ArticleThe Journal of cardiovascular nursing
The Contribution of Thoracic Radiation Dose Volumes to Subsequent Development of Cardiovascular Disease in Cancer Survivors.
Article in The Journal of cardiovascular nursing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough radiation therapy (RT) has been recognized for contributing to cardiovascular disease (CVD), it is unknown whether specific doses received by cardiovascular tissues influence development.
objectiveIn this pilot study, we examined the contribution of RT dose distribution on the development of CVD events in patients with cancer within 5 years of RT.
methodsA retrospective case-controlled design was used matching 28 cases receiving thoracic RT who subsequently developed an adverse CVD event with 28 controls based upon age, gender, and cancer type. Dose volume histograms of nongated computed tomography scans received during RT characterized the dose delivered to the heart. Heart chambers were segmented using an atlas approach, and radiomics features for the segmentation as well as planning dose in each chamber were tabulated for analysis.
resultNo significant differences were observed in the RT dose statistics between groups, preexisting CVD, nor significant differences of RT doses delivered to distinct chambers of the heart. Cases were found to have greater CVD risk factors at the time of cancer diagnosis. Morphological significant differences for perimeter on border ( P = .043), equivalent spherical radius ( P = .050), and elongation ( P = .038) were observed, with preexisting CVD having the highest values (ie, larger hearts).
conclusionTraditional CVD risk factors were more prevalent in the cases who developed CVD. No differences were observed in doses of RT. Of note, we observed significant differences in heart morphology and mass in known diseased hearts on the pretreatment scans. These new metrics may have implications for the measurement and quantification of CVD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.