Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T01:51:06.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improving paediatric cardiologists’ awareness about the needs of childhood cancer survivors: results of a single-centre directed educational initiative

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2019

Kirsten Rose-Felker ,
Karen Effinger ,
Michael S Kelleman ,
Ritu Sachdeva ,
Lillian R. Meacham  and
William L. Border
Kirsten Rose-Felker
Affiliation:
Sibley Heart Center Cardiology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA Department of Pediatrics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
Karen Effinger
Affiliation:
Aflac Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, GA, USA Department of Pediatrics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
Michael S Kelleman
Affiliation:
Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
Ritu Sachdeva
Affiliation:
Sibley Heart Center Cardiology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA Department of Pediatrics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
Lillian R. Meacham
Affiliation:
Aflac Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, GA, USA Department of Pediatrics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
William L. Border*
Affiliation:
Sibley Heart Center Cardiology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA Department of Pediatrics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
*
Author for correspondence: William L Border, MD, Department of Pediatrics, Sibley Heart Center Cardiology, Emory University, 1405 Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA. Tel: (404)256-2593; E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in childhood cancer survivors. Cardiologists must be aware of risk factors and long-term follow-up guidelines, which have historically been the purview of oncologists. Little is known about paediatric cardiologists’ knowledge regarding the cardiotoxicity of cancer treatment and how to improve this knowledge.

Methods:

A total of 58 paediatric cardiologists anonymously completed a 21-question, web-based survey focused on four cardio-oncology themes: cancer treatment-related risk factors (n = 6), patient-related risk factors (n = 6), recommended surveillance (n = 3), and cardiac-specific considerations (n = 6). Following the baseline survey, a multi-disciplinary team of paediatric cardiologists and cancer survivor providers developed an in-person and web-based educational intervention. A post-intervention survey was conducted 5 months later.

Results:

The response rate was 41/58 (70.7%) pre-intervention and 30/58 (51.7%) post-intervention. On the baseline survey, the percentage of correct answers was 68.8 ± 10.3%, which improved to 79.2 ± 16.2% after the intervention (p = 0.009). The theme with the most profound knowledge deficit was surveillance; however, it also had the greatest improvement after the intervention (49.6 ± 26.7 versus 66.7 ± 27.7% correct, p = 0.025). Individual questions with the largest per cent improvement pertained to risk of cardiac dysfunction with time since treatment (52.4 versus 93.1%, p = 0.002) and the role of dexrazoxane (48.8 versus 82.8%, p = 0.020).

Conclusion:

Specific knowledge deficits about the care of paediatric cancer survivors were identified amongst cardiologists using a web-based survey. Knowledge of surveillance was initially lowest but improved the most after an educational intervention. This highlights the need for cardio-oncology-based educational initiatives among paediatric cardiologists.

Keywords

Cardio-oncologycardiotoxicitychildhood cancer survivoreducationpaediatrics
Type
Original Article
Information
Cardiology in the Young , Volume 29 , Issue 6 , June 2019 , pp. 808 - 812
Check for updates
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Howlader, NNA, Krapcho, M, Miller, D, et al. (eds) SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2014. National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, MD. https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2014/, based on November 2016 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, April 2017.Google Scholar
Mertens, AC, Liu, Q, Neglia, JP, et al. Cause-specific late mortality among 5-year survivors of childhood cancer: the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008; 100: 1368–1379.10.1093/jnci/djn310CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barac, A, Murtagh, G, Carver, JR, et al. Cardiovascular health of patients with cancer and cancer survivors: a roadmap to the next level. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015; 65: 2739–2746.10.1016/j.jacc.2015.04.059CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yoon, GJ, Telli, ML, Kao, DP, Matsuda, KY, Carlson, RW, Witteles, RM. Left ventricular dysfunction in patients receiving cardiotoxic cancer therapies are clinicians responding optimally? J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 56: 1644–1650.10.1016/j.jacc.2010.07.023CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ammon, M, Arenja, N, Leibundgut, G, et al. Cardiovascular management of cancer patients with chemotherapy-associated left ventricular systolic dysfunction in real-world clinical practice. J Card Fail 2013; 19: 629–634.10.1016/j.cardfail.2013.07.007CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Children’s Oncology Group Long-Term Follow-Up Guidelines for Survivors of Childhood. Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer. 2013; http://www.survivorshipguidelines.org/pdf/LTFUGuidelines_40.pdf.Google Scholar
Hudson, MM, Rai, SN, Nunez, C, et al. Noninvasive evaluation of late anthracycline cardiac toxicity in childhood cancer survivors. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 3635–3643.10.1200/JCO.2006.09.7451CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mulrooney, DA, Yeazel, MW, Kawashima, T, et al. Cardiac outcomes in a cohort of adult survivors of childhood and adolescent cancer: retrospective analysis of the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study cohort. BMJ 2009; 339: b4606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipshultz, SE, Scully, RE, Lipsitz, SR, et al. Assessment of dexrazoxane as a cardioprotectant in doxorubicin-treated children with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: long-term follow-up of a prospective, randomised, multicentre trial. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 950–961.10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70204-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lipshultz, SE, Rifai, N, Dalton, VM, et al. The effect of dexrazoxane on myocardial injury in doxorubicin-treated children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N Engl J Med 2004; 351: 145–153.10.1056/NEJMoa035153CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chow, EJ, Chen, Y, Kremer, LC, et al. Individual prediction of heart failure among childhood cancer survivors. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33: 394–402.10.1200/JCO.2014.56.1373CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jovenaux, L, Cautela, J, Resseguier, N, et al. Practices in management of cancer treatment-related cardiovascular toxicity: a cardio-oncology survey. Int J Cardiol 2017; 241: 387–392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shelburne, N, Adhikari, B, Brell, J, et al. Cancer treatment-related cardiotoxicity: current state of knowledge and future research priorities. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014; 106: dju232.10.1093/jnci/dju232CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plana, JC, Galderisi, M, Barac, A, et al. Expert consensus for multimodality imaging evaluation of adult patients during and after cancer therapy: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. JASE 2014; 27: 911–939.Google ScholarPubMed
Ruddy, K, Moslehi, J. Cardiac complications of cancer therapy. ASCO University. Retrieved February 1, 2018, from https://university.asco.org/cardiac-complications-cancer-therapyGoogle Scholar
Mulrooney, DA, Armstrong, GT, Huang, S, et al. Cardiac outcomes in adult survivors of childhood cancer exposed to cardiotoxic therapy: a cross-sectional study. Ann Intern Med 2016; 164: 93–101.10.7326/M15-0424CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Rose-Felker et al. supplementary material

Supplemental Table

Download Rose-Felker et al. supplementary material(File)
File 146.9 KB