The Complex Management of Atrial Fibrillation and Cancer in the COVID-19 Era: Drug Interactions, Thromboembolic Risk, and Proarrhythmia

Screening for clinically relevant drug-drug interactions between direct oral anticoagulants and antineoplastic agents: a pharmacovigilance approach

BACKGROUND

Use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with cancer remains suboptimal due to the concern regarding potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with antineoplastic treatments. However, the clinical relevance of these DDIs is unknown.

METHODS

We conducted a pharmacovigilance study of adverse event (AE) reports from the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System from 1/1/2004 to 12/31/2021. AE reports containing DOACs and antineoplastic agents with CYP3A4/P-gp inhibitory or inducing activity suggested by published pharmacokinetic studies were included (n = 36,066). The outcomes of interest were bleeding or stroke, identified by MedDRA dictionary version 25.0. We used disproportionality analyses (DPA), logistic regression models (LR), and Multi-item Gamma-Poisson Shrinker (MGPS) (Empirical Bayes Geometric Means (EBGM) and 90% credible intervals (90% CIs)) algorithms to identify the safety signal of DDIs.

RESULTS

The highest bleeding reporting rates for each drug class were the combination of DOACs with neratinib (39.08%, n = 34), tamoxifen (21.22%, n = 104), irinotecan (20.54%, n = 83), and cyclosporine (19.17%, n = 227). The highest rate of stroke was found for prednisolone (2.43%, n = 113). In the primary analysis, no signal of DDIs by the antineoplastic therapeutic class was detected by MGPS, DPA, and LR approaches. By individual antineoplastic drug, DOACs-neratinib was the only signal detected [EBGM (EB05-EB95) = 2.71 (2.03-3.54)].

CONCLUSION

No signal of DDIs between DOACs and antineoplastic agents was detected, except for DOAC-neratinib. Most DDIs between DOACs and antineoplastic agents may not be clinically relevant. The DDIs between DOACs and neratinib should be further examined in future research.

Thromboembolism profiles associated with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors: a real-world pharmacovigilance study and a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Thrombosis is the second leading cause of mortality in cancer patients. This study aimed to investigate the association between cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) and thrombosis.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A retrospective pharmacovigilance analysis based on real-world data combined with a systematic review was used to explore the thrombotic risk profiles of CDK4/6i. The study has been registered with Prospero (CRD42021284218).

RESULT

In the pharmacovigilance analysis, CDK4/6i showed a higher rate of reported venous thromboembolism (VTE) (ROR = 2.78, 95% CI = 2.64-2.92), with the highest signal for trilaciclib (ROR = 27.55, 95% CI = 13.43-56.52) but only 9 cases, followed by abemaciclib (ROR = 3.73, 95% CI = 3.19-4.37). For arterial thromboembolism (ATE), only ribociclib increased the reporting rate (ROR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.91-2.41). In the meta-analysis, palbociclib, abemaciclib, and trilaciclib all increased the risk of VTE (OR = 2.23, 3.17, and 3.90). In the subgroup analysis, only abemaciclib increased the risk of ATE (OR = 2.11, 95% CI = 1.12-3.99)    .

CONCLUSIONS

CDK4/6i had different profiles of thromboembolism. Palbociclib, abemaciclib, or trilaciclib increased the risk of VTE. Ribociclib and abemaciclib showed a weak association with the risk of ATE.

Application of Amiodarone and Cedilan in the Treatment of Patients with Arrhythmia after Esophageal and Lung Cancer

Objective

To explore the effect of amiodarone and cedilan in the treatment of patients with arrhythmia after esophageal and lung cancer.

Methods

The data of 60 patients with postoperative complications of arrhythmias after esophageal and lung cancer from January 2018 to July 2021 were retrospectively analyzed and divided into an observation group (n = 30) and control group (n = 30) according to the random number grouping principle. The former group was treated with amiodarone, and the latter group received cedilan.

Results

The effective rate of treatment was significantly higher in the observation group than the control group (P < 0.05). The observation group had the drug onset time obviously shorter than the control group (P < 0.001). The average ventricular rate after treatment in the observation group was remarkably lower than the control group (P < 0.001). The observation group exhibited obviously better cardiac function after treatment as compared to the control group (P < 0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions in the observation group was notably lower than the control group (P < 0.05). Moreover, the observation group had less stress after treatment than the control group (P < 0.001). The blood pressure level of the observation group after treatment was significantly better than the control group (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Amiodarone can relieve stress in patients with arrhythmia following esophageal and lung cancer surgery, stabilize blood pressure, and mitigate arrhythmia symptoms. Our findings are worthy of promotion and application in clinic.

Strategies and Tools for Supporting the Appropriateness of Drug Use in Older People

Through this structured review of the published literature, we aimed to provide an up-to-date description of strategies (human-related) and tools (mainly from the digital field) facilitating the appropriateness of drug use in older adults. The evidence of each strategy and tool’s effectiveness and sustainability largely derives from local and heterogeneous experiences, with contrasting results. As a general framework, three main steps should be considered in implementing measures to improve appropriateness: prescription, acceptance by the patient, and continuous monitoring of adherence and risk-benefit profile. Each step needs efforts from specific actors (physicians, patients, caregivers, healthcare professionals) and dedicated supporting tools. Moreover, how to support the appropriateness also strictly depends on the particular setting of care (hospital, ambulatory or primary care, nursing home, long-term care) and available economic resources. Therefore, it is urgent assigning to each approach proposed in the literature the following characteristics: level of effectiveness, strength of evidence, setting of implementation, needed resources, and issues for its sustainability.

Identification of Drug Interaction Adverse Events in Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

During the COVID-19 pandemic, urgent clinical management of patients has mainly included drugs currently administered for other diseases, referred to as repositioned drugs. As a result, some of these drugs have proved to be not only ineffective but also harmful because of adverse events associated with drug-drug interactions (DDIs).

OBJECTIVE

To identify DDIs that led to adverse clinical outcomes and/or adverse drug reactions in patients with COVID-19 by systematically reviewing the literature and assessing the value of drug interaction checkers in identifying such events.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

After identification of the drugs used during the COVID-19 pandemic, the drug interaction checkers Drugs.com, COVID-19 Drug Interactions, LexiComp, Medscape, and WebMD were consulted to analyze theoretical DDI-associated adverse events in patients with COVID-19 from March 1, 2020, through February 28, 2022. A systematic literature review was performed by searching the databases PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane for articles published from March 1, 2020, through February 28, 2022, to retrieve articles describing actual adverse events associated with DDIs. The drug interaction checkers were consulted again to evaluate their potential to assess such events.

FINDINGS

The DDIs identified in the reviewed articles involved 46 different drugs. In total, 575 DDIs for 58 drug pairs (305 associated with at least 1 adverse drug reaction) were reported. The drugs most involved in DDIs were lopinavir and ritonavir. Of the 6917 identified studies, 20 met the inclusion criteria. These studies, which enrolled 1297 patients overall, reported 115 DDI-related adverse events: 15 (26%) were identifiable by all tools analyzed, 29 (50%) were identifiable by at least 1 of them, and 14 (24%) remained nonidentifiable.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The main finding of this systematic review is that the use of drug interaction checkers could have identified several DDI-associated adverse drug reactions, including severe and life-threatening events. Both the interactions between the drugs used to treat COVID-19 and between the COVID-19 drugs and those already used by the patients should be evaluated.

Cardio-Oncology Drug Interactions: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

In the cardio-oncology population, drug interactions are of particular importance given the complex pharmacological profile, narrow therapeutic index, and inherent risk of therapies used to manage cardiovascular disease and cancer. Drug interactions may be beneficial or detrimental to the desired therapeutic effect. Clinicians in both cardiology and oncology should be cognizant of these potential drug-drug interactions that may reduce the efficacy or safety of either cardiovascular or cancer therapies. These risks can be mitigated through increased recognition of potential drug-drug interaction, use of alternative medications when possible, and careful monitoring. This scientific statement provides clinicians with an overview of pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions in patients with cancer exposed to common cardiovascular and cancer medications.

Atrial fibrillation in older adults with cancer

Cancer and atrial fibrillation (AF) are common co-morbid conditions in older adults. Both cancer and cancer treatment increase the risk of developing new AF which increases morbidity and mortality. Heart rate and rhythm control along with anticoagulation therapy remain the mainstay of treatment of AF in older adults with both cancer and AF. Adjustments to the treatment may be necessary because of drug interactions with concurrent chemotherapy. Cancer and old age increase the risk of both, thromboembolism and bleeding. The risk of these complications is further enhanced by concomitant cancer therapy, frailty, poor nutrition status and, coexisting geriatric syndromes. Therefore, careful attention needs to be given to the risks and benefits of using anticoagulant medications. This review focuses on the management of AF in older patients with cancer, including at the end-of-life care.

The Cytokine Release Syndrome and/or the Proinflammatory Cytokines as Underlying Mechanisms of Downregulation of Drug Metabolism and Drug Transport: A Systematic Review of the Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Victim Drugs of this Drug-Disease Interaction Under Different Clinical Conditions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

An ever-growing body of evidence supports the impact of cytokine modulation on the patient's phenotypic drug response. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze the clinical studies that assessed the pharmacokinetics of victim drugs of this drug-disease interaction in the presence of different scenarios of cytokine modulation in comparison with baseline conditions.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review by searching the PubMed-MEDLINE database from inception until February 2022 to retrieve prospective and/or retrospective observational studies, population pharmacokinetic studies, phase I studies, and/or case series/reports that investigated the impact of cytokine modulation on the pharmacokinetic behavior of victim drugs. Only studies providing quantitative pharmacokinetic data of victim drugs by comparing normal status versus clinical conditions with documented cytokine modulation or by assessing the influence of anti-inflammatory biological agents on metabolism and/or transport of victim drugs were included.

RESULTS

Overall, 26 studies were included. Rheumatoid arthritis (6/26; 23.1%) and sepsis (5/26; 19.2%) were the two most frequently investigated pro-inflammatory clinical scenarios. The victim drug most frequently assessed was midazolam (14/26; 53.8%; as a probe for cytochrome P450 [CYP] 3A4). Cytokine modulation showed a moderate inhibitory effect on CYP3A4-mediated metabolism (area under the concentration-time curve increase and/or clearance decrease between 1.98-fold and 2.59-fold) and a weak-to-moderate inhibitory effect on CYP1A2, CYP2C9, and CYP2C19-mediated metabolism (in the area under the concentration-time curve increase or clearance decrease between 1.29-fold and 1.97-fold). Anti-interleukin-6 agents showed remarkable activity in counteracting downregulation of CYP3A4-mediated activity (increase in the area under the concentration-time curve between 1.75-fold and 2.56-fold).

CONCLUSIONS

Cytokine modulation may cause moderate or weak-to-moderate downregulation of metabolism/transport of victim drugs, and this may theoretically have relevant clinical consequences.

ANMCO POSITION PAPER: cardio-oncology in the COVID era (CO and CO)

The COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease have confirmed the particular vulnerability of these populations. Indeed, not only a higher risk of contracting the infection has been reported but also an increased occurrence of a more severe course and unfavourable outcome. Beyond the direct consequences of COVID-19 infection, the pandemic has an enormous impact on global health systems. Screening programmes and non-urgent tests have been postponed; clinical trials have suffered a setback. Similarly, in the area of cardiology care, a significant decline in STEMI accesses and an increase in cases of late presenting heart attacks with increased mortality and complication rates have been reported. Health care systems must therefore get ready to tackle the 'rebound effect' that will likely show a relative increase in the short- and medium-term incidence of diseases such as heart failure, myocardial infarction, arrhythmias, and cardio- and cerebrovascular complications. Scientific societies are taking action to provide general guidance and recommendations aimed at mitigating the unfavourable outcomes of this pandemic emergency. Cardio-oncology, as an emerging discipline, is more flexible in modulating care pathways and represents a beacon of innovation in the development of multi-specialty patient management. In the era of the COVID-19 pandemic, cardio-oncology has rapidly modified its clinical care pathways and implemented flexible monitoring protocols that include targeted use of cardiac imaging, increased use of biomarkers, and telemedicine systems. The goal of these strategic adjustments is to minimize the risk of infection for providers and patients while maintaining standards of care for the treatment of oncologic and cardiovascular diseases. The aim of this document is to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on the management of cardio-oncologic patients with the-state-of-the-art knowledge about severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in order to optimize medical strategies during and after the pandemic.

The role of senescence in the pathogenesis of atrial fibrillation: A target process for health improvement and drug development

Cellular senescence is a state of growth arrest that occurs after cells encounter various stresses. Senescence contributes to tumour suppression, embryonic development, and wound healing. It impacts on the pathology of various diseases by secreting inflammatory chemokines, immune modulators and other bioactive factors. These secretory biosignatures ultimately cause inflammation, tissue fibrosis, immunosenescence and many ageing-related diseases such as atrial fibrillation (AF). Because the molecular mechanisms underpinning AF development remain unclear, current treatments are suboptimal and have serious side effects. In this review, we summarize recent results describing the role of senescence in AF. We propose that senescence factors induce AF and have a causative role. Hence, targeting senescence and its secretory phenotype may attenuate AF.

Janus Kinase Inhibitors and Coronavirus Disease (COVID)-19: Rationale, Clinical Evidence and Safety Issues

We are witnessing a paradigm shift in drug development and clinical practice to fight the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), and a number of clinical trials have been or are being testing various pharmacological approaches to counteract viral load and its complications such as cytokine storm. However, data on the effectiveness of antiviral and immune therapies are still inconclusive and inconsistent. As compared to other candidate drugs to treat COVID-19, Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors, including baricitinib and ruxolitinib, possess key pharmacological features for a potentially successful repurposing: convenient oral administration, favorable pharmacokinetic profile, multifunctional pharmacodynamics by exerting dual anti-inflammatory and anti-viral effects. Baricitinib, originally approved for rheumatoid arthritis, received Emergency Use Authorization in November 2020 by the Food and Drug Administration in combination with remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients ≥ 2 years old who require supplemental oxygen, invasive mechanical ventilation, or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. By July 2021, the European Medicines Agency is also expected to issue the opinion on whether or not to extend its use in hospitalised patients from 10 years of age who require supplemental oxygen. Ruxolitinib, approved for myelofibrosis, was prescribed in patients with COVID-19 within an open-label Emergency Expanded Access Plan. This review will address key milestones in the discovery and use of JAK inhibitors in COVID-19, from artificial intelligence to current clinical evidence, including real world experience, and critically appraise emerging safety issues, namely infections, thrombosis, and liver injury. An outlook to ongoing studies (ClinicalTrials.gov) and unpublished pharmacovigilance data is also offered.

Literature-based considerations regarding organizing and performing cardiac surgery against the backdrop of the coronavirus pandemic

BACKGROUND

The ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic presents challenges for surgeons of all disciplines, including cardiologists. The volume of cardiac surgery cases has to comply with the mandatory constraints of healthcare capacities. The treatment of Covid-19-positive patients must also be considered. Unfortunately, no scientific evidence is available on this issue. Therefore, this study aimed to offer some consensus-based considerations, derived from available scientific papers, regarding the organization and performance of cardiac surgery against the backdrop of the Covid-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Key recommendations were extracted from recent literature concerning cardiac surgery. RESULTSː Reducing elective cardiac procedures should be based on frequent clinical assessment of patients on the waiting list (every one or two weeks) and the current local status of the Covid-19 pandemic. Screening tests at admission for every patient are broadly recommended. Where appropriate, alternative treatment methods can be considered, including percutaneous techniques and minimally invasive surgery, if performed by experienced cardiac surgery teams.

CONCLUSIONS

There is little evidence on the strategies to organize cardiac surgery in the Covid-19 pandemic. Most authors agree on reducing elective operations based on patients' clinical condition and the status of the Covid-19 pandemic. Admission screenings and the use of percutaneous or minimally invasive approaches should be preferred to reduce in-hospital stays.

Drug-Drug Interactions and Prescription Appropriateness at Hospital Discharge: Experience with COVID-19 Patients

BACKGROUND

Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are often elderly, with comorbidities, and receiving polypharmacy, all of which are known factors for potentially severe drug-drug interactions (DDIs) and the prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the risk of DDIs and PIMs in COVID-19 patients at hospital discharge.

METHOD

Patients with a proven diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection who were hospitalized between 21 February and 30 April 2020, treated with at least two drugs, and with available information regarding pharmacological treatments upon admission and at discharge were considered. The appropriateness of drug prescriptions was assessed using INTERcheck®.

RESULTS

A significant increase in the prescription of proton pump inhibitors and heparins was found when comparing admission with hospital discharge (from 24 to 33% [p < 0.05] and from 1 to 17% [p < 0.01], respectively). The increased prescription of heparins at discharge resulted in a highly significant increase in the potentially severe DDIs mediated by this class of drugs. 51% of COVID-19 patients aged > 65 years had at least one PIM upon admission, with an insignificant increment at discharge (58%).

CONCLUSION

An increased number of prescribed drugs was observed in COVID-19 patients discharged from our hospital. The addition of heparins is appropriate according to the current literature, while the use of proton pump inhibitors is more controversial. Particular attention should be paid to the risk of bleeding complications linked to heparin-based DDIs.

Clinically Significant Drug Interactions Between Psychotropic Agents and Repurposed COVID-19 Therapies

As many patients with underlying psychiatric disorders may be infected with COVID-19, and COVID-19-affected subjects may frequently experience a new onset of psychiatric manifestations, concomitant use of psychotropic medications and COVID-19 therapies is expected to be highly likely and raises concerns of clinically relevant drug interactions. In this setting, four major mechanisms responsible for drug interactions involving psychotropic agents and COVID-19 therapies may be identified: (1) pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions mainly acting on cytochrome P450; (2) pharmacodynamic drug-drug interactions resulting in additive or synergistic toxicity; (3) drug-disease interactions according to stage and severity of the disease; and (4) pharmacogenetic issues associated with polymorphisms of cytochrome P450 isoenzymes. In this review, we summarise the available literature on relevant drug interactions between psychotropic agents and COVID-19 therapies, providing practical clinical recommendations and potential management strategies according to severity of illness and clinical scenario.