Incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation after thoracic radiotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Clin Transl OncolJun 6, 2026 (epub)
Clinical ResearchCardiologyOncology (Medical)PulmonologyOpen access

Asayel M Alsultan, Reman A AlAbdulaaly, Saud A Alyahya et al.

✦ AI-curated · Sources linked

In 30 seconds

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) after thoracic radiotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer, using observational studies. Nine retrospective cohorts were reviewed, and eight contributed to quantitative synthesis; six studies with 4410 patients and 736 events informed the primary analysis. The pooled proportion of new-onset AF was 0.14 (95%CI 0.07-0.24), with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 94.0%). Across studies, AF risk appeared associated with radiation exposure to cardiac substructures, including the sinoatrial node, pulmonary veins, and atrial structures.

Key findings

  • Six studies including 4410 patients and 736 events contributed to the primary analysis.
  • The pooled proportion of new-onset AF was 0.14 (95%CI 0.07-0.24), with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 94.0%).
  • In three studies, pooled cumulative incidence was 0.09 (95% CI, 0.00-0.84; I2 = 0.0%), but the estimate was highly imprecise.
  • AF risk appeared associated with radiation exposure to the sinoatrial node, pulmonary veins, and atrial structures.

Why it matters

AF may be a clinically relevant component of cardiac toxicity after thoracic radiotherapy for NSCLC. The pooled estimate provides an indication of its potential frequency, while the marked variation between studies and imprecision in cumulative-incidence estimates mean the evidence does not establish a reliable individual risk. Attention to cardiac substructure exposure and consistent outcome reporting may help clarify this risk.

What to keep in mind

Evidence came from retrospective cohorts and was markedly heterogeneous; the cumulative-incidence estimate was highly imprecise. The authors call for prospective validation and standardized outcome reporting.

Source

Published in Clin Transl Oncol. This summary was written by xxcode from the publication's abstract and metadata. It is not peer reviewed and is not a substitute for the original article. For clinical decisions, review the original publication.

ShareTelegramLinkedIn

AI-generated summaries may contain errors or omissions. Verify clinically important information with the original publication.

More in Cardiology

Want this personalized?

Stop searching the literature. Choose what you follow and xxcode will build your personalized medical digest.

  • Your specialties
  • Your filters and thresholds
  • Clinical Research + Case Reports, tuned separately
  • Automatic weekly delivery
  • Audio and text

Prefer listening? Personalized audio digests are available with Pro.

Stay updated for free

Get the 3 most interesting publications in one specialty each week.

Weekly email. Unsubscribe anytime.