Standard Cardiovascular Risk Assessment Sufficient for Childhood Cancer Survivors: JAMA study

Written By :  Dr Riya Dave
Medically Reviewed By :  Dr. Kamal Kant Kohli
Published On 2026-04-14 14:45 GMT   |   Update On 2026-04-14 14:45 GMT

A randomized clinical trial found that adult survivors of childhood cancer did not gain additional benefit from tailored cardiovascular (CV) counseling compared with standard CV risk assessment. While technically negative, the study offers reassuring evidence that a simple, standardized approach to evaluating and communicating cardiovascular risk may be adequate for this population. The study was published in JAMA Network Open by Eric J. and colleagues.

There is a significantly increased risk of cardiovascular disease among survivors of childhood cancer because of previous treatment with cardiotoxic agents. In spite of the availability of guidelines that recommend screening and aggressive management of risk factors for CVD, high-risk patients are often not followed up or treated appropriately as young adults. The Communicating Health Information and Improving Coordination With Primary Care (CHIIP) Study was conducted to see if an SCP-based counseling intervention could improve control of hypertension, dyslipidemia, and glucose intolerance in this high-risk population.

The CHIIP Study recruited participants from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study group in 9 metropolitan areas in the US between August 2017 and April 2020, and the follow-up ended in July 2022. Data analysis ended on March 18, 2025.

Of the 1,840 survivors approached:

  • 842 agreed to participate

  • 347 met all eligibility criteria and were randomized

Eligibility criteria were:

  • Adult survivors of childhood cancer

  • Exposure to cardiotoxic therapies

  • Presence of undertreated CVD risk factors, as defined by standard guidelines

  • Hypertension

  • Dyslipidemia

  • Glucose intolerance

  • Participants underwent a home assessment by trained examiners prior to randomization.

The final randomized group consisted of 347 survivors:

  • Mean (SD) age: 40.5 (9.4) years

  • 182 participants (52.4%) male

  • 175 assigned to the intervention group

  • 172 assigned to enhanced care control

Key findings

  • After 1 year of follow-up, 45 of 173 surviving participants in the intervention group (26.0%) demonstrated reduced undertreatment of cardiovascular risk factors, compared with 52 of 172 participants (30.2%) in the enhanced care control group.

  • The primary comparative analysis yielded an odds ratio (OR) of 1.31 (95% CI, 0.84–2.05) for reduced undertreatment in the intervention group compared with controls, a difference that was not statistically significant.

  • Participants who were more engaged in the counseling process had lower odds of undertreatment at 1 year (OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.18–0.72).

  • In addition, primary care clinician documentation of cardiovascular risk improved substantially in the intervention group, with a 14.8% increase compared with only a 0.9% increase in the control group (P = 0.002).

In the long-term, survivors of childhood cancer with high cardiovascular risk, the addition of survivorship-based self-management counseling did not decrease undertreatment of hypertension, dyslipidemia, or glucose intolerance beyond the provision of CVD risk assessments to survivors and primary care providers.

Reference:

Chow EJ, Chen Y, Yasui Y, et al. Counseling and Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factor Control in Long-Term Cancer Survivors: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2026;9(2):e2555863. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.55863



Tags:    
Article Source : JAMA Network Open

Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.

NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.

Our comments section is governed by our Comments Policy . By posting comments at Medical Dialogues you automatically agree with our Comments Policy , Terms And Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Similar News