Cargando…

Approaches to management of cardiovascular morbidity in adult cancer patients – cross-sectional survey among cardio-oncology experts

BACKGROUND: In cardio-oncology, a range of clinical dilemmas can be identified where high-quality evidence for management is still lacking. The aim of this project was to study clinical practices and expert approaches to several clinical cardio-oncological dilemmas regarding prediction, prevention a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hedayati, E., Papakonstantinou, A., Månsson-Broberg, A., Bergh, J., Hubbert, L., Altena, R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7460793/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32884837
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40959-020-00070-y
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: In cardio-oncology, a range of clinical dilemmas can be identified where high-quality evidence for management is still lacking. The aim of this project was to study clinical practices and expert approaches to several clinical cardio-oncological dilemmas regarding prediction, prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease in adult cancer patients. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was sent out to internationally renowned experts in the field of cardio-oncology. Participants were selected based on being first or last authors of papers in the field of cardio-oncology, or principal investigators to trials in this field. RESULTS: Topics discussed include, among others, the use of biomarkers for subclinical cardiovascular toxicity, approaches towards primary prevention and follow-up with medication and life-style recommendations, and management of fluoropyrimidine-vasospasm, QTc-prolongation and asymptomatic declines in left ventricular ejection fraction. CONCLUSION: The answers provided in this survey have shed light on expert-based practices in cardio-oncologic dilemmas. Attitudes towards, as well as discrepancies in those dilemmas are presented. Existing discrepancies clearly indicate the need for generation of high-quality data that allows for more evidence-based recommendations in the future.