Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Oncology
Volume 2015, Article ID 391848, 4 pages
Research Article

An International Survey of Health Care Providers Involved in the Management of Cancer Patients Exposed to Cardiotoxic Therapy

1The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1H 8L6
2Vanderbilt Heart and Vascular Institute, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
3The Ottawa Hospital Division of Cardiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1H 8L6

Received 18 October 2014; Accepted 29 December 2014

Academic Editor: Bruno Vincenzi

Copyright © 2015 Jeffrey Sulpher et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


Cardiotoxicity is the second leading cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer survivors. The objective of this international cardiac oncology survey was to gain a better understanding of current knowledge and practice patterns among HCPs involved in the management of cancer patients exposed to potentially cardiotoxic drugs. Between 2012 and 2013, we conducted an email-based survey of HCPs involved in the management of cardiac disease in cancer patients. 393 survey responses were received, of which 77 were from Canadian respondents. The majority of respondents were cardiologists (47%), followed closely by medical oncologists. The majority of respondents agreed that cardiac issues are important to cancer patients (97%). However, only 36% of total respondents agreed with an accepted definition of cardiotoxicity. While 78% of respondents felt that cardiac medications are protective during active cancer treatment, only 51% would consider prescribing these medications up-front in cancer patients. Although results confirm a high level of concern for cardiac safety, there continues to be a lack of consensus on the definition of cardiotoxicity and a discrepancy in clinical practice between cardiologists and oncologists. These differences in opinion require resolution through more effective research collaboration and formulation of evidence-based guidelines.