Skip to main content
. 2019 Aug 21;4(10):1007–1018. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.2952

Table. Summary of Included Studies.

Source Cancer Type, % Treatment, % Study Type CTRCD Definitiona Follow-up, mo Age, y Female, % Baseline Echo Vendor Analysis Software Vendor GLS Follow-up, mo Study Size, No. CTRCD, %
LVEF, % GLS, −%
Studies Examining the Prognostic Value of Absolute or Relative GLS Cutoff Values
Baratta et al,11 2013 Breast, 44.4; lymphoma-leukemia, 30.6; other, 25.0 Doxorubicin, 58.3; TZM, 22.2; mitoxantrone, 2.8; other, 16.7 Prospective CREC Mean: 6 Mean: 47 41.7 Mean (SD): 65 (7) Mean (SD): 20.3 (2.7)b Vivid 7 (GE) EchoPAC (GE) 3 36 19.4
Charbonnel et al,20 2017 HL, 45; NHL, 49; acute leukemia, 6 ANT, 100 Prospective ASE/EACVI Mean: 12 Median (IQR): 48 (30-64) 36 Median (IQR): 66 (62-69) Median (IQR): 21.1 (19.3-23.1) Vivid E9 (GE) EchoPAC (GE) 3 86 9.3
Gripp et al,21 2018 Breast, 100 ANT only, 83.7; ANT with TZM, 16.3 Prospective CREC Mean (SD): 12.7 (1.0) Mean: 50 100 Mean: 68 Mean: 20.4 Vivid S6 (GE) EchoPAC (GE) 3 49 10.2
Fallah-Rad et al,22 2011 Breast, 100 ANT with TZM, 12; FEC with TZM, 88 Prospective CREC Mean: 12 Mean (SD): 47 (9) 100 Mean: 63 Mean: 20.1 Vivid 7 (GE) EchoPAC (GE) 3 42 23.8
Florescu et al,23 2014 Breast, 100 ANT, 100 Prospective CREC Mean (SD): 4.2 (0.4) Mean (SD): 51 (8) 100 Mean (SD): 60 (4) Mean (SD): 23.1 (1.7) Vivid 7 Dimension (GE) EchoPAC (GE) Mean: 2.1 40 35.0
Guerra et al,24 2016 Breast, 100 CP, 62; ANT, 59; taxanes, 23; TZM, 17; 5-FU, 16c Prospective CREC/ESMO Mean: 12 Mean (SD): 56 (13) 96 Mean: 64 Mean: 19.8 Vivid 7 Pro (GE) EchoPAC (GE) 3 69 27.5
Kang et al,25 2013 NHL, 100 ANT with R-CHOP, 100 Prospective CREC Range: 4-6 Mean (SD): 54 (14) 45.3 Mean (SD): 65 (4) Mean (SD): 18.5 (1.7) iE33 (Philips) QLAB (Philips) 2 to 3 75 18.7
Milks et al,26 2018 Breast, 100 ANT only, 58.8; ANT with TZM, 41.2 Retrospective ASE/EACVI NA Mean (SD): 51 (11) 100 Mean: 59 Mean: 22.4 Several Image-Arena (TomTec) Clinical time points 183 18.0
Mornoş and Petrescu,27 2013 Breast, 44.6; NHL, 20.3; HL, 17.6; ALL, 12.1; AML, 2.7; osteosarcoma, 2.7 ANT, 100 Prospective CREC Mean: 12 Mean (SD): 51 (11) 58.1 Mean (SD): 61 (6) Mean (SD): 21.2 (2.5) Vivid 7 (GE) EchoPAC Dimension (GE) 1.5 74 13.5
Mornoş et al,28 2014 Breast, 44.1; NHL, 20.3; HL, 16.9; ALL, 13.6; AML, 3.4; osteosarcoma, 1.7 ANT, 100 Prospective CREC Mean: 8.4 Mean (SD): 51 (10) 59.3 Mean (SD): 60 (6) Mean (SD): 20.1 (3.7) Vivid 9 (GE) EchoPAC Dimension (GE) 3 59 13.6
Negishi et al,12 2013 Breast (EGFR2+), 100 TZM with or without ANT, 45.7; TZM with or without taxanes, 91.4c Prospective ≥10% Reduction in LVEF Mean: 12 Mean (SD): 50 (11) 10 Mean (SD): 62 (4) Mean (SD): 20 (2) Vivid 7 or E9 (GE) EchoPAC (GE) 6 81 29.6
Paraskevaidis et al,29 2017 BMT for NHL, 50; AML, 40; CML, 10 BMT, 100d Prospective ASE/EACVI Mean: 12 Mean (SD): 45 (11) 45 Mean (SD): 59 (4)e Mean (SD): 20 (2.2) Vivid 7 (GE) EchoPAC (GE) 1 80 17.5
Portugal et al,30 2017 Breast, 100 ANT only, 67; ANT with TZM, 33 Prospective ASE/EACVI Mean: 5.4 Mean (SD): 55 (13) 100 Mean (SD): 62 (8) Mean (SD): 20.1 (3.5) Vivid 7 or E9 (GE) EchoPAC BT12 (GE) Mean: 3.6 158 19.0
Sawaya et al,31 2012 Breast (EGFR2+), 100 ANT with taxanes and TZM, 100 Prospective CREC Mean: 15 Mean (SD): 50 (18) 100 Mean (SD): 64 (5) Mean (SD): 21 (2)b Vivid 7 or E9 (GE) EchoPAC (GE) 3 81 32.1
Sawaya et al,32 2011 Breast (EGFR2+), 100 ANT with taxanes and TZM, 100 Prospective CREC Mean: 6 Mean: 49 100 Mean (SD): 65 (6) Mean (SD): 20.5 (2.2)b Vivid 7 or E9
(GE)
EchoPAC (GE) 3 43 20.9
Tang et al,33 2017 Breast, 100 ANT, 100 Retrospective ASE/EACVI Mean: 5.1 Mean (SD): 49 (8) 100 Mean (SD): 65 (6) Mean (SD): 17.9 (2.8) Vivid E9 (GE) EchoPAC (GE) Median: 2.5 86 16.3
Studies With No GLS Cutoff Values Identified or Examined
Fei et al,34 2016 Breast, 100 ANT with TZM, 100 Retrospective ASE/EACVI Median (IQR): 17 (13-38) Mean (SD): 47 (11) 100 Mean (SD): 68 (5) Mean (SD): 22.2 (2) Vivid 7 or E9 (GE) or iE33 (Philips) 2D Cardiac Performance Analysis (TomTec) Mean: 1.5 95 20.0
Lorenzini et al,35 2013 Breast, 100 ANT with TZM, 100 Prospective CREC Mean: 7.4 Mean (SD): 53 (11) NA Mean (SD): 58 (4.8) Mean: 19.9 Vivid E9 (GE) EchoPAC (GE) 4 65 36.9
Narayan et al,36 2016 Breast, 100 ANT only, 67; TZM only, 15; ANT with TZM, 18 Prospective ≥10% reduction in LVEF from baseline to <50% after treatment initiation Median (IQR): 23 (11-29) Median (IQR): 48 (41-57) 100 Median (IQR): 54 (51-56) Median (IQR): 16.1 (17.7-14)f Vivid 7 or E9 (GE) or iE33 (Philips) 2D Cardiac Performance Analysis (TomTec) Variable depending on treatment regimen 135 15.6
Narayan et al,37 2017 Breast, 61; lymphoma, 29; leukemia, 6; sarcoma, 4 ANT only, 92; ANT with TZM, 8 Prospective ≥10% reduction in LVEF from baseline to <50% after treatment initiation Median (IQR): 7 (6-12) Mean (SD): 53 (13) 77 Mean (SD): 50 (6) Mean (SD): 14.9 (2.8)f GE, Philips, and Sequoia platforms 2D Cardiac Performance Analysis (TomTec) 6 165 18.8
Shaikh et al,38 2016 AML, 100 Mitoxantrone, 100 Retrospective CREC Mean: 6 Mean: 62 45 Mean: 65 Mean: 15.8 Vivid 7 (GE) TomTec Mean: 1.8 80 43.8

Abbreviations: ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia; AML, acute myelocytic leukemia; ANT, anthracyclines; ASE, American Society of Echocardiography; BMT, bone marrow transplant; CML, chronic myeloid leukemia; CP, cyclophosphamide; CREC, Cardiac Review and Evaluation Committee; CTRCD, cancer therapy–related cardiac dysfunction; EACVI, European Association for Cardiovascular Imaging; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; ESMO, European Society for Medical Oncology; FEC, combination of 5-FU, epirubicin, and CP; 5-FU, 5-fluorouracil; GLS, global longitudinal strain; HL, Hodgkin lymphoma; IQR, interquartile range; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; NA, not applicable; NHL, non-Hodgkin lymphoma; R-CHOP, rituximab, doxorubicin, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, and prednisone; TZM, trastuzumab.

a

Cardiotoxicity definitions: ASE/EACVI, ≥10% reduction in LVEF from baseline to <53% after treatment; CREC, ≥10% reduction in LVEF from baseline to <55% or ≥5% reduction to <55% with heart failure symptoms; ESMO, ≥20% reduction in LVEF from baseline despite normal function or to an LVEF <50%.

b

Strain measured from 2 rather than all 3 apical views.

c

Patients received different combinations of treatments, so percentages do not sum to 100.

d

In this study, 89% of patients had previously received ANT.

e

LVEF measured using 3-dimensional echocardiography.

f

The LV endocardial border was manually traced from the parasternal short-axis view at the midpapillary level and apical 4-chamber views.