Cardio-oncology & otherMeta-analysis
Risk prediction models for cancer therapy related cardiac dysfunction in patients with cancer and cancer survivors: systematic review and meta-analysis
- Systematic review and meta-analysis
- random effects meta-analyses
Authors' conclusion
Existing prediction models for CTRCD need additional evidence before widespread clinical adoption.
Study context
- Population
- Prediction models for cancer therapy related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD) in young people or adults with cancer or cancer survivors treated with systemic antineoplastic agents56 studies
- Comparison
- Low risk vs Medium risk vs High risk vs Very high risk
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Prediction models for CTRCD: development, validation and performance
- Developed models
- 51
- Externally validated models
- 12
- Developed in adults
- n=34/51, 67%
- Discrimination and calibration reported, developed models
- 13/51 (25%)
- Discrimination and calibration reported, external validations
- 6/44 (14%)
- Developed models that underwent external validation
- 12/51 (24%)
Further pooled results
HFA-ICOS tool, breast cancer treated with anti-HER2 agents · observed pooled event rates
- Heart Failure Association-International Cardio-Oncology Society (HFA-ICOS) tool, breast cancer treated with anti-HER2 agents — Pooled C statistic
- 0.60 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.68)
- HFA-ICOS tool, breast cancer treated with anti-HER2 agents: HFA-ICOS validated 11 times
HFA-ICOS tool, breast cancer treated with anti-HER2 agents
- HFA-ICOS consistently underestimated risk across external validations
Original publication
Risk prediction models for cancer therapy related cardiac dysfunction in patients with cancer and cancer survivors: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. Published 23 September 2025. doi:10.1136/bmj-2025-084062
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it