ABSTRACT
Background: Cardiomyopathy is a leading cause of late morbidity and mortality in childhood cancer survivors (CCS). Evidence-based guidelines recommend risk-stratified screening for cardiomyopathy, but the management approach for abnormalities detected when screening asymptomatic young adult CCS is poorly defined. Objectives: The aims of this study were to build upon existing guidelines by describing the expert consensus-based cardiomyopathy screening practices, management approach, and clinical rationale for the management of young adult CCS with screening-detected abnormalities and to identify areas of controversy in practice. Methods: A multispecialty Delphi panel of 40 physicians with expertise in cancer survivorship completed 3 iterative rounds of semi-open-ended questionnaires regarding their approaches to the management of asymptomatic young adult CCS at risk for cardiomyopathy (screening practices, referrals, cardiac testing, laboratory studies, medications). Consensus was defined as ≥90% panelist agreement with recommendation. Results: The response rate was 100% for all 3 rounds. Panelists reached consensus on the timing and frequency of echocardiographic screening for anthracycline-associated cardiomyopathy, monitoring during pregnancy, laboratory testing for modifiable cardiac risk factors, and referral to cardiology for ejection fraction ≤50% or preserved ejection fraction with diastolic dysfunction. Controversial areas (<75% agreement) included chest radiation dose threshold to merit screening, indications for advanced cardiac imaging and cardiac serum biomarkers for follow-up of abnormal echocardiographic findings, and medical management of asymptomatic left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Conclusions: Expert practice is largely consistent with existing risk-based screening guidelines. Some recommendations for managing abnormalities detected on screening echocardiography remain controversial. The rationale offered by experts for divergent approaches may help guide clinical decisions in the absence of guidelines specific to young adult CCS.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is insufficient evidence to support stroke prevention guidelines for childhood cancer survivors (CCS) treated with cranial irradiation for CNS tumors or other childhood cancers involving the CNS. We used a systematic consensus-building methodology to develop expert recommendations and define areas of controversy in managing asymptomatic CCS at risk for stroke. METHODS: A Delphi process was used to query a multispecialty panel of 45 physicians from the United States/Canada, with expertise in CCS, about their stroke screening and management practices (imaging, referrals, laboratory testing, and medications). Three iterative rounds of anonymous, scenario-based questionnaires, building on panelists' aggregate responses, were used to reach consensus (≥90% agreement), agreement (89%-70% agree), or to understand the rationale for disagreement (<70% agree). RESULTS: All 45 physicians participated in the first 2 rounds and 44 in the third. Panelists reached consensus on indications for referral to neurology and laboratory screening for modifiable cerebral vascular disease (CVD) risk factors in most scenarios. Panelists agreed that aspirin therapy is not recommended in the scenario of normal neuroimaging (86% agreed). Decisions about aspirin therapy in scenarios with abnormal neuroimaging were deferred to specialists; almost all agreed with not using aspirin for cavernomas with no evidence for previous hemorrhage (93%) and using aspirin for both large vessel CVD (93%) and small vessel CVD with evidence of previous stroke (86%). Clinical decisions that remain controversial (less than 70% agreement) include neuroimaging to screen asymptomatic CCS for CVD, referral to neurology for cavernomas, aspirin use in the setting of cavernomas with previous hemorrhage, or with evidence for small vessel CVD and no previous stroke, and indications for statins. Overall, pediatric neurologists/neuro-oncologists and radiation oncologists were more likely to advocate for screening and interventions. DISCUSSION: Despite lack of evidence to guide the management of CCS at risk for stroke, expert recommendations and rationale developed by consensus methodology are helpful to support clinical decision-making.
