Key result
Despite a higher prevalence of CVD, cancer survivors had no difference in the adjusted use of CVD medications compared to individuals without cancer (OR 1.15; 95% CI 1.00-1.33).
Why the study?
Cancer and cardiovascular disease frequently coexist, but little is known about cardiovascular disease medication use in cancer survivors.
Does a history of cancer affect the use of cardiovascular disease medications and medical services compared to individuals without cancer?
Cohort (n=9,333)
Does a history of cancer affect the use of cardiovascular disease medications and medical services compared to individuals without cancer?
Odds Ratio: 1.15 (95% CI 1–1.33)
Despite a significantly higher prevalence of cardiovascular disease, cancer survivors do not have higher overall use of CVD medications compared to those without cancer, highlighting a potential gap in cardio-oncology care.
May indicate gaps in CVD pharmacotherapy for cancer survivors; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective confirmation.
BACKGROUND: Cancer and cardiovascular disease (CVD) frequently coexist, but little is known about CVD medication use in cancer survivors. The aim of this study was to compare CVD medication and medical service use between individuals with and without cancer. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study linking Australian National Health Survey 2020-2021 data from participants aged ≥ 25 years to medication dispensing, medical services, and death registry data via the Multi-Agency Data Integration Project. Logistic regression was used to compare patterns of CVD medication use between cancer and non-cancer groups and negative binomial regression to examine patterns of medical service utilisation by cancer and CVD status. RESULTS: The analysis included 1828 individuals with a history of cancer (cancer survivors) and 7505 people without cancer. Although cancer survivors had a higher prevalence of CVD (31% vs. 13%) compared to people without cancer, there was no difference in the adjusted use of CVD medications (adjusted odds ratios: 1.15; 95% CI = 1.00-1.33) between these two groups. There was, however, an increased rate of health service use in those with cancer alone (adjusted rate ratios (aRR): 1.39; 95% CI = 1.29-1.50), those with CVD alone (aRR: 1.71; 95% CI = 1.63-1.80), and those with both conditions (aRR: 2.10; 95% CI = 1.97-2.25) compared to people without cancer or CVD. CONCLUSIONS: Despite having a higher prevalence of CVD and higher health service utilisation, the overall use of CVD medication did not differ between people with and without cancer. Cancer survivors with CVD had a higher rate of medical services use compared with persons with either condition alone or neither condition. Further research should explore the underlying reasons behind these data to inform strategies to mitigate the detrimental effects of comorbid CVD in cancer.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tan et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Cancer and cardiovascular disease (n=9,333). History of cancer vs. People without cancer was evaluated on CVD medication use (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.00-1.33). Despite a higher prevalence of CVD, cancer survivors had no difference in the adjusted use of CVD medications compared to individuals without cancer (OR 1.15; 95% CI 1.00-1.33).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: