, yet it remains underdiagnosed and its epidemiology largely unknown. This statement underscores the imperative need to include HFpEF in the cardiotoxicities identified during or after anticancer treatments. It also highlights the prognostic value of pre-existing HFpEF for periprocedural and cardiotoxicity risk and it discusses the challenges in the diagnosis and treatment of HFpEF in cancer patients. It also explores the aetiologic role of anticancer therapies (chemotherapy, targeted and hormonal therapies and radiotherapy) in the pathogenesis of HFpEF. Special emphasis is given on the importance of considering HFpEF from cancer diagnosis throughout treatment and survivorship and provides useful insights for cardiologists and oncologists in the monitoring and management of these patients. Finally, it highlights the key gaps in current knowledge that require further investigation through well-designed research trials to enhance our understanding and improve clinical outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".