Why the study?
Despite growing awareness of treatment-related cardiac injury, the evidence base supporting preventive strategies and standardized safety assessment in cardio-oncology remains fragmented.
Can cardiovascular therapies and strategies routinely used in clinical cardiology mitigate cardiovascular toxicity related to cancer treatments?
Comparison
Pharmacological and non-pharmacological preventive interventions vs standard care or control
Design
Review of randomized controlled trials
Key result
Pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions show signals of benefit on surrogate endpoints but lack consistent reductions in major clinical cardiovascular outcomes in oncology trials.
Authors
Loading...
Evidence for preventive strategies in cardio-oncology remains fragmented; leaves open optimal cardioprotection and calls for larger standardized RCTs.
Can cardiovascular therapies and strategies routinely used in clinical cardiology mitigate cardiovascular toxicity related to cancer treatments?
Current evidence highlights the need for standardized cardiovascular safety frameworks and harmonized monitoring strategies in oncology trials to improve cardiotoxicity detection and reporting.
Iaconelli et al. (2026) conducted a review in Cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions (neurohormonal antagonists, statins, exercise) was evaluated. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions show signals of benefit on surrogate endpoints but lack consistent reductions in major clinical cardiovascular outcomes in oncology trials.