ArticleCardio-oncology (London, England)2026
Cardio-oncology research prioritisation in the United Kingdom: national surveys of health care professionals, patients and carers.
Article in Cardio-oncology (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe relevance of cardiovascular disease in people with a history of cancer has increased in parallel with dramatic improvements in cancer-specific outcomes. There is an urgent need to improve the evidence underpinning cardio-oncology practice. Research prioritisation is essential and needs to account for multidisciplinary healthcare professional (HCP) perspectives, as well as patients and carers.
methodsThe NIHR-BHF Cardiovascular Partnership Theme in Cardio-Oncology conducted two UK-wide online surveys to identify research priorities. The first was distributed to HCPs with cardiology, oncology and haemato-oncology backgrounds. The second was distributed to patients and carers (PCs) with experience of cancer and/or cardiovascular disease. Surveys were co-designed by clinicians and patients.
resultsHCP Survey: 127 responded; 53% prioritised research 'during cancer treatment'. Immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies were identified as the highest-priority drug classes. Cardiac dysfunction/heart failure (53%) and myocarditis (22%) were priority cardiovascular toxicities of interest. The development of a cardio-oncology registry was marginally favoured over randomised trials. Prospective randomised open-label blinded endpoints (PROBE) designs were considered of similar priority to double-blinded placebo controlled trials. PC Survey: 267 responded. 54% were concerned about the impact of cancer treatment upon cardiovascular health. PC research priorities were: prevention of cardiac side effects (58%), long-term cardiac monitoring, and early detection of side effects. Willingness to participate in research was high.
conclusionHCPs and PCs from the UK prioritised prevention and detection of cardiac dysfunction during and immediately following cancer therapy, particularly with agents such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies. These findings provide important strategy-setting insights for large-scale collaborative cardio-oncology studies.
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.