Classification, prevalence, and outcomes of anticancer therapy-induced cardiotoxicity: the CARDIOTOX registry

AIM

Cardiotoxicity (CTox) is a major side effect of cancer therapies, but uniform diagnostic criteria to guide clinical and research practices are lacking.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We prospectively studied 865 patients, aged 54.7 ± 13.9; 16.3% men, scheduled for anticancer therapy related with moderate/high CTox risk. Four groups of progressive myocardial damage/dysfunction were considered according to current guidelines: normal, normal biomarkers (high-sensitivity troponin T and N-terminal natriuretic pro-peptide), and left ventricular (LV) function; mild, abnormal biomarkers, and/or LV dysfunction (LVD) maintaining an LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥50%; moderate, LVD with LVEF 40-49%; and severe, LVD with LVEF ≤40% or symptomatic heart failure. Cardiotoxicity was defined as new or worsening of myocardial damage/ventricular function from baseline during follow-up. Patients were followed for a median of 24 months. Cardiotoxicity was identified in 37.5% patients during follow-up [95% confidence interval (CI) 34.22-40.8%], 31.6% with mild, 2.8% moderate, and 3.1% with severe myocardial damage/dysfunction. The mortality rate in the severe CTox group was 22.9 deaths per 100 patients-year vs. 2.3 deaths per 100 patients-year in the rest of groups, hazard ratio of 10.2 (95% CI 5.5-19.2) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients present objective data of myocardial injury/dysfunction during or after cancer therapy. Nevertheless, severe CTox, with a strong prognostic relationship, was comparatively rare. This should be reflected in protocols for clinical and research practices.

Stratification and management of cardiovascular risk in cancer patients. A consensus document of the SEC, FEC, SEOM, SEOR, SEHH, SEMG, AEEMT, AEEC, and AECC

Both cancer treatment and survival have significantly improved, but these advances have highlighted the deleterious effects of vascular complications associated with anticancer therapy. This consensus document aims to provide a coordinated, multidisciplinary and practical approach to the stratification, monitoring and treatment of cardiovascular risk in cancer patients. The document is promoted by the Working Group on Cardio Oncology of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC) and was drafted in collaboration with experts from distinct areas of expertise of the SEC and the Spanish Society of Hematology and Hemotherapy (SEHH), the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR), the Spanish Society of General and Family Physicians (SEMG), the Spanish Association of Specialists in Occupational Medicine (AEEMT), the Spanish Association of Cardiovascular Nursing (AEEC), the Spanish Heart Foundation (FEC), and the Spanish Cancer Association (AECC).

Cardiovascular risk factors during cancer treatment. Prevalence and prognostic relevance: insights from the CARDIOTOX registry

Aims

The actual usefulness of cardiovascular (CV) risk factor assessment in the prognostic evaluation of cancer patients treated with cardiotoxic treatment remains largely unknown. Prospective multicentre study in patients scheduled to receive anticancer therapy related with moderate/high cardiotoxic risk.

Methods and results

A total of 1324 patients underwent follow-up in a dedicated cardio-oncology clinic from April 2012 to October 2017. Special care was given to the identification and control of CV risk factors. Clinical data, blood samples, and echocardiographic parameters were prospectively collected according to protocol, at baseline before cancer therapy and then at 3 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 1.5 years, and 2 years after initiation of cancer therapy. At baseline, 893 patients (67.4%) presented at least one risk factor, with a significant number of patients newly diagnosed during follow-up. Individual risk factors were not related with worse prognosis during a 2-year follow-up. However, a higher Systemic Coronary Risk Estimation (SCORE) was significantly associated with higher rates of severe cardiotoxicity (CTox) and all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.79 (95% confidence interval, CI 1.16–2.76) for SCORE 5–9 and HR 4.90 (95% CI 2.44–9.82) for SCORE ≥10 when compared with patients with lower SCORE (0–4)].

Conclusions

This large cohort of patients treated with a potentially cardiotoxic regimen showed a significant prevalence of CV risk factors at baseline and significant incidence during follow-up. Baseline CV risk assessment using SCORE predicted severe CTox and all-cause mortality. Therefore, its use should be considered in the evaluation of cancer patients.

Incidence of long-term cardiotoxicity and evolution of the systolic function in patients with breast cancer treated with anthracyclines

Background

Anthracycline cardiotoxicity (AC) may manifest years after treatment (long-term cardiotoxicity). There is little data on the incidence and natural history of AC in the current context, with protocols including lower anthracycline doses. The present study prospectively evaluated the incidence, time of occurrence and clinical correlates of long-term cardiotoxicity and the evolution of systolic function in patients with breast cancer treated with anthracyclines.

Methods

This study prospectively included 85 consecutive patients undergoing chemotherapy (CHT) with anthracyclines without trastuzumab. All patients underwent evaluation at baseline, at the end of CHT, 3 months after the end of CHT and 1 and 4 years subsequent to the beginning of CHT. Clinical data and echocardiographic parameters were evaluated in all examinations.

Results

The mean dose of doxorubicin used was 243.53 mg/m². Median follow-up of the current cohort was 4.5 years. At 1 year the incidence of AC was 1% and at the end of the follow-up 16.5% (14 of 85 patients). Therefore, the incidence of late cardiotoxicity (after the first year) was 15%. Of these 14 patients with AC, 12 had asymptomatic systolic dysfunction, 1 had heart failure and 1 suffered sudden death. Fifteen percent developed systolic dysfunction during follow-up. An early decline in strain was observed in patients who developed long-term AC.

Conclusions

The incidence of long-term cardiotoxicity in patients treated with low-cumulative dose of anthracyclines is high, 16.5% at 4.5 years. This was observed in almost all cases after the first year of follow-up. Therefore, long-term monitoring may be advisable.

[Coronary revascularization: clinical features and indications]

Coronary artery revascularization is an established therapeutic intervention and is therefore included in all treatment guidelines for patients with coronary artery disease. Although the procedure has been available for more than 40 years, constant technical progress in surgical and percutaneous revascularization continues to bring the benefits of revascularization therapy to new groups of patients. Therefore the indications and limitations of this approach need to be reviewed and updated periodically. The aim of revascularization therapy is to improve the prognosis or symptoms and quality of life in patients with ischemic heart disease. The revascularization process comprises two aspects: 1) indication and selection of the revascularization procedure, and 2) performance of the procedure. Involvement of the clinical cardiologist in the first step is fundamental. Basing their decisions on clinical, functional and anatomical features, these professionals detect and select patients who would benefit, and also help to select the revascularization technique. In this Update article on revascularization we review, for stable ischemic heart disease and non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes, the following: 1) the most relevant aspects to consider when evaluating the need for and the type of revascularization (age, sex, diabetes, renal function, electrocardiographic changes, ventricular function and quantification of functional relevance of coronary artery disease and viability of the acinetic areas); 2) indications for surgical or percutaneous intervention, and the choice of therapeutic strategy according to the latest clinical evidence and guidelines of scientific societies, and 3) currently available data on the controversy regarding choice of the revascularization procedure in patients with multivessel disease.