Acute myocardial infarction treatments and outcomes in 6.5 million patients with a current or historical diagnosis of cancer in the USA

Comparative analysis of cardiogenic shock outcomes in acute myocardial infarction with polyvascular disease

Background

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is the leading cause of mortality in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients, especially in those with vascular disease. This study aimed to assess the association between extent of polyvascular disease and the in hospital management and outcome of patients with AMI-induced CS.

Method

Using the National Inpatient Sample from 2016 to 2019, adult patients with AMI and CS with known vascular disease were identified and stratified by number of diseased vascular beds and into STEMI and NSTEMI subgroups. The study assessed in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), mortality, acute CVA and major bleeding, as well as invasive management by number of diseased vascular beds.

Results

Out of 136,245 patients, 57.9 % attributed to STEMI and 42.1 % to NSTEMI. The study revealed that the likelihood of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) [(aOR for 2 beds 0.94, CI 0.91-0.96, p-value < 0.001; 3 beds 1.0, CI 0.94-1.06, p-value 0.96)] and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) [(aOR for 2 beds 0.66, CI 0.64-0.69, p-value < 0.001; 3 beds 0.76, CI 0.71-0.81, p-value < 0.001)] decreased as the number of diseased vascular sites increased. The study also highlighted a direct dose-response relationship between the number of diseased vascular beds and major adverse outcomes, including MACCE, mortality and acute CVA, underscoring the prognostic significance of polyvascular disease in this patient population.

Conclusion

The study demonstrated that polyvascular disease significantly worsens AMI-induced CS outcomes. The findings highlight the importance of early identification and aggressive management of polyvascular disease in these patients. Further research is needed to develop targeted treatment strategies for this high-risk population.

[Translation into French and republication of: "Cancer-related arterial thromboembolic events"]

Cancer is associated with a hypercoagulable state and is a well-known independent risk factor for venous thromboembolism, whereas the association between cancer and arterial thromboembolism is less well established. Arterial thromboembolism, primarily defined as myocardial infarction or stroke is significantly more frequent in patients with cancer, independently of vascular risk factors and associated with a three-fold increase in the risk of mortality. Patients with brain cancer, lung cancer, colorectal cancer and pancreatic cancer have the highest relative risk of developing arterial thromboembolism. Antithrombotic treatments should be used with caution due to the increased risk of haemorrhage, as specified in current practice guidelines.

Sudden cardiac arrest in patients with cancer in the general population: insights from the Paris-SDEC registry

BACKGROUND

Data on the management of patients with cancer presenting with sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) are scarce. We aimed to assess the characteristics and outcomes of SCA according to cancer history.

METHODS

Prospective, population-based registry including every out-of-hospital SCA in adults in Paris and its suburbs, between 2011 and 2019, with a specific focus on patients with cancer.

RESULTS

Out of 4069 patients who had SCA admitted alive in hospital, 207 (5.1%) had current or past medical history of cancer. Patients with cancer were older (69.2 vs 59.3 years old, p<0.001), more often women (37.2% vs 28.0%, p=0.006) with more frequent underlying cardiovascular disease (41.1% vs 32.5%, p=0.01). SCA happened more often with a non-shockable rhythm (62.6% vs 43.1%, p<0.001) with no significant difference regarding witness presence and cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) performed. Cardiac causes were less frequent among patients with cancer (mostly acute coronary syndromes, 25.5% vs 46.8%, p<0.001) and had more respiratory causes (pulmonary embolism and hypoxaemia in 34.2% vs 10.8%, p<0.001). Still, no difference regarding in-hospital survival was found after SCA in patients with cancer versus other patients (26.2% vs 29.8%, respectively, p=0.27). Public location, CPR by witness and shockable rhythm were independent predictors of in-hospital survival after SCA in the cancer group.

CONCLUSIONS

One in 20 SCA occurs in patients with a history of cancer, yet with fewer cardiac causes than in patients who are cancer-free. Still, in-hospital outcomes remain similar even in patients with known cancer. Cancer history should therefore not compromise the initiation of resuscitation in the context of SCA.

Antithrombotic Therapy in Cancer Patients with Cardiovascular Diseases: Daily Practice Recommendations by the Hemostasis Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO) and the Society for Thrombosis and Hemostasis Research (GTH e.V.)

Active cancer by itself but also chemotherapy is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and especially coronary artery disease (CAD) and atrial fibrillation (AF). The frequency of CVD, CAD, and AF varies depending on comorbidities (particularly in older patients), cancer type, and stage, as well as the anticancer therapeutic being taken. Many reports exist for anticancer drugs being associated with CVD, CAD, and AF, but robust data are often lacking. Because of this, each patient needs an individual structured approach concerning thromboembolic and bleeding risk, drug-drug interactions, as well as patient preferences to evaluate the need for anticoagulation therapy and targeting optimal symptom control. Interruption of specific cancer therapy should be avoided to reduce the potential risk of cancer progression. Nevertheless, additional factors like thrombocytopenia and anticoagulation in the elderly and frail patient with cancer cause additional challenges which need to be addressed in daily clinical management. Therefore, the aim of these recommendations is to summarize the available scientific data on antithrombotic therapy (both antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy) in cancer patients with CVD and in cases of missing data providing guidance for optimal careful decision-making in daily routine.

Impact of Cancer, Inflammation, and No Standard Risk Factors in Patients With Myocardial Infarction

Background

The lack of standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRFs), including hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and smoking, is reportedly associated with poor outcomes in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Among patients with no SMuRFs, cancer and chronic systemic inflammatory diseases (CSIDs) may be major etiologies of AMI.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with cancer, CSIDs, and no SMuRFs in AMI.

Methods

This multicenter registry included 2,480 patients with AMI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were divided into 4 groups: active cancer, CSIDs, no SMuRFs, and those remaining. The coprimary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major bleeding events, during hospitalization and after discharge.

Results

Of 2,480 patients, 104 (4.2%), 94 (3.8%), and 120 (4.8%) were grouped as cancer, CSIDs, and no SMuRFs, respectively. During the hospitalization, MACE rates were highest in the no SMuRFs group, followed by the cancer, CSIDs, and SMuRFs groups (22.5% vs 15.4% vs 12.8% vs 10.2%; P < 0.001), whereas bleeding risks were highest in the cancer group, followed by the no SMuRFs, CSIDs, and SMuRFs groups (15.4% vs 10.8% vs 7.5% vs 4.9%; P < 0.001). After discharge, the rates of MACE (33.3% vs 22.7% vs 11.3% vs 9.2%; P < 0.001) and bleeding events (8.6% vs 6.7% vs 3.8% vs 2.9%; P = 0.01) were higher in the cancer group than in the CSIDs, no SMuRFs, and SMuRFs groups.

Conclusions

Patients with active cancer, CSIDs, and no SMuRFs differently had worse outcomes after AMI in ischemic and bleeding endpoints during hospitalization and/or after discharge, compared with those with SMuRFs.

Impact of breast-, gastrointestinal-, and lung cancer on prognosis in patients with first-time pulmonary embolism: A Danish nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is described as a prognostic factor in patients with cancer however, the prognostic impact of PE remains unknown. This study investigated, the 1-year prognosis following PE in patients with breast-, gastrointestinal-, or lung cancer stratified by cancer status.

METHODS

All Danish patients with first-time PE from 2008 to 2018 were included. Cancer status was categorized as no cancer, history of cancer, non-active cancer and active cancer. Unadjusted and age-stratified 1-year risk of death was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. Cause of death was reported using the Aalen-Johansen method.

RESULTS

Of 35,679 patients with PE, 18% had a breast-, gastrointestinal-, or lung cancer. Patients with cancer were older compared with no cancer (69.8 years [IQR: 56.2-79.8]). One-year risk of death (95% confidence interval) for active breast-, gastrointestinal-, and lung cancer was 49.5% (44.0%-54.9%), 75.0% (72.5%-77.4%) and 80.1% (78.0%-82.3%) respectively, compared with 18.9% (18.4%-19.3%) for no cancer. Age-stratified analysis revealed no association with increasing age in non-active lung cancer and all active cancers. Further, non-cardiovascular death accounted for an increasing proportion by cancer status (no cancer < history of cancer < non-active cancer < active cancer).

CONCLUSIONS

One-year risk of death was dependent on both cancer type and status; no association with age was found for patients with active cancers. Non-cardiovascular death was leading in non-active and active cancers. Thus, the occurrence of first-time PE could be regarded as a marker of cancer severity for patients with breast-, gastrointestinal-, and lung cancer.

Cancer history and physical function in patients with cardiovascular disease

Both cancer and cardiovascular disease (CVD) cause skeletal muscle mass loss, thereby increasing the likelihood of a poor prognosis. We investigated the association between cancer history and physical function and their combined association with prognosis in patients with CVD. We retrospectively reviewed 3,796 patients with CVD (median age: 70 years; interquartile range [IQR]: 61-77 years) who had undergone physical function tests (gait speed and 6-minute walk distance [6MWD]) at discharge. We performed multiple linear regression analyses to assess potential associations between cancer history and physical function. Moreover, Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate prognostic associations in four groups of patients categorized by the absence or presence of cancer history and of high or low physical function. Multiple regression analyses showed that cancer history was significantly and independently associated with a lower gait speed and 6MWD performance. A total of 610 deaths occurred during the follow-up period (median: 3.1 years; IQR: 1.4-5.4 years). The coexistence of low physical function and cancer history in patients with CVD was associated with a significantly higher mortality risk, even after adjusting for covariates (cancer history/low gait speed, hazard ratio [HR]: 1.93, P < 0.001; and cancer history/low 6MWD, HR: 1.61, P = 0.002). Cancer history is associated with low physical function in patients with CVD, and the combination of both factors is associated with a poor prognosis.

Socioeconomic and Ethnic Disparities in the Process of Care and Outcomes Among Cancer Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome

Cancer and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are the leading causes of morbidity and mortality globally, with many shared risk factors. There are several challenges to the management of patients with cancer presenting with ACS, owing to their higher baseline risk profile, the complexities of their cancer-related therapies and prognosis, and their higher risk of adverse outcomes after ACS. Although previous studies have demonstrated disparities in the care of both cancer and ACS among patients from ethnic minorities and socioeconomic deprivation, there is limited evidence around the magnitude of such disparities specifically in cancer patients presenting with ACS. This review summarises the current literature on differences in prevalence and management of ACS among patients with cancer from ethnic minorities and socioeconomically deprived backgrounds, as well as the gaps in evidence around the care of this high-risk population and potential solutions.

The new ESC acute coronary syndrome guideline and its impact in the CPU and emergency department setting

The new guideline on acute coronary syndrome (ACS) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) replaces two separate guidelines on ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation (NSTE) ACS. This change of paradigm reflects the experts view that the ACS is a continuum, starting with unstable angina and ending in cardiogenic shock or cardiac arrest due to severe myocardial ischemia. Secondary, partly non-atherosclerotic-caused myocardial infarctions ("type 2") are not integrated in this concept.With respect to acute care in the setting of emergency medicine and the chest pain unit structures, the following new aspects have to be taken into account:1. New procedural approach as "think A.C.S." meaning "abnormal ECG," "clinical context," and "stable patient"2. New recommendation regarding a holistic approach for frail patients3. Revised recommendations regarding imaging and timing of invasive strategy in suspected NSTE-ACS4. Revised recommendations for antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy in STEMI5. Revised recommendations for cardiac arrest and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest6. Revised recommendations for in-hospital management (starting in the CPU/ED) and ACS comorbid conditionsIn summary, the changes are mostly gradual and are not based on extensive new evidence, but more on focused and healthcare process-related considerations.

Emergent Coronary Thrombectomy for Acute Myocardial Infarction Immediately Following Craniotomy with Tumor Resection

The management of perioperative acute myocardial infarction (AMI) following oncologic neurosurgery requires balancing competing risks of myocardial ischemia and postoperative bleeding. There are limited human data to establish the safest timing of antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapy following neurosurgical procedures. For patients with malignancy experiencing AMI in the acute postoperative period, staged percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with upfront coronary aspiration thrombectomy followed by delayed completion PCI may offer an opportunity for myocardial salvage while minimizing postoperative bleeding risks. CYP2C19 genotyping and platelet aggregation studies can help confirm adequate platelet inhibition once antiplatelet therapy is resumed.

Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease: The Conjoined Twins

Cancer and cardiovascular disease are the two most common causes of death worldwide. As the fields of cardiovascular medicine and oncology continue to expand, the area of overlap is becoming more prominent demanding dedicated attention and individualized patient care. We have come to realize that both fields are inextricably intertwined in several aspects, so much so that the mere presence of one, with its resultant downstream implications, has an impact on the other. Nonetheless, cardiovascular disease and cancer are generally approached independently. The focus that is granted to the predominant pathological entity (either cardiovascular disease or cancer), does not allow for optimal medical care for the other. As a result, ample opportunities for improvement in overall health care are being overlooked. Herein, we hope to shed light on the interconnected relationship between cardiovascular disease and cancer and uncover some of the unintentionally neglected intricacies of common cardiovascular therapeutics from an oncologic standpoint.

Ischaemic heart disease in patients with cancer

Cardiologists are encountering a growing number of cancer patients with ischaemic heart disease (IHD). Several factors account for the interrelationship between these two conditions, in addition to improving survival rates in the cancer population. Established cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, such as hypercholesterolaemia and obesity, predispose to both IHD and cancer, through specific mechanisms and via low-grade, systemic inflammation. This latter is also fuelled by clonal haematopoiesis of indeterminate potential. Furthermore, experimental work indicates that IHD and cancer can promote one another, and the CV or metabolic toxicity of anticancer therapies can lead to IHD. The connections between IHD and cancer are reinforced by social determinants of health, non-medical factors that modify health outcomes and comprise individual and societal domains, including economic stability, educational and healthcare access and quality, neighbourhood and built environment, and social and community context. Management of IHD in cancer patients is often challenging, due to atypical presentation, increased bleeding and ischaemic risk, and worse outcomes as compared to patients without cancer. The decision to proceed with coronary revascularization and the choice of antithrombotic therapy can be difficult, particularly in patients with chronic coronary syndromes, necessitating multidisciplinary discussion that considers both general guidelines and specific features on a case by case basis. Randomized controlled trial evidence in cancer patients is very limited and there is urgent need for more data to inform clinical practice. Therefore, coexistence of IHD and cancer raises important scientific and practical questions that call for collaborative efforts from the cardio-oncology, cardiology, and oncology communities.

Risk Burden of Cancer in Patients Treated With Abbreviated Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After PCI: Analysis of Multicenter Controlled High-Bleeding Risk Trials

BACKGROUND

Oncological patients with coronary artery disease face an elevated risk of hemorrhagic and ischemic events following percutaneous coronary intervention. Despite medical guidelines recommending minimal dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration for patients with cancer, dedicated data on abbreviated DAPT in this population is lacking. This study aims to evaluate the occurrence of ischemic and hemorrhagic events in patients with cancer compared with other high-bleeding risk individuals.

METHODS

Patient-level data from 4 high-bleeding risk coronary drug-eluting stent studies (ONYX One, LEADERS FREE, LEADERS FREE II, and SENIOR trials) treated with short DAPT were analyzed. The comparison focused on patients with high-bleeding risk with and without cancer, assessing 1-year rates of net adverse clinical events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] types 3 to 5 bleeding) and major adverse clinical events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke).

RESULTS

A total of 5232 patients were included, of whom 574 individuals had cancer, and 4658 were at high-bleeding risk without previous cancer. Despite being younger with fewer risk factors, patients with cancer had higher net adverse clinical event (HR, 1.25; P=0.01) and major adverse clinical event (HR, 1.26; P=0.02), primarily driven by all-cause mortality and major bleeding (BARC 3-5), but not myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, or repeat revascularization. Cancer was an independent predictor of net adverse clinical event (P=0.005), major adverse clinical event (P=0.01), and major bleeding (P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The present work is the first report on abbreviated DAPT dedicated to patients with cancer. Cancer is a major marker of adverse outcomes and these events had high lethality. Despite short DAPT, patients with cancer experienced higher rates of major bleeding compared with patients without cancer with high-bleeding risk, which occurred mainly after DAPT discontinuation. These findings reinforce the need for a more detailed and individualized stratification of those patients.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT03344653, NCT01623180, NCT02843633, NCT0284.

Short- and long-term outcomes of patients with active cancer presenting with an acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

Management of cancer patients presenting with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) may be challenging. In this study, we sought to examine whether and how a concomitant diagnosis of active cancer affects patients' management and outcomes following an event of ACS.

METHODS

We used a retrospective cohort data analysis of patients from the Acute Coronary Syndrome Israeli Survey (ACSIS) carried out between the years 2016-2021 to compare patients with and without a concomitant diagnosis of active cancer.

RESULTS

Of 4913 patients who presented with an ACS, 90 (1.8%) patients had a concomitant active cancer. Cancer patients were older, with a higher prevalence of hypertension and chronic renal failure. The rate of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) was similar (40%) between both groups. Cancer patients were less likely to undergo coronary angiography during hospitalization; but once it was performed, the rate of percutaneous coronary intervention was similar. The presence of cancer during an ACS was associated with an increased short- and long-term mortality. In a multivariate analysis, the risk for 1-year mortality remained significantly higher in cancer patient (HR 2.72, 95% CI 1.74-4.24, p < 0.001), and was most prominent in patients presenting with STEMI (HR 5.00, 95% CI 2.40-10.39, p < 0.001). Short- and long-term death rates were also higher in cancer patients after a propensity score matching and adjustment for comorbidities other than cancer.

CONCLUSION

Despite significant advances in oncologic and cardiac care, the presence of active cancer in patients with an ACS is still associated with significantly increased risk for 1-year mortality.

Outcomes of Patients With Cancer With Myocardial Infarction-Associated Cardiogenic Shock Managed With Mechanical Circulatory Support

Background

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is the leading cause of death among patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and is managed with temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS) in advanced cases. Patients with cancer are at high risk of AMI and CS. However, outcomes of patients with cancer and AMI-CS managed with tMCS have not been rigorously studied.

Methods

Adult patients with AMI-CS managed with tMCS from 2006 to 2018 with and without cancer were identified using the National Inpatient Sample. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed for variables associated with cancer. Primary outcome was in-hospital death, and secondary outcomes were major bleeding and thrombotic complications.

Results

After PSM, 1287 patients with cancer were matched with 12,870 patients without cancer. There was an increasing temporal trend for prevalence of cancer among patients admitted with AMI-CS managed with tMCS (P trend < .001). After PSM, there was no difference in in-hospital death (odds ratio [OR], 1.00; 95% CI, 0.88-1.13) or thrombotic complications (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.91-1.34) between patients with and without cancer. Patients with cancer had a higher risk of major bleeding (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.15-1.46).

Conclusions

Among patients with AMI-CS managed with tMCS, cancer is becoming increasingly frequent and associated with increased risk of major bleeding, although there was no difference in in-hospital death. Further studies are needed to further characterize outcomes, and inclusion of patients with cancer in trials of tMCS is needed.

Heart Failure Readmission in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Active Cancer

Background

Although numerous studies have examined readmission with heart failure (HF) after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), limited data are available on HF readmission in cancer patients post-AMI.

Objectives

This study aimed to assess the rates and factors associated with HF readmission in cancer patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

Methods

A nationally linked cohort of STEMI patients between January 2005 and March 2019 were obtained from the UK Myocardial Infarction National Audit Project registry and the UK national Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care registry. Multivariable Fine-Gray competing risk models were used to evaluate HF readmission at 30 days and 1 year.

Results

A total of 326,551 STEMI indexed admissions were included, with 7,090 (2.2%) patients having active cancer. The cancer group was less likely to be admitted under the care of a cardiologist (74.5% vs 81.9%) and had lower rates of invasive coronary angiography (62.2% vs 72.7%; P < 0.001) and percutaneous coronary intervention (58.4% vs. 69.5%). There was a significant prescription gap in the administration of post-AMI medications upon discharge such as an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (49.5% vs 71.1%) and beta-blockers (58.4% vs 68.0%) in cancer patients. The cancer group had a higher rate of HF readmission at 30 days (3.2% vs 2.3%) and 1 year (9.4% vs 7.3%). However, after adjustment, cancer was not independently associated with HF readmission at 30 days (subdistribution HR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.86-1.28) or 1 year (subdistribution HR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.92-1.16). The opportunity-based quality indicator was associated with higher rates of HF readmission independent of cancer diagnosis.

Conclusions

Cancer patients receive care that differs in important ways from patients without cancer. Greater implementation of evidence-based care may reduce HF readmissions, including in cancer patients.

Cancer-related arterial thromboembolic events

Cancer is associated with a hypercoagulable state and is a well-known independent risk factor for venous thromboembolism, whereas the association between cancer and arterial thromboembolism is less well established. Arterial thromboembolism, primarily defined as myocardial infarction or stroke is significantly more frequent in patients with cancer, independently of vascular risk factors and associated with a three-fold increase in the risk of mortality. Patients with brain cancer, lung cancer, colorectal cancer and pancreatic cancer have the highest relative risk of developing arterial thromboembolism. Antithrombotic treatments should be used with caution due to the increased risk of haemorrhage, as specified in current practice guidelines.

Outcomes of ST elevation myocardial infarction in patients with cancer: a nationwide study

AIMS

To assess processes of care and clinical outcomes in cancer patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) according to cancer type.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This is a national population-based study of patients admitted with STEMI in the UK between January 2005 and March 2019. Data were obtained from the National Heart Attack Myocardial Infarction National Audit Project (MINAP) registry and the Hospital Episode Statistics registry. We identified 353 448 STEMI-indexed admissions between 2005 and 2019. Of those, 8581 (2.4%) had active cancer. Prostate cancer (29% of STEMI patients with cancer) was the most common cancer followed by haematologic malignancies (14%) and lung cancer (13%). Cancer patients were less likely to receive invasive coronary revascularization (60.0% vs. 71.6%, P < 0.001] and had higher in-hospital death [odd ratio (OR) 1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-1.54] and bleeding (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.03-1.46). Cancer patients had higher mortality at 30 days (HR 2.39, 95% CI 2.19-2.62) and 1 year (HR 3.73, 95% CI 3.58-3.89). Lung cancer was the cancer associated with the highest risk of death in the hospital (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.39-2.22) and at 1 year (OR 8.08, 95% CI 7.44-8.78). Colon cancer (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.24-3.14) was the main cancer associated with major bleeding. All common cancer types were associated with higher mortality at 1 year. Cardiovascular death (62%) was the main cause of death in the first 30 days, while cancer (52%) was the main cause of death within 1 year.

CONCLUSION

STEMI patients with cancer have a higher risk of short- and long-term mortality, particularly lung cancer. Colon cancer is the main cancer associated with major bleeding. Cardiovascular disease was the main cause of death in the first month, whereas cancer was the main cause of death within 1 year.

Antithrombotic strategy in cancer patients comorbid with acute coronary syndrome and atrial fibrillation

It has been shown that patients with cancer have a longer expected life duration, benefiting from advanced medical therapy. Meanwhile, the risk of suffering from cardiovascular disease (CVD) has been increasing with ageing. A growing number of studies have elucidated the association between cancer and CVD. Cancer, atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease share some common factors and interact with each other, such as obesity, aging, diabetes, and inflammation, but the potential specific mechanism is still unclear. In addition, cancer-specific and therapy-related factors may increase the risk of embolism and bleeding in patients with cancer than in general population. However, current available embolic and bleeding risk scores applied in patients with CVD may not be applicable for risk assessment in cancer patients, which would be difficult for clinicians to select an appropriate antithrombotic regimen and ensure the balance between bleeding and embolism. Moreover, different types of cancer have distinct risks, which may increase the complexity of antithrombotic therapy. In this review, we review the literature related to cancer, AF, and acute coronary syndrome, focusing on the epidemiological status, physiological mechanism, embolism and bleeding risks, and strategies of antithrombotic therapy.

Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events Score Underestimates Post-Acute Coronary Syndrome Mortality among Cancer Patients

Background Patients with prior cancer are at increased risk of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with poorer post-ACS outcomes. We aimed to ascertain if the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score accurately predicts mortality risk among patients with ACS and prior cancer. Methods We linked nationwide ACS and cancer registries from 2007 to 2018 in Singapore. A total of 24,529 eligible patients had in-hospital and 1-year all-cause mortality risk calculated using the GRACE score (2471 prior cancer; 22,058 no cancer). Results Patients with prior cancer had two-fold higher all-cause mortality compared to patients without cancer (in-hospital: 22.8% versus 10.3%, p < 0.001; 1-year: 49.0% vs. 18.7%, p < 0.001). Cardiovascular mortality did not differ between groups (in-hospital: 5.2% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.346; 1-year: 6.9% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.12). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the GRACE score for prediction of all-cause mortality was less for prior cancer (in-hospital: 0.64 vs. 0.80, p < 0.001; 1-year: 0.66 vs. 0.83, p < 0.001). Among patients with prior cancer and a high-risk GRACE score > 140, in-hospital revascularization was not associated with lower cardiovascular mortality than without in-hospital revascularization (6.7% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.50). Conclusions The GRACE score performs poorly in risk stratification of patients with prior cancer and ACS.

Comorbidity clusters and in-hospital outcomes in patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction in the USA: A national population-based study

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of multimorbidity in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is increasing. It is unclear whether comorbidities cluster into distinct phenogroups and whether are associated with clinical trajectories.

METHODS

Survey-weighted analysis of the United States Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) for patients admitted with a primary diagnosis of AMI in 2018. In-hospital outcomes included mortality, stroke, bleeding, and coronary revascularisation. Latent class analysis of 21 chronic conditions was used to identify comorbidity classes. Multivariable logistic and linear regressions were fitted for associations between comorbidity classes and outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 416,655 AMI admissions included in the analysis, mean (±SD) age was 67 (±13) years, 38% were females, and 76% White ethnicity. Overall, hypertension, coronary heart disease (CHD), dyslipidaemia, and diabetes were common comorbidities, but each of the identified five classes (C) included ≥1 predominant comorbidities defining distinct phenogroups: cancer/coagulopathy/liver disease class (C1); least burdened (C2); CHD/dyslipidaemia (largest/referent group, (C3)); pulmonary/valvular/peripheral vascular disease (C4); diabetes/kidney disease/heart failure class (C5). Odds ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) for mortality ranged between 2.11 (1.89-2.37) in C2 to 5.57 (4.99-6.21) in C1. For major bleeding, OR for C1 was 4.48 (3.78; 5.31); for acute stroke, ORs ranged between 0.75 (0.60; 0.94) in C2 to 2.76 (2.27; 3.35) in C1; for coronary revascularization, ORs ranged between 0.34 (0.32; 0.36) in C1 to 1.41 (1.30; 1.53) in C4.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified distinct comorbidity phenogroups that predicted in-hospital outcomes in patients admitted with AMI. Some conditions overlapped across classes, driven by the high comorbidity burden. Our findings demonstrate the predictive value and potential clinical utility of identifying patients with AMI with specific comorbidity clustering.

Prevalence and outcomes of type 2 myocardial infarction in patients with cancer: A retrospective analysis from the National Inpatient Sample dataset

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the prevalence, clinical characteristics and outcomes of type 2 myocardial infarction (T2AMI) in patients with versus without cancer.

METHODS

All hospitalizations with a primary discharge diagnosis of T2AMI were stratified according to cancer status (secondary diagnosis of any-cancer vs cancer-free) using data from the US National Inpatient Sample (2016-2019). The primary outcome was in-hospital all-cause mortality while secondary outcomes were in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE).

RESULTS

Among 61,305 included hospitalizations with primary diagnosis of T2AMI, 3745 (6.1%) were associated with a diagnosis of cancer. Patients with T2AMI and cancer presented more frequently with acute respiratory failure (23.2% vs 18.1%), acute pulmonary embolism (3.7% v 1.3%), major bleeding (6.8% vs 4.1%) and renal failure (51.0% vs 46.8%), compared to patients without. On adjusted analysis, diagnosis of cancer was associated with lower odds of invasive coronary angiography (aOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.93, p = 0.009) but greater odds of mortality (aOR 1.95, 95% C.I. 1.26-2.99 p = 0.002). Among the different types of cancer, adjusted risk of all-cause mortality was higher in patients with colorectal (aOR 4.17 95% CI 1.68-10.32, p = 0.002), lung (aOR 3.63, 95% CI 1.83-7.18, p < 0.001) and haematologic (aOR 2.48, 95% CI 1.22-5.05, p = 0.001) cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with cancer presenting with T2AMI have lower odds of management with invasive diagnostic coronary angiography and have higher rates of in-hospital all-cause death. Further studies are warranted to improve overall care and outcomes of cancer patients and cardiovascular diseases.

Patient mortality following new-onset heart failure stratified by cancer type and status

AIM

Expected 1-year survival is essential to risk stratification of patients with heart failure (HF); however, little is known about the 1-year prognosis of patients with HF and cancer. Thus, the objective was to investigate the 1-year prognosis following new-onset HF stratified by cancer status in patients with breast, gastrointestinal, or lung cancer.

METHODS AND RESULTS

All Danish patients with new-onset HF from 2000 to 2018 were included. Cancer status was categorized as history of cancer (no cancer-related contact within 5 years of HF diagnosis), non-active cancer (curative intended procedure administered) and active cancer. Standardized 1-year all-cause mortality was reported using G-computation. Age-stratified 1-year all-cause mortality was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. In total, 193 359 patients with HF were included, 7.3% had either a breast, gastrointestinal, or lung cancer diagnosis. Patients with cancer were older and more comorbid than patients without cancer. Standardized 1-year all-cause mortality (95% confidence intervals) was 24.6% (23.0-26.2%), 27.1% (25.5-28.6%), and 29.9% (25.9-34.0%) for history of breast, gastrointestinal and lung cancer, respectively, which was comparable to patients with non-active cancers. For active breast, gastrointestinal and lung cancer, standardized 1-year all-cause mortality was 36.2% (33.8-38.6%), 49.0% (47.2-50.9%), and 61.6% (59.7-63.5%), respectively. One-year all-cause mortality increased incrementally with age, except for active lung cancer.

CONCLUSION

Standardized 1-year all-cause mortality was comparable for patients with history of cancer and non-active cancer regardless of cancer type, but varied comprehensively for active cancers. Prognostic impact of age was limited for active lung cancer. Thus, granular stratification of cancer is necessary for optimized management of new-onset HF.

Proportion and number of incident cancer deaths in coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Globally, coronary artery disease (CAD) and cancer are the leading causes of death. Studies focusing on the proportion and spectrum of cancer mortality among CAD patients are lacking. We aim to characterize the proportion and spectrum of cancer-specific mortality among patients with CAD.

METHODS

We analyzed 93,797 hospitalized survivors with angiographically documented CAD between 2007 and 2020 (mean age: 62.8 ± 11.1 years, 24.7% female) from Cardiorenal ImprovemeNt II (CIN-II) cohort.

RESULTS

During the median follow-up of 4.8 years (IQR: 2.6-7.5), 13,162 (14.0%) patients died after discharge. A total of 1223/7703 (15.8% of cause-specific death) CAD patients died of cancer. The three most common types of cancer-specific death were lung (36.1%), liver (13.3%), and colorectum cancer (12.8%). Furthermore, male (adjusted HR 2.38, 95% CI: 1.99-2.85) and older (≥60 vs. <60 years, adjusted HR 3.25, 95%CI 2.72-3.88) patients had a significantly increased cancer-specific mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that nearly one-sixth of death is accounted for cancer among CAD patients within a median follow-up of 4.8 years. Lung, liver, and colorectum cancer are top three cancer-specific mortality. Further studies are needed to reduce cancer mortality for CAD patients, especially in older and male ones.

TRAIL REGISTRATION

(ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05050877).

Chest Pain in Cancer Patients: Prevalence of Myocardial Infarction and Performance of High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponins

Background

Little is known about patients with cancer presenting with acute chest discomfort to the emergency department (ED).

Objectives

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), outcomes, and the diagnostic utility of recommended diagnostic tools in this population.

Methods

Patients presenting with chest pain to the ED were prospectively enrolled in an international multicenter diagnostic study with central adjudication. Cancer status was assessed prospectively and additional cancer details retrospectively. Findings were externally validated in an independent multicenter cohort.

Results

Among 8,267 patients, 711 (8.6%) had cancer. Patients with cancer had a higher burden of cardiovascular risk factors and pre-existing cardiac disease. Total length of stay in the ED (5.2 hours vs 4.3 hours) and hospitalization rate (49.8% vs 34.3%) were both increased in patients with cancer (P < 0.001 for both). Among 8,093 patients eligible for the AMI analyses, those with cancer more often had final diagnoses of AMI (184 of 686 with cancer [26.8%] vs 1,561 of 7,407 without cancer [21.1%]; P < 0.001). In patients with cancer, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) but not high sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI) concentration had lower diagnostic accuracy for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (for hs-cTnT, area under the curve: 0.89 [95% CI: 0.86-0.92] vs 0.94 [95% CI: 0.93-0.94] [P < 0.001]; for hs-cTnI, area under the curve: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.91-0.95] vs 0.95 [95% CI: 0.94-0.95] [P = 0.10]). In patients with cancer, the European Society of Cardiology 0/1-hour hs-cTnT and hs-cTnI algorithms maintained very high safety but had lower efficacy, with twice the number of patients remaining in the observe zone. Similar findings were obtained in the external validation cohort.

Conclusions

Patients with cancer have a substantially higher prevalence of AMI as the cause of chest pain. Length of ED stay and hospitalization rates are increased. The diagnostic performance of hs-cTnT and the efficacy of both the European Society of Cardiology 0/1-hour hs-cTnT and hs-cTnI algorithms is reduced. (Advantageous Predictors of Acute Coronary Syndromes Evaluation [APACE] Study; NCT00470587).

Acute myocardial infarction in von Willebrand disease: characteristics and outcomes

Background

Von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common inherited bleeding disorder. As treatments have improved prognosis of VWD, age-related diseases, including acute myocardial infarction (AMI), have become more prevalent. The treatment of AMI includes antithrombotic therapies, which increase the risk of bleeding. Current guidelines suggest weighing risks/benefits of antithrombotic therapy in patients with VWD. However, data to inform these discussions are lacking.

Objective

To characterize outcomes of patients with VWD after AMI.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study utilizing the National Readmissions Database of patients with and without VWD admitted with AMI in 2017 and 2018. Primary outcomes were 90-day any-cause, bleeding-related, and arterial thrombosis-related readmissions. Case-control matching was performed for age, sex (male or female), ST-elevation myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. Time-to-event analysis was performed after matching using Cox proportional hazards regression.

Results

A total of 136 patients with VWD were matched with 3400 controls without VWD. At 90 days, there were no differences in all-cause (10.7% vs 11.5%; P = 1.00), arterial thrombosis (1.9% vs 3.1%; P = .77), and bleeding (1.9% vs 0.4%; P = .083) readmission in patients with VWD. VWD was associated with increased risk of 90-day bleeding (hazard ratio [HR], 4.75; 95% CI, 1.05-21.66) but not all-cause (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.50-1.67) or arterial thrombosis (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.39-2.19) readmission.

Conclusion

Among patients admitted with AMI, VWD was associated with higher risk of 90-day readmission for bleeding but not any-cause and arterial thrombosis-related readmissions. Further studies are needed to balance bleeding and thrombotic risks post-AMI in patients with VWD.

Cancer Incidence and Survival Among Patients Following an Acute Coronary Syndrome

To examine the role of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in subsequent cancer incidence and survival, 2 cohorts of patients hospitalized with ACS were matched 1:1 by gender and age (±3 years) to cardiovascular disease (CVD)-free patients from 2 cycles of the Israeli National Health and Nutrition Surveys. Data on all-cause mortality were retrieved from national registries. Cancer incidence with death treated as a competing event, overall survival, and mortality risk associated with incident cancer as a time-dependent variable were compared between the groups. Our cohort included 2,040 cancer-free matched pairs (mean age of 60±14 years, 42.5% women). Despite higher rates of smokers and patients with hypertension and diabetes mellitus, 10-year cumulative cancer incidence was significantly lower in the ACS group compared with CVD-free group (8.0% vs 11.4%, p = 0.02). This decreased risk was more pronounced in women than men (pinteraction = 0.05). Although being free of CVD meant a significant (p <0.001) survival advantage in the general cohort, this advantage faded once a cancer diagnosis was made (p = 0.80). After adjustment for sociodemographic and clinical covariates, the hazard ratios for mortality associated with a cancer diagnosis were 2.96 (95% confidence interval: 2.36 to 3.71) in the ACS group versus 6.41 (95% confidence interval: 4.96 to 8.28) in the CVD-free group (Pinteraction<0.001). In conclusion, in this matched cohort, ACS was associated with a lower risk of cancer and mitigated the excess risk of mortality associated with cancer incidence.

Vascular Inflammation, Cancer, and Cardiovascular Diseases

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cancer and cardiovascular disease are among the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the USA. Cancer and cardiovascular disease have inflammatory underpinnings that have been associated with both the development and progression of these disease states.

RECENT FINDINGS

Inflammatory signaling has been found to be a critical event in both cardiovascular disease and cancer formation and progression. Further, many chemotherapeutic agents potentiate inflammation exacerbating existing cardiovascular disease or leading to its presence. The exact mechanisms of these interactions remain poorly understood. The proinflammatory milieu observed in both cancer and cardiovascular disease likely plays an important role in the development and potentiation of both conditions. Further evaluation of this relationship will be critical in the development of new diagnostic and therapeutic modalities.

Outcomes of Patients With Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Admitted With Myocardial Infarction: Insights From National Inpatient Sample

Background

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) are hematopoietic stem cell neoplasms with a high risk of thrombosis, including acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, outcomes after AMI have not been thoroughly characterized.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to characterize outcomes after AMI in patients with MPNs compared with patients without MPNs.

Methods

Patients with a primary admission of AMI from January 2006 to December 2018 were identified using the National Inpatient Sample. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital death or cardiac arrest (CA) and major bleeding. Propensity score weighting was used to compare outcomes between MPN and non-MPN groups.

Results

A total of 1,644,304 unweighted admissions for AMI were included; of these admissions, 5,374 (0.3%) were patients with MPNs. After propensity score weighting, patients with MPNs had a lower risk of in-hospital death or CA (OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.82-0.84) but a higher risk of major bleeding (OR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.28-1.30) compared with non-MPN patients. There was a decreasing temporal rate of in-hospital death or CA and bleeding in patients without MPNs (Ptrend < 0.001 for both). However, there was an increasing temporal rate of in-hospital death or CA (Ptrend < 0.001) and a stable rate of major bleeding (Ptrend = 0.48) in patients with MPNs.

Conclusions

Among patients hospitalized with AMI, patients with MPNs have a lower risk of in-hospital death or CA compared with patients without MPNs, although they have a higher risk of bleeding. More investigation is needed in order to improve post-AMI bleeding outcomes in patients with MPN.

Interventional Cardio-Oncology: Unique Challenges and Considerations in a High-Risk Population

OPINION STATEMENT

Patients with cancer are at risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) including atherosclerotic heart disease (AHD), valvular heart disease (VHD), and atrial fibrillation (AF). Advances in percutaneous catheter-based treatments, including percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for AHD, percutaneous valve replacement or repair for VHD, and ablation and left atrial appendage occlusion devices (LAAODs) for AF, have provided patients with CVD significant benefit in the recent decades. However, trials and registries investigating outcomes of these procedures often exclude patients with cancer. As a result, patients with cancer are less likely to undergo these therapies despite their benefits. Despite the inclusion of cancer patients in randomized clinical trial data, studies suggest that cancer patients derive similar benefits of percutaneous therapies for CVD compared with patients without cancer. Therefore, percutaneous interventions for CVD should not be withheld in patients with cancer, as they may still benefit from these procedures.

Impact of a Prior Cancer Diagnosis on Quality of Care and Survival Following Acute Myocardial Infarction: Retrospective Population-Based Cohort Study in England

BACKGROUND

An increasing proportion of patients with cancer experience acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We investigated differences in quality of AMI care and survival between patients with and without previous cancer diagnoses.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study using Virtual Cardio-Oncology Research Initiative data. Patients aged 40+ years hospitalized in England with AMI between January 2010 and March 2018 were assessed, ascertaining previous cancers diagnosed within 15 years. Multivariable regression was used to assess effects of cancer diagnosis, time, stage, and site on international quality indicators and mortality.

RESULTS

Of 512 388 patients with AMI (mean age, 69.3 years; 33.5% women), 42 187 (8.2%) had previous cancers. Patients with cancer had significantly lower use of ACE (angiotensin-converting enzyme) inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (mean percentage point decrease [mppd], 2.6% [95% CI, 1.8-3.4]) and lower overall composite care (mppd, 1.2% [95% CI, 0.9-1.6]). Poorer quality indicator attainment was observed in patients with cancer diagnosed in the last year (mppd, 1.4% [95% CI, 1.8-1.0]), with later stage disease (mppd, 2.5% [95% CI, 3.3-1.4]), and with lung cancer (mppd, 2.2% [95% CI, 3.0-1.3]). Twelve-month all-cause survival was 90.5% in noncancer controls and 86.3% in adjusted counterfactual controls. Differences in post-AMI survival were driven by cancer-related deaths. Modeling improving quality indicator attainment to noncancer patient levels showed modest 12-month survival benefits (lung cancer, 0.6%; other cancers, 0.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Measures of quality of AMI care are poorer in patients with cancer, with lower use of secondary prevention medications. Findings are primarily driven by differences in age and comorbidities between cancer and noncancer populations and attenuated after adjustment. The largest impact was observed in recent cancer diagnoses (<1 year) and lung cancer. Further investigation will determine whether differences reflect appropriate management according to cancer prognosis or whether opportunities to improve AMI outcomes in patients with cancer exist.

Coronary Revascularization in Patients With Cancer

Purpose of review

The treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) in cancer patients is an evolving landscape. Recent data emphasizes the importance of aggressive management of cardiovascular risk factors and diseases in improving cardiovascular health in this unique group of patients regardless of cancer type or stage.

Recent findings

Novel cancer therapeutics such as immune therapies and proteasome inhibitors have been associated with CAD. Recent stent technologies may safely allow for shorter duration (< 6 months) of dual antiplatelet therapy post-percutaneous coronary interventions. Intracoronary imaging may be useful in the decision making process in terms of stent positioning and healing.

Summary

Large registry studies have partially filled a gap left by the lack of randomized controlled trials in the treatment of CAD in cancer patients. Cardio-oncology is gaining traction as a major sub-specialty in the cardiology field given the release of the first European Society of Cardiology - Cardio-oncology guidelines in 2022.

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator for the Primary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death among Patients With Cancer

Data are limited regarding the characteristics and outcomes of patients with cancer who are found eligible for primary defibrillator therapy. We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of patients with preexisting cancer diagnoses who become eligible for a primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) or cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) defibrillator. Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-ICD (MADIT-ICD) benefit scores were calculated. The study included 75 cancer patients at a median age of 73 (interquartile range 64, 81) years at heart failure diagnosis. Active cancer was present in 51%. Overall, 55% of the cohort had coronary artery disease and 37% were CRT eligible. We found that 48%, 49%, and 3% of cohorts had low, intermediate, and high MADIT-ICD Benefit scores, respectively. Only 27% of patients underwent primary defibrillator implantation. Using multivariate analysis, indication for CRT and intermediate/high MADIT-ICD Benefit categories were found as independent predictors for implantation (odds ratio 8.42 p <0.001 and odds ratio 3.74 p = 0.040, respectively). During a median follow-up of 5.3 (interquartile range 4.5, 7.2) years, one patient (5%) with a defibrillator had appropriate shock therapy and 2 patients (10%) had bacteremia. Of 13 patients with CRT defibrillator-implants, one patient was admitted for heart failure exacerbation (8%). Using a time-varying covariate model, we did not observe statistically significant differences in the survival of patients with cancer implanted versus those not implanted with primary defibrillators (hazard ratio 0.521, p = 0.127). In conclusion, although primary defibrillator therapy is underutilized in patients with cancer, its relative benefit is limited because of competing risk of nonarrhythmic mortality. These findings highlight the need for personalized cardiologic and oncologic coevaluation.

Cardiovascular outcomes in patients with cancer during a 5-year follow-up: Results from a French administrative database

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available regarding the optimal management and prognosis of patients with cancer who develop an acute myocardial infarction.

AIM

The objective of this study was to analyse the characteristics and outcomes of patients according to cancer and myocardial infarction occurrence.

METHODS

Based on the French administrative hospital discharge database, the study collected information for all consecutive patients seen in French hospitals in 2013, excluding those with a history of myocardial infarction. The population was divided into two groups according to their history of cancer. We studied the following outcomes: all-cause and cardiovascular mortality; acute myocardial infarction; and ischaemic stroke. Data were collected after a 5-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Between 2013 and 2019, 3,381,472 patients were seen in French hospitals; among them, 3,323,757 had no history of myocardial infarction. Patients with a history of cancer (n=497,593) had higher incidences of all-cause mortality (17.82%/year vs 3.79%/year), cardiovascular mortality (1.61%/year vs 1.17%/year), myocardial infarction (0.82%/year vs 0.61%/year) and ischaemic stroke (0.91%/year vs 0.62%/year) compared with patients without cancer (n=2,826,164). After performing an adjusted competing-risk analysis, the cumulative incidence of acute myocardial infarction, cardiovascular death and ischaemic stroke incidence was found to be lower in patients with a history of cancer, whereas death of non-cardiac origin was more prevalent in patients with a history of cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

In this observational study, we have shown that patients with cancer have a higher incidence of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and myocardial infarction. However, multivariable analysis showed a lower cumulative incidence of these events.

Treatment strategies of acute myocardial infarction: updates on revascularization, pharmacological therapy, and beyond

Owing to recent advances in early reperfusion strategies, pharmacological therapy, standardized care, and the identification of vulnerable patient subsets, the prognosis of acute myocardial infarction has improved. However, there is still considerable room for improvement. This review article summarizes the latest evidence concerning clinical diagnosis and treatment of acute myocardial infarction.

Prognosis of acute coronary syndrome stratified by cancer type and status - a nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

To investigated the prognosis of the most prevalent cancers (breast-, gastrointestinal-, and lung cancer), according to cancer status (i.e., active-, non-active-, history of-, and no cancer), following first-time of acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

METHODS

Danish nationwide registers were used to identify patients with first-time ACS from 2000-2018. Patients were stratified according to cancer type and status. Hazard ratios (HR) estimated by adjusted Cox regression models for 1year all-cause mortality reported. Further absolute risks of 1year cardiovascular versus non-cardiovascular death and 30-day cumulative incidence of coronary angiograms (CAG) was estimated, using the Aalen-Johansen non-parametric method, with competing risk of death.

RESULTS

We identified 150,478 (95.7%) with no cancer, 2,370 (1.5%) with history of cancer, 2,712 (1.7%) with non-active cancer and 1,704 (1.1%) with active cancer. Cancer patients were older with more comorbidities than patients with no cancer. When compared with no cancer, we found HRs (95% confidence intervals) of 1.71 (1.44-2.02), 2.47 (2.23-2.73) and 4.22 (3.87-4.60) correspondingly for active breast-, gastrointestinal-, and lung cancer. Increased HRs were also found for non-active cancers, but not for history of cancer. Cardiovascular disease was the leading cause of death in all patients. Among patients with active breast-, gastrointestinal-, and lung cancer 43%, 43%, and 31% underwent CAG, correspondingly, compared with 77% of patients without cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Active- and non-active cancers were associated with an increased 1-year all-cause mortality compared with patients with history of cancer and no cancer. Cardiovascular disease was the leading cause of death; notably CAG was less frequently performed in cancer patients.

Coronary artery disease, left ventricular function and cardiac biomarkers determine all-cause mortality in cancer patients-a large monocenter cohort study

Cancer patients are at risk of suffering from cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Nevertheless, the impact of cardiovascular comorbidity on all-cause mortality (ACM) in large clinical cohorts is not well investigated. In this retrospective cohort study, we collected data from 40,329 patients who were subjected to cardiac catherization from 01/2006 to 12/2017 at University Hospital Heidelberg. The study population included 3666 patients with a diagnosis of cancer prior to catherization and 3666 propensity-score matched non-cancer patients according to age, gender, diabetes and hypertension. 5-year ACM in cancer patients was higher with a reduced left ventricular function (LVEF < 50%; 68.0% vs 50.9%) or cardiac biomarker elevation (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT; 64.6% vs 44.6%) and N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP; 62.9% vs 41.4%) compared to cancer patients without cardiac risk. Compared to non-cancer patients, NT-proBNP was found to be significantly higher (median NT-proBNP cancer: 881 ng/L, IQR [254; 3983 ng/L] vs non-cancer: 668 ng/L, IQR [179; 2704 ng/L]; p < 0.001, Wilcoxon-rank sum test) and turned out to predict ACM more accurately than hs-cTnT (NT-proBNP: AUC: 0.74; hs-cTnT: AUC: 0.63; p < 0.001, DeLong's test) in cancer patients. Risk factors for atherosclerosis, such as diabetes and age (> 65 years) were significant predictors for increased ACM in cancer patients in a multivariate analysis (OR diabetes: 1.96 (1.39-2.75); p < 0.001; OR age > 65 years: 2.95 (1.68-5.4); p < 0.001, logistic regression). Our data support the notion, that overall outcome in cancer patients who underwent cardiac catherization depends on cardiovascular comorbidities. Therefore, particularly cancer patients may benefit from standardized cardiac care.

Risk of mortality and other adverse outcomes from myocardial infarction in cancer survivors: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Myocardial infarction (MI) is an acute cardiovascular disease that can increase prognosis risks such as arrhythmia, heart failure, shock, etc. Studies have found that even well-controlled coexistence of cancer could affect the quality of life in MI patients. However, the prognostic impact of cancer on MI patients is controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the influence of cancer on the risk of future all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in MI patients.

METHODS

The Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane libraries were searched for cohort studies and case-control from inception to May 2022. The quality of the included pieces of literature was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). All statistical analyses were performed using Stata statistical software versions 14.0 and 16.0. Sensitivity analysis assessed the robustness of the results, and funnel plots and Egger's tests evaluated the publication bias.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies were included, covering 7,210,530 participants. Summary analyses show that compared with non-cancer patients, cancer increased the risk of long-term all-cause mortality in MI patients (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.36-1.84, I² = 94.2%). However, no significant difference was observed in the risk of cardiovascular mortality (HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.91-1.54, I² = 52.4%) or MACCE (HR 1.26, 95% CI 0.94-1.70, I² = 99.2%). In subgroup analysis, cancer was associated with the risk of recurrent MI (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.03-1.34, I² = 88.8%), and major bleeding (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.60-2.52, I² = 93.1%), with no significant difference in the risk of stroke (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.97-1.27, I² = 85.1%).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis shows that cancer increases the risk of all-cause mortality, recurrent MI, and major bleeding in MI patients but is not associated with the risk of cardiovascular death. Therefore, comprehensive multidisciplinary management and monitoring of potential future adverse events in MI patients with cancer are needed.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

The meta-analysis was registered in the International Register of Prospective Systematic Reviews (NO. CRD42022332775).

The new 2022 ESC Guidelines on Cardio-oncology and their impact on the Acute Cardiovascular Care Society

In this perspective piece on the recently published ESC Guidelines on Cardio-oncology and the Consensus Statements from the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association, we summarize key learning points regarding the management of acute cardiovascular disease in patients with cancer. This document outlines where other pre-existing ESC Guidelines can be applied to the management of acute cardiovascular disease in patients with cancer while simultaneously highlighting important gaps in knowledge that require further research.

Cancer and cardiovascular disease share common risk factors and often co-exist, especially in older patients. In addition, patients with cancer undergoing active treatment are exposed to multiple, potentially cardiotoxic drugs, which may manifest as a variety of cardiovascular events, including left-ventricular systolic dysfunction and heart failure, arrhythmias, hypertension, or acute venous and arterial vascular events.

Knowledge about potential causative cancer therapeutics is necessary for rapid recognition and management to improve cardiovascular outcomes and guide ongoing cancer treatment. Specifically, the importance of rapidly interrupting culprit cancer drugs is highlighted, as well as instituting standard guideline-based therapies for conditions such as acute heart failure and acute coronary syndromes [ST-elevation myocardial infarction and high-risk non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (ACS)]. Given the high prevalence of thrombocytopenia and increased bleeding risk in patients with cancer, we are provided with platelet cut-offs for the use of different antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants for patients with ACS and atrial arrhythmias. In contrast, given the hypercoagulable milieu of cancer, we are provided information regarding types of anticoagulants, drug–drug interactions, and duration of anticoagulation in patients with acute venous thromboembolism, as well as for atrial fibrillation. They also discuss the diagnostic and treatment strategies for the unique cardiotoxicities seen with novel cancer therapeutics such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric receptor antigen T-cell therapy. Last, but not least, the authors emphasize that the care of these patients requires close collaboration between cardiology and oncology to maximize both cardiovascular and cancer outcomes.

Palliative Care Utilization Among Hospitalized Patients With Common Chronic Conditions in the United States

Objective: Limited data exist around the receipt of palliative care (PC) in patients hospitalized with common chronic conditions. We studied the independent predictors, temporal trends in rates of PC utilization in patients hospitalized with acute exacerbation of common chronic diseases. Methods: Population-based cohort study of all hospitalizations with an acute exacerbation of heart disease (HD), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), cancer (CA), and chronic lower respiratory disease (CLRD). Patients aged ≥18 years or older between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2017, referred for inpatient PC were extracted from the National Inpatient Sample. Poisson regression analyses were used to estimate temporal trends. Results: Between 2004 and 2017, of 91,877,531 hospitalizations, 55.2%, 13.9%, 17.2%, and 13.8% hospitalizations were related to HD, CVA, CA, and CLRD, respectively. There was a temporal increase in the uptake of PC across all disease groups. Age-adjusted estimated rates of PC per 100,000 hospitalizations/year were highest for CA (2308 (95% CI 2249-2366) to 10,794 (95% CI 10,652-10,936)), whereas the CLRD cohort had the lowest rates of PC referrals (255 (95% CI 231-278) to 1882 (95% CI 1821-1943)) between 2004 and 2017, respectively. In the subgroup analysis of patients who died during hospitalization, the CVA group had the highest uptake of PC per 100,000 hospitalizations/year (4979 (95% CI 4918-5040)) followed by CA (4241 (95% CI 4189-4292)), HD (3250 (95% CI 3211-3289)) and CLRD (3248 (95% CI 3162-3405)). Conclusion: PC service utilization is increasing but remains disparate, particularly in patients that die during hospital admission from common chronic conditions. These findings highlight the need to develop a multidisciplinary, patient-centered approach to improve access to PC services in these patients.

Impact of Active and Historical Cancers on the Management and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicating Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on the outcomes of acute myocardial infarction-cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) in patients with concomitant cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of adult AMI-CS admissions was identified from the National Inpatient Sample (2000-2017) and stratified by active cancer, historical cancer, and no cancer. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, use of coronary angiography, use of percutaneous coronary intervention, do-not-resuscitate status, palliative care use, hospitalization costs, and hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

Of the 557,974 AMI-CS admissions during this 18-year period, active and historical cancers were noted in 14,826 (2.6%) and 27,073 (4.8%), respectively. From 2000 to 2017, there was a decline in active cancers (adjusted odds ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.63-0.79]; P &lt; .001) and an increase in historical cancer (adjusted odds ratio, 2.06 [95% CI, 1.89-2.25]; P &lt; .001). Compared with patients with no cancer, patients with active and historical cancer received less-frequent coronary angiography (57%, 67%, and 70%, respectively) and percutaneous coronary intervention (40%, 47%, and 49%%, respectively) and had higher do-not-resuscitate status (13%, 15%, 7%%, respectively) and palliative care use (12%, 10%, 6%%, respectively) (P &lt; .001). Compared with those without cancer, higher in-hospital mortality was found in admissions with active cancer (45.9% vs 37.0%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.24-1.34]; P &lt; .001) but not historical cancer (40.1% vs 37.0%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.98-1.04]; P = .39). AMI-CS admissions with cancer had a shorter hospitalization duration and lower costs (all P &lt; .001).

CONCLUSION

Concomitant cancer was associated with less use of guideline-directed procedures. Active, but not historical, cancer was associated with higher mortality in patients with AMI-CS.

Are cardiovascular comorbidities always associated with a worse prognosis in patients with lung cancer?

Many factors contribute to mortality in lung cancer, including the presence of concomitant cardiovascular disease. In the treatment of early stage of lung cancer, the presence of comorbidities and occurence of cardiotoxicity may be prognostic. The effect of cardiotoxicity of radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy on overall survival has been documented. Acute arterial and venous thromboembolic events seem to correlate with the degree of the histological malignancy, its clinical advancement, and even with optimal cardiac treatment, they may influence the survival time. In the case of high-grade and advanced lung cancer stage especially in an unresectable stadium, the prognosis depends primarily on the factors related to the histopathological and molecular diagnosis. Electrocardiographic and echocardiographic abnormalities may be prognostic factors, as they seem to correlate with the patient's performance status as well as tumor localization and size.

Percutaneous Coronary Angioplasty in Patients with Cancer: Clinical Challenges and Management Strategies

The number of cancer survivors in the United States is projected to increase by 31% by 2030. With advances in early screening, diagnosis and therapeutic strategies, a steadily increasing number of patients are surviving cancer. Coronary artery disease (CAD) is now one of the leading causes of death amongst cancer survivors, with the latter group of patients having a higher risk of CAD compared to the general population. Our review covers a range of specific challenges faced by doctors when considering percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in cancer patients; clinical outcomes in cancer patients undergoing PCI, as well as some important technical considerations to be made when making decisions regarding the management strategy in this special population of patients.