ArticleCardio-oncology (London, England)2026
Cardio-oncology from the consulting side: diagnostic thresholds, surveillance and treatment responsibility among cardiologists and internists in a German multicentre survey.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity (CTR-CVT) is a leading non-cancer cause of morbidity and mortality. The 2022 ESC Guidelines define a multidisciplinary pathway in which baseline cardiovascular risk assessment is led by the treating oncology or haematology team, with cardiological involvement guided by the resulting risk; how this is put into practice in hospitals is poorly characterised. Previous surveys have described the treating specialties; we examined the receiving cardiologists and internists.
methodsCross-sectional online survey of physicians in cardiology, internal medicine, gynaecology and oncology at 1,435 German hospital departments (February-October 2025). This pre-specified analysis addressed cardiological involvement in the pathway and in risk stratification, left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)-decline thresholds, strain use and biomarker testing in a standardised high-risk scenario (a patient with pre-existing heart failure receiving anthracycline chemotherapy). Findings are self-reported; comparisons exploratory.
resultsOne hundred twenty physicians responded (44 cardiologists, 28 oncologists, 27 gynaecologists, 21 internists; 73.3% academic or university hospitals). Risk stratification showed the lowest cardiological involvement (42.9%, 15/35); 51.0% (26/51) of cardiologists and internists performed it themselves or within a team, and 19.6% (10/51) regarded it as the treating oncologist's task. LVEF-decline thresholds were asked in two non-equivalent versions and are reported separately. Any LVEF decline was regarded as cardiotoxicity by 38.2% (13/34) of cardiologists and 61.5% (8/13) of internists, and by 26.7% (4/15) of gynaecologists and 39.1% (9/23) of oncologists; a decline exceeding 10% points by 55.9% and 23.1%, respectively. Routine strain use was reported by 76.5% (26/34) of cardiologists and 36.4% (4/11) of internists. Twelve-month biomarker testing in this scenario was infrequent even in cardiology (20.6%).
conclusionsAmong these predominantly academic physicians, risk stratification had the least clearly assigned ownership, the LVEF decline regarded as relevant varied widely within each version, routine strain use differed between cardiology and internal medicine, and late post-treatment biomarker testing was infrequent even in cardiology. These hypothesis-generating findings identify targets-assigned responsibility for risk stratification, explicit LVEF thresholds, implementation of routine strain imaging and structured post-treatment surveillance-whose effect on CTR-CVT outcomes requires prospective testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42850673What 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.