Portrait of Italian Cardio-Oncology: Results of a Nationwide Associazione Nazionale Medici Cardiologi Ospedalieri (ANMCO) Survey

Baseline Troponin Level and Cardiac Toxicity in HER2-positive Early Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Trastuzumab

BACKGROUND/AIM

There is controversy around the use of high-sensitive troponin T (hs-TnT) as an early biomarker of cardiac toxicity in patients with breast cancer on trastuzumab (T).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients receiving adjuvant or neo-adjuvant T for early HER2-positive breast cancer were prospectively included. Transthoracic echocardiograms and matched hs-TnT before T and at 3, 6, and 9 months were performed on all patients. Congestive heart failure, cardiac death, a decline in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of more than 10% from baseline even if it is still within the normal range, or a drop in LVEF below 55% were all considered signs of cardiac toxicity.

RESULTS

In total, 24 patients (median age: 57; range=39-79 years) were enrolled. Anthracyclines were administered to all patients but three as part of neo/adjuvant treatment before T. Cardiovascular toxicity was observed in 3 out of 24 (12.5%) patients: two non-symptomatic LVEF declines (8.3%) and one heart failure episode (4.2%). In the entire population, the mean baseline hs-TnT level was 10.1±8.8 pg/ml, and after 3, 6, and 12 months, no appreciable change was observed. Patients with cardiac toxicity had mean hs-TnT levels higher than those without (18.3±12.3 vs. 8.2±7.2 pg/ml; p=0.049). A definite trend was evident in the chi-square test (chi2=3.52; p=0.06).

CONCLUSION

In anthracycline-exposed patients with early breast cancer, hs-TnT may be able to identify those at risk of developing cardiac toxicity during neo/adjuvant T treatment.

2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease."

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease."

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

Women at heart: Introducing gender cardio-oncology

As cardio-oncology imposed itself as the reference specialty for a comprehensive cardiovascular approach to all patients with cancer, a more specific and careful cardiac evaluation of women entering their journey into cancer care is needed. Gender medicine refers to the study of how sex-based biological and gender-based socioeconomic and cultural differences influence people's health. Gender-related aspects could account for differences in the development, progression, and clinical signs of diseases as well as in the treatment of adverse events. Gender also accounts for major differences in access to healthcare. As for medicine and healthcare in general, gender-related characteristics have gained significance in cardio-oncology and should no longer be neglected in both clinical practice and research. We aimed to review the most relevant cardiovascular issues in women related to the cardio-oncology approach to offer a specific gender-related point of view for clinicians involved in the care process for both cancer and cardiovascular disease.

Predictability of cardiotoxicity: Experience of a Belgian cardio-oncology clinic

BACKGROUND

New oncological treatments improved survival but also increased awareness of cardiovascular side-effects during and after cancer therapy.

METHODS

We report the experience of the cardio-oncology clinic at a large Belgian tertiary care center and investigated the predictability of cardiotoxicity based on referring department, cardiovascular risk factors, cancer treatment and existing risk scores of the American Society of Clinical Oncologists (ASCO) and Mayo Clinic. Cardiotoxicity was defined as a 10% reduction in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) compared to the baseline transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in asymptomatic patients or 5% in symptomatic patients.

RESULTS

Of the 324 patients included, 14.5% died during follow-up. Most deaths were oncological, yet 19% of deaths were attributable to cardiovascular diseases. Models based on cardiovascular risk factors alone and cardiovascular risk factors combined with cardiotoxic medication poorly predicted cardiotoxicity. Existing risk scores from ASCO and Mayo Clinic also poorly predicted cardiotoxicity. A weighed model based on the Mayo Clinic cardiotoxicity risk score was the best risk assessment tool with still a limited predictive value with an Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve of 0.654 (CI 95%: 0.601-0.715).

CONCLUSION

Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality are common in cancer patients and survivors and stress the unmet need of adequate risk prediction tools for systematic screening and rigorous cardiovascular follow-up. In our outpatient cohort, cardiotoxicity risk could not be adequately predicted by cancer type, using classic cardiovascular risk factors, nor by the combination of cardiovascular risk factors and the proposed cancer treatment. Furthermore, we showed that existing cardiotoxicity risk scores are suboptimal and should thus be interpreted with caution.

Cardio-Oncology in the COVID Era (Co & Co): The Never Ending Story

The pathophysiology of some non-communicable diseases (NCDs) such as hypertension, cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes, and cancer includes an alteration of the endothelial function. COVID-19 is a pulmonary and vascular disease with a negative impact on patients whose damaged endothelium is particularly vulnerable. The peculiar SARS-CoV-2-induced "endothelitis" triggers an intriguing immune-thrombosis that affects both the venous and arterial vascular beds. An increased liability for infection and an increased likelihood of a worse outcome have been observed during the pandemic in patients with active cancer and in cancer survivors. "Overlapping commonalities" between COVID-19 and Cardio-Oncology have been described that include shared phenotypes of cardiovascular toxicities such as left ventricular dysfunction, ischemic syndromes, conduction disturbances, myocarditis, pericarditis and right ventricular failure; shared pathophysiologic mechanisms such as inflammation, release of cytokines, the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-pathway, coagulation abnormalities, microthrombosis and endothelial dysfunction. For these features and for the catalyst role of NCDs (mainly CVD and cancer), we should refer to COVID-19 as a "syndemic." Another challenging issue is the persistence of the symptoms, the so-called "long COVID" whose pathogenesis is still uncertain: it may be due to persistent multi-organ viral attacks or to an abnormal immune response. An intensive vaccination campaign is the most successful pharmacological weapon against SARS-CoV-2, but the increasing number of variants has reduced the efficacy of the vaccines in controlling SARS-CoV-2 infections. After a year of vaccinations we have also learned more about efficacy and side-effects of COVID-19 vaccines. An important byproduct of the COVID-19 pandemic has been the rapid expansion of telemedicine platforms across different care settings; this new modality of monitoring cancer patients may be useful even in a post pandemic era. In this paper we analyze the problems that the cardio-oncologists are facing in a pandemic scenario modified by the extensive vaccination campaign and add actionable recommendations derived from the ongoing studies and from the syndemic nature of the infection.

A Population-Based Study of Cardiovascular Disease Mortality in Italian Cancer Patients

Simple Summary

Research suggests that lengthening the prognosis in cancer patients (which is certainly a positive thing) requires greater attention to be paid to the onset of other pathologies. The increase in cardiovascular mortality in cancer patients (due to both exposure to risk factors and the side effects of cytotoxic drugs) requires greater collaboration between oncologists and cardiologists, and the integration of shared follow-up paths. Particular attention to the follow-up of cancer patients can reduce this risk: in the present study, patients presented an excessive risk of cardiovascular mortality only in the first two years from cancer diagnosis.

Abstract

The present research describes 25 years of cardiovascular mortality in a cohort of patients in Northern Italy. The study included patients with malignant cancer enrolled in the period of 1996–2019, and describes cardiovascular and cancer mortality in relation to sex, age, year of diagnosis, months of survivorship, tumor site, and standardized mortality ratio (SMR). Out of 67,173 patients, 38,272 deaths (57.7%) were recorded: 4466 from cardiovascular disease (CVD) (6.6%), and 28,579 (42.6%) from cancer. The proportion of CVD death increased from 4.5% in the first two years after diagnosis, to 7.3% after more than 10 years, while the proportion of deaths from cancer decreased from 70.5% to 9.4%. The CVD SMR comparing cancer patients with the general population was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82–0.92) in 1996–1999, rising to 0.95 (95% CI: 0.84–1.08) in 2015–2019, without differences in terms of sex or age. The risk of dying from CVD was higher compared with the general population (SMR 1.31; 95% CI: 1.24–1.39) only in the first two years after diagnosis. The trend over time underscored that CVD deaths increased in patients with breast, bladder, prostate, and colorectal cancers, and, in the more recent period, for kidney cancer and melanoma patients. Our data confirmed that cardiovascular mortality is an important issue in the modern management of cancer patients, suggesting the need for an extensive interdisciplinary approach.