Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32043205›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer survivorship : research and practice2020

Communicating cardiovascular risk to high-risk cancer survivors: a mixed-methods pilot study of a statin risk communication tool.

Nirupa J Raghunathan, Emily C Zabor, Nassim Anderson, Kevin Oeffinger, Emily S Tonorezos, Deborah Korenstein

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nirupa J RaghunathanDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Ave, 2nd Floor, New York City, NY, 10017, USA. raghunan@mskcc.org.ORCID 0000-0003-1990-247X
Emily C ZaborDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Nassim AndersonDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Ave, 2nd Floor, New York City, NY, 10017, USA.
Kevin OeffingerDuke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, USA.
Emily S TonorezosDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Ave, 2nd Floor, New York City, NY, 10017, USA.
Deborah KorensteinDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Ave, 2nd Floor, New York City, NY, 10017, USA.
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USCleveland Clinic · USDuke Cancer Institute

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Disparities in COVID Disease Severity and Outcomes in New York CityUL1TR002384 · NCATS · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI JULIANNE L IMPERATO-MCGINLEY · 2017 to 2026
$86.2M
Exercise and QUality diet After LeukemiaR01CA187397 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI TONOREZOS, EMILY SMITH · 2014 to 2018
$3.2M
Clinical and Translational Science CenterKL2TR000458 · NCATS · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI IMPERATO-MCGINLEY, JULIANNE L · 2012 to 2016
$2.1M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000458NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002384NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS R01 CA187397
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeChildhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors treated with radiation therapy (RT) may be unaware of their high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk or how to mitigate it. Tools are needed to improve understanding. We developed and pilot-tested a risk communication tool for shared decision-making with survivors regarding CVD risk reduction with statin therapy. We included quantitative and qualitative arms to further tool development and testing.

methodsThe statin risk communication tool was adapted from a previously validated tool. Patients were at increased risk for CVD due to history of chest RT and recruited to usual care and intervention arms. The post-visit survey included Likert-like scales to explore acceptability of the tool, knowledge questions, and a decisional conflict scale. This pilot study used descriptive statistics and was not powered for significance. Semi-structured interviews with intervention arm participants explored shared decision-making processes.

resultsMedian participant (n = 46) age was 45. Most intervention patients (22/24, 92%) and 50% (11/22) of controls found statin information acceptable while 31% (7/22) of the control arm selected "not applicable" regarding information acceptability. Most participants were unaware of their personal CVD risk or potential statin side effects. In semi-structured interviews, participants found the tool is helpful to visualize risk and aid conversations.

conclusionsThe risk communication tool was acceptable. Qualitative data suggested the tool improved decisional clarity and comfort. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Poor knowledge of CVD and statins and poor recall of CVD risk conversation suggest a need to continue to optimize conversations regarding cardiovascular risk and statin therapy.

Indexed as

AdultCancer SurvivorsCardiovascular DiseasesCommunicationFemaleHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPilot ProjectsProspective StudiesRisk FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsCardiovascular riskDecisional conflictMixed-methods studyRisk communication toolsShared decision-makingStatins

Identifiers

PMID32043205
PMCPMC7365742
OpenAlexW3005898656

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.