Delphi Panel Consensus Recommendations for Screening and Managing Childhood Cancer Survivors at Risk for Cardiomyopathy.

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.