Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2025 Mar;132(4):311-325.
doi: 10.1038/s41416-024-02888-0. Epub 2024 Nov 6.

Cardiotoxicity following thoracic radiotherapy for lung cancer

Affiliations
Review

Cardiotoxicity following thoracic radiotherapy for lung cancer

Gerard M Walls et al. Br J Cancer. 2025 Mar.

Erratum in

Abstract

Radiotherapy is the standard of care treatment for unresectable NSCLC, combined with concurrent chemotherapy and adjuvant immunotherapy. Despite technological advances in radiotherapy planning and delivery, the risk of damage to surrounding thoracic tissues remains high. Cardiac problems, including arrhythmia, heart failure and ischaemic events, occur in 20% of patients with lung cancer who undergo radiotherapy. As survival rates improve incrementally for this cohort, minimising the cardiovascular morbidity of RT is increasingly important. Problematically, the reporting of cardiac endpoints has been poor in thoracic radiotherapy clinical trials, and retrospective studies have been limited by the lack of standardisation of nomenclature and endpoints. How baseline cardiovascular profile and cardiac substructure radiation dose distribution impact the risk of cardiotoxicity is incompletely understood. As Thoracic Oncology departments seek to expand the indications for radiotherapy, and as the patient cohort becomes older and more comorbid, there is a pressing need for cardiotoxicity to be comprehensively characterised with sophisticated oncology, physics and cardio-oncology evaluations. This review synthesises the evidence base for cardiotoxicity in conventional radiotherapy, focusing on lung cancer, including current data, unmet clinical needs, and future scientific directions.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: GW – Speaker honorarium (Astra Zeneca). CB – no relevant relationships to declare. JM – Research support (Myocardial Solutions, Abbott Laboratories), modest consulting fees (Alnylam, Altathera, Bridgebio, Pfizer and Race Oncology). SR – no relevant relationships to declare. GH – Research support to institution (Varian Medical Systems, ViewRay, Mevion Medical Systems, Siemens Helathineers), consulting fees (Varian), Patents/Royalties/IP (pending patent, Varian Medical Systems). PS – Speaker honoraria (Varian Medical Systems). CR – Research support to institution (Merck, Varian Medical Systems), consulting fees (Varian Medical Systems, AstraZeneca, EMD Serono, Quantaras), Patents/Royalties/IP (Noninvasive imaging and treatment system for cardiac arrhythmias WO 2017078757 A1; U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/598, 162 Entitled System and method for determining segments for ablation), Leadership (Radialogica, EmpNia), Stock/Ownership (Radialogica, Quantaras, EmpNia).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Categorisation of cardiovascular factors and study endpoints in radiation heart disease particularly in the setting of lung cancer.
a is a summary schema for how critical cardiovascular factors can be considered temporally. b displays the positive and negative characteristics of commonly employed study designs. (MI = myocardial infarction; IHD = ischaemic heart disease).
Fig. 2
Fig. 2. Summary of published dosimetric relationships for cardiac endpoints in lung radiotherapy studies.
The three-dimensional reconstruction of autosegmented cardiac substructures from a lung cancer radiotherapy plan, annotated with the literature on post-radiotherapy cardiac event endpoints by substructure, and proposed dose constraints where available (*no dose threshold reported; Vxx = percentage volume receiving at least XX Gy; Dmax = maximum dose; Dmean = mean dose).
Fig. 3
Fig. 3. Suggested priorities at each stage of the patient journey for both clinicians and researchers.
(CVRF = cardiovascular risk factor; ECD = established cardiac disease; ECG = electrocardiogram; RIHD = radiation-induced heart disease; PRV = planning organ at risk volume).

References

    1. Patz EF, Pinsky P, Gatsonis C, Sicks JRD, Kramer BS, Tammemägi MC, et al. Overdiagnosis in low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:269–74. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Siegel RL, Giaquinto AN, Jemal A Cancer statistics, 2024. CA Cancer J Clin 2024; 74. 10.3322/CAAC.21820. - PubMed
    1. Cancer Research UK. A cancer of substantial unmet need: why we’re making lung cancer a priority. 2015. https://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2015/07/20/a-cancer-of-substantial-unm... (accessed 3 Dec2022).
    1. Nygård L, Vogelius IR, Fischer BM, Kjær A, Langer SW, Aznar MC, et al. A Competing Risk Model of First Failure Site after Definitive Chemoradiation Therapy for Locally Advanced Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2018;13:559–67. - PubMed
    1. Bradley JD, Hu C, Komaki RR, Masters GA, Blumenschein GR, Schild SE, et al. Long-term results of NRG oncology RTOG 0617: Standard-versus high-dose chemoradiotherapy with or without cetuximab for unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38:706–14. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms