Cancer Medicine (Aug 2020)

Cardiovascular disease and asymptomatic childhood cancer survivors: Current clinical practice

  • Wendy J. Bottinor,
  • Debra L. Friedman,
  • Thomas D. Ryan,
  • Li Wang,
  • Chang Yu,
  • Scott C. Borinstein,
  • Justin Godown

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.3190
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 9, no. 15
pp. 5500 – 5508

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background It is poorly understood how cardiovascular screening in asymptomatic childhood cancer survivors (CCS) is applied to and impacts clinical care. Objectives To describe the current role of cardiovascular screening in the clinical care of asymptomatic CCS. Methods At 50 pediatric academic medical centers, a childhood cancer survivorship clinic director, pediatric cardiologist, and adult cardiologist with a focus on CCS were identified and invited to participate in a survey. Surveys were managed electronically. Categorical data were analyzed using nonparametric methods. Results Of the 95 (63%) respondents, 39% were survivorship practitioners, and 61% were cardiologists. Eighty‐eight percent of survivorship practitioners reported that greater than half of CCS received cardiovascular screening. CCS followed by adult cardiology were more likely to be seen by a cardio‐oncologist. Those followed by pediatric cardiology were more likely to be seen by a heart failure/transplant specialist. Common reasons for referral to cardiology were abnormal cardiovascular imaging or concerns a CCS was at high risk for cardiovascular disease. Ninety‐two percent of cardiologists initiated angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker therapy for mild systolic dysfunction. Adult cardiologists initiated beta‐blocker therapy for less severe systolic dysfunction compared to pediatric cardiologists (P < .001). Pediatric cardiologists initiated mineralocorticoid therapy for less severe systolic dysfunction compared to adult cardiologists (P = .025). Practitioners (93%) support a multi‐institutional collaboration to standardize cardiovascular care for CCS. Conclusions While there is much common ground in the clinical approach to CCS, heterogeneity is evident. This highlights the need for cohesive, multi‐institutional, standardized approaches to cardiovascular management in CCS.

Keywords