ArticleCancer2025
Implantable cardioverter defibrillators in people dying with cancer: A SEER-Medicare analysis of ICD prevalence and association with aggressive end-of-life care.
Article in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices in Oncology Patients: Challenges and Management.Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe shared risk profiles for cancer and heart disease suggest many individuals with cancer may have an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). ICDs can have dramatic cancer end-of-life care implications including painful and distressing shocks. ICD prevalence and association with aggressive end-of-life care among individuals with breast, colorectal, and pancreatic cancer was evaluated using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare dataset.
methodsA total of 37,306 Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥66 years with stage 3 or 4 cancer who died between 2005 and 2016 were identified. ICD prevalence, ICD-related care utilization that might present opportunities to discuss end-of-life implications and association with aggressive end-of-life care (>1 emergency department visit, intensive care unit admission, >1 hospitalization, terminal hospitalization, chemotherapy, and invasive or life-extending procedures) in the last month of life was assessed using multivariable logistic regression.
resultsAmong cancer decedents, 6% had an ICD. More individuals with an ICD (31%) died in the hospital than individuals without an ICD (25%; p < .001). Half (46%) of individuals with an ICD had device programming or interrogation visits that could be an opportunity for device discussion. In adjusted models, ICD presence was associated with higher odds of every indicator of aggressive end-of-life care other than chemotherapy.
conclusionMany older cancer decedents in the United States had an ICD, and those with ICDs received more aggressive care at the end of life. Results suggest there are opportunities to discuss ICD and goals of care, raise awareness and encourage shared decision-making for this population to ensure goal-concordant care, and improve end-of-life care quality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.