Prevalence of carotid ultrasound screening in survivors of childhood cancer: A report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Cancer Pub Date : 2024-10-10 DOI:10.1002/cncr.35591
Yolanda Bryce, Jillian A Whitton, Kayla L Stratton, Wendy M Leisenring, Eric J Chow, Gregory Armstrong, Brent Weil, Bryan Dieffenbach, Rebecca M Howell, Kevin C Oeffinger, Paul C Nathan, Emily S Tonorezos
{"title":"Prevalence of carotid ultrasound screening in survivors of childhood cancer: A report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.","authors":"Yolanda Bryce, Jillian A Whitton, Kayla L Stratton, Wendy M Leisenring, Eric J Chow, Gregory Armstrong, Brent Weil, Bryan Dieffenbach, Rebecca M Howell, Kevin C Oeffinger, Paul C Nathan, Emily S Tonorezos","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Many childhood cancer survivors are at risk for cardiovascular disease and stroke. The North American Children's Oncology Group long-term follow-up guidelines recommend carotid ultrasound in cancer survivors 10 years after neck radiation therapy (RT) ≥40 Gy. The use of carotid ultrasound in this population has not been described.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Survivors of childhood cancer diagnosed 1970-1999 (N = 8693) and siblings (N = 1989) enrolled in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study were asked if they had ever had a carotid ultrasound. Prevalence of carotid ultrasound was evaluated. Prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were evaluated in multivariate Poisson regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among participants with no reported cardiovascular condition, prevalence of carotid ultrasound among survivors with RT ≥40 Gy to the neck (N = 172) was 29.7% (95% CI, 22.5-36.8), significantly higher than those with <40 Gy (prevalence 10.7%; 95% CI, 9.9%-11.4%). Siblings without a cardiovascular condition (N = 1621) had the lowest prevalence of carotid ultrasound (4.7%; 95% CI, 3.6%-5.7%). In a multivariable models among survivors with no reported cardiovascular condition and RT ≥40 Gy to the neck, those who were over age 50 (vs. 18-49) at follow-up (PR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.09-3.05), with a history of seeing a cancer specialist in the last 2 years (PR = 2.58; 95% CI, 1.53-4.33), or having a colonoscopy (PR = 2.02; 95% CI, 1.17-3.48) or echocardiogram (PR = 6.42; 95% CI, 1.54-26.85) were more likely to have had a carotid ultrasound.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Many survivors do not undergo carotid ultrasound despite meeting existing guidelines. Health care delivery features such as having seen a cancer specialist or having other testing are relevant.</p>","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35591","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Many childhood cancer survivors are at risk for cardiovascular disease and stroke. The North American Children's Oncology Group long-term follow-up guidelines recommend carotid ultrasound in cancer survivors 10 years after neck radiation therapy (RT) ≥40 Gy. The use of carotid ultrasound in this population has not been described.

Methods: Survivors of childhood cancer diagnosed 1970-1999 (N = 8693) and siblings (N = 1989) enrolled in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study were asked if they had ever had a carotid ultrasound. Prevalence of carotid ultrasound was evaluated. Prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were evaluated in multivariate Poisson regression models.

Results: Among participants with no reported cardiovascular condition, prevalence of carotid ultrasound among survivors with RT ≥40 Gy to the neck (N = 172) was 29.7% (95% CI, 22.5-36.8), significantly higher than those with <40 Gy (prevalence 10.7%; 95% CI, 9.9%-11.4%). Siblings without a cardiovascular condition (N = 1621) had the lowest prevalence of carotid ultrasound (4.7%; 95% CI, 3.6%-5.7%). In a multivariable models among survivors with no reported cardiovascular condition and RT ≥40 Gy to the neck, those who were over age 50 (vs. 18-49) at follow-up (PR = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.09-3.05), with a history of seeing a cancer specialist in the last 2 years (PR = 2.58; 95% CI, 1.53-4.33), or having a colonoscopy (PR = 2.02; 95% CI, 1.17-3.48) or echocardiogram (PR = 6.42; 95% CI, 1.54-26.85) were more likely to have had a carotid ultrasound.

Conclusion: Many survivors do not undergo carotid ultrasound despite meeting existing guidelines. Health care delivery features such as having seen a cancer specialist or having other testing are relevant.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
儿童癌症幸存者接受颈动脉超声筛查的比例:儿童癌症幸存者研究报告。
导言许多儿童癌症幸存者都有罹患心血管疾病和中风的风险。北美儿童肿瘤组织长期随访指南建议,颈部放射治疗(RT)≥40 Gy 后 10 年的癌症幸存者应进行颈动脉超声检查。颈动脉超声在这一人群中的应用尚未见报道:方法:询问1970-1999年确诊的儿童癌症幸存者(N = 8693)和参加儿童癌症幸存者研究的兄弟姐妹(N = 1989)是否接受过颈动脉超声检查。对颈动脉超声的患病率进行了评估。在多变量泊松回归模型中评估了患病率比(PR)和95%置信区间(CI):结果:在未报告心血管疾病的参与者中,颈部RT≥40 Gy的幸存者(N = 172)中颈动脉超声的患病率为29.7%(95% CI,22.5-36.8),明显高于有结论的幸存者:尽管符合现有指南,但许多幸存者并未接受颈动脉超声检查。医疗保健服务的特征(如是否看过癌症专科医生或进行过其他检查)与此有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer
Cancer 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
3.20%
发文量
480
审稿时长
2-3 weeks
期刊介绍: The CANCER site is a full-text, electronic implementation of CANCER, an Interdisciplinary International Journal of the American Cancer Society, and CANCER CYTOPATHOLOGY, a Journal of the American Cancer Society. CANCER publishes interdisciplinary oncologic information according to, but not limited to, the following disease sites and disciplines: blood/bone marrow; breast disease; endocrine disorders; epidemiology; gastrointestinal tract; genitourinary disease; gynecologic oncology; head and neck disease; hepatobiliary tract; integrated medicine; lung disease; medical oncology; neuro-oncology; pathology radiation oncology; translational research
期刊最新文献
A systematic review and meta-analysis of patient-relevant outcomes in comprehensive cancer centers versus noncomprehensive cancer centers. American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline update on palliative care for patients with cancer: Addressing the reality gap. Embrace with caution: The limitations of generative artificial intelligence in responding to patient health care queries. Expression of Concern. Global disparities in cancer care: Bridging the gap in affordability and access to medications between high and low-income countries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1