Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer May Do Well With Simple Strategy for CV Risk
•February 13, 2026
0
Companies Mentioned
Why It Matters
The findings indicate that routine CV screening can capture most of the benefit, simplifying care pathways for a growing survivor cohort and reducing the need for resource‑intensive counseling programs.
Key Takeaways
- •Early CV screening matches counseling for adult childhood cancer survivors
- •53% had untreated hypertension; 52% dyslipidemia; 49% glucose intolerance
- •Intervention reduced systolic BP 4.6 mmHg; control lowered triglycerides
- •Documentation of cancer history improved 15% with counseling
- •Simple risk assessment may suffice; intensive counseling adds little
Pulse Analysis
Adult survivors of childhood cancer represent a uniquely vulnerable group, with roughly half a million individuals in the United States facing premature cardiovascular disease due to prior cardiotoxic therapies. Traditional guidelines often target older adults, leaving many survivors under‑screened despite a 10% prevalence of ischemic heart disease or heart failure by age 50. By integrating systematic blood pressure, lipid, and glucose testing into survivorship care, clinicians can identify hidden risk factors that would otherwise go untreated, aligning with the American Heart Association’s recent focus on oncology‑related cardiotoxicity.
The CHIIP study’s randomized design compared enhanced usual care—providing test results and referral advice—to a more intensive model that added personalized survivorship care plans and remote counseling. While both arms achieved meaningful reductions in diastolic pressure, LDL cholesterol, and triglycerides, the counseling group only showed a modest systolic pressure drop, and overall undertreatment rates improved similarly. Notably, the intervention boosted documentation of cancer history by 15%, suggesting that communication tools can improve record accuracy even if they do not dramatically alter clinical outcomes. These results imply that the primary therapeutic lever may be the early detection of abnormalities rather than the depth of counseling.
Looking ahead, the modest incremental benefit of counseling underscores the need for scalable, cost‑effective strategies that can be embedded in primary‑care workflows. Future research should explore medication optimization algorithms, digital self‑management platforms, and lifestyle programs tailored to survivor-specific risk profiles. Policymakers and health systems may consider mandating routine CV risk panels for all adult survivors, leveraging electronic health record alerts to bridge the knowledge gap identified in the study. Such systemic approaches could deliver the dual advantage of early intervention and broader reach, ultimately reducing the cardiovascular burden in this growing patient population.
Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer May Do Well With Simple Strategy for CV Risk
A randomized study found that early screening for risk factors was as helpful as screening plus one‑on‑one counseling.
Adults who survived childhood cancer don’t get any added benefit from tailored counseling beyond what’s achieved with standard CV risk assessments, new data from a randomized clinical trial suggest.
But researchers say their study, though technically negative, in fact provides some good news: a simple approach to gauging and communicating risk may well be sufficient in this population. The findings were published recently in JAMA Network Open.
Lead author Eric J. Chow, MD, MPH (Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA), told TCTMD that adult survivors of childhood cancer are probably “not the typical patients that most cardiologists or primary care providers usually think about when they’re seeing patients.”
Approximately 500,000 survivors of childhood cancer live in the US. Due to the cancer therapies they received years prior, many face early onset of cardiovascular disease—by age 50, around 10 % of those exposed to cardiotoxic treatments such as anthracyclines or chest radiotherapy will develop ischemic heart disease and/or heart failure.
“It was obviously a little bit disappointing” to see no advantage with the more intensive, customized approach, said Chow, but it seems “performing the screening and finding … abnormal results is an important first step and that’s actually much easier to do.”
It’s also possible that the study design—wherein controls received enhanced care involving early screening for CVD but no counseling—didn’t fully capture the advantage the intervention would have over usual care. Chow said that they designed their study in this way due to ethical concerns. “These were all clinically actionable lab tests, so we didn’t feel like … we could hide those results, especially since we were processing them in real time,” he explained.
Chow said that, regardless of the specific findings, the study will hopefully raise awareness among clinicians that adult survivors face outsized heart risks. The American Heart Association, in 2025, released a scientific statement exploring cardiovascular toxicity in patients treated for childhood cancer.
CHIIP Findings
The Communicating Health Information and Improving Coordination With Primary Care (CHIIP) Study, part of the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study, enrolled 347 adult survivors of childhood cancer (mean age 40.5 years; 52.4 % male) across nine US metropolitan areas between 2017 and 2020. All had been exposed to cardiotoxic cancer therapies as children.
To start, a trained home examiner tested the study participants’ blood pressure, lipid profile, and glucose and hemoglobin A1c levels. A little more than half (53.0 %) were found to have undertreated hypertension at baseline, 51.9 % had undertreated dyslipidemia, and 49.0 % had undertreated glucose intolerance. Fully 43.2 % had more than one such condition, and 10.7 % had all three.
Participants randomized to the intervention group, after that testing, were mailed a survivorship care plan (SCP) with personalized CV risk information then took part in a remote counseling session to review measurements and develop an action plan for CV risk factor management, plus a follow‑up session 4 months later. Those randomized to the control group received enhanced usual care consisting of their CV assessment results and advice to follow up with their primary‑care clinician regarding any abnormal values.
Additionally, study participants’ primary‑care clinicians received all of the materials sent to their patients.
By 1 year, 26 % of individuals in the intervention group and 30.2 % of enhanced‑care controls had less undertreatment for hypertension, dyslipidemia, and glucose intolerance, a nonsignificant between‑group difference (OR 1.31; 95 % CI 0.84‑2.05). Both groups had decreases in diastolic blood pressure and LDL cholesterol compared with baseline. The intervention group had a significant reduction in systolic blood pressure (‑4.6 mm Hg; 95 % CI ‑7.1 to ‑2.1 mm Hg), and the controls had a significant reduction in triglycerides (‑48.9 mg/dL; 95 % CI ‑91.9 to ‑5.8 mg/dL).
Among the intervention participants, greater engagement with their counseling sessions and action plan was tied to less undertreatment at 1‑year follow‑up (OR 0.31; 95 % CI 0.18‑0.72). The intervention group, compared with controls, also had better documentation of cancer history and CV risk in their health records, with improvements of 14.8 % versus 0.9 %, respectively (P = 0.002).
“There’s a possibility that down the road this might have implications” for cardiovascular health, said Chow. Earlier work has shown “a fair percentage of people who had cancer as children weren’t necessarily documented as having had cancer at all” in their medical records, he added, and those who were didn’t always have details of which cancer treatments they received at the time.
Without those details, clinicians now seeing an adult survivor might understandably not be on the alert for early cardiovascular disease. And even if they do know their patient’s history, they may not be aware of its relevance. “Most primary care providers, if they decide to screen it’s based on general population guidelines,” which tend to focus on older patients, said Chow.
Next up, he said, the research team will be looking in greater detail at how CHIIP Study participants may have had their medications adjusted based on their lab results. In a separate study, they also plan to look at how lifestyle modification might impact CV risk in adult survivors.
But Would More Be Better?
Stephanie B. Dixon, MD, MPH (St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, TN), and Bonnie Ky, MD (University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia), in an accompanying editorial, suggest several explanations for the CHIIP Study findings. Among them are that intervention and control groups each saw more improvement than was initially expected. “It is also possible that further improvement in CV risk factor control among survivors requires more intensive intervention for primary care providers, survivors, or both,” they write.
For example, patients in the CHIIP study’s intervention arm were given the SCP, Dixon and Ky note. Both the National Academy of Medicine and American Society of Clinical Oncology “recommend generation of an SCP soon after completion of cancer‑directed therapy as a tool to communicate treatment information and associated risk or need for surveillance. [But] the clinical impact of these have been mixed, and there is still little evidence that their provision improves health outcomes and care delivery for survivors.”
This lack of impact may stem from the fact that the “specific contents of SCPs and how they can be optimally delivered and utilized to improve care coordination and health outcomes for survivors still needs to be defined,” the editorialists point out.
“Research to optimize interventions for CV risk factor management that are not only effective but also scalable and easily disseminated to the diverse network of healthcare practitioners caring for adult survivors are urgently needed in this growing population,” they conclude.
0
Comments
Want to join the conversation?
Loading comments...