Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Oct 29:8:721080.
doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.721080. eCollection 2021.

Clinical Profile and Prognosis of a Real-World Cohort of Patients With Moderate or Severe Cancer Therapy-Induced Cardiac Dysfunction

Affiliations

Clinical Profile and Prognosis of a Real-World Cohort of Patients With Moderate or Severe Cancer Therapy-Induced Cardiac Dysfunction

Alberto Esteban-Fernández et al. Front Cardiovasc Med. .

Abstract

Introduction and Objectives: Cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD) is a common cause of cancer treatment withdrawal, related to the poor outcomes. The cardiac-specific treatment could recover the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We analyzed the clinical profile and prognosis of patients with CTRCD in a real-world scenario. Methods: A retrospective study that include all the cancer patients diagnosed with CTRCD, defined as LVEF < 50%. We analyzed the cardiac and oncologic treatments, the predictors of mortality and LVEF recovery, hospital admission, and the causes of mortality (cardiovascular (CV), non-CV, and cancer-related). Results: We included 113 patients (82.3% women, age 49.2 ± 12.1 years). Breast cancer (72.6%) and anthracyclines (72.6%) were the most frequent cancer and treatment. Meantime to CTRCD was 8 months, with mean LVEF of 39.4 ± 9.2%. At diagnosis, 27.4% of the patients were asymptomatic. Cardiac-specific treatment was started in 66.4% of patients, with LVEF recovery-rate of 54.8%. Higher LVEF at the time of CTRCD, shorter time from cancer treatment to diagnosis of CTRCD, and younger age were the predictors of LVEF recovery. The hospitalization rate was 20.4% (8.8% linked to heart failure). Treatment with trastuzumab and lower LVEF at diagnosis of CTRCD were the predictors of mortality. Thirty point nine percent of patients died during the 26 months follow-up. The non-CV causes and cancer-related were more frequent than CV ones. Conclusions: Cardiac-specific treatment achieves LVEF recovery in more than half of the patients. LVEF at the diagnosis of CTRCD, age, and time from the cancer treatment initiation to CTRCD were the predictors of LVEF recovery. The CV-related deaths were less frequent than the non-CV ones. Trastuzumab treatment and LVEF at the time of CTRCD were the predictors of mortality.

Keywords: cancer therapies; cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction; cardio-oncology; cardiotoxicity; left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

SP has received a travel and accommodation grant from Novartis and advisor/consultant role for AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Polyphor, Roche, and Seattle Genetics. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Kaplan–Meier analysis of heart failure (HF) hospital admission during follow-up. We have lost data about HF admission in the 35 patients.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Kaplan–Meier survival analysis according to all-cause of death.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Kaplan–Meier survival analysis according to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) recovery. LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; LVEFr, left ventricular ejection fraction recovery. Unknown refers to the patients with lost data about LVEF recovery. Heart transplantation was included as cardiovascular (CV) death.

References

    1. Pavo N, Raderer M, Hülsmann M, Neuhold S, Adlbrecht C, Strunk G, et al. . Cardiovascular biomarkers in patients with cancer and their association with all-cause mortality. Heart. (2015) 101:1874–80. 10.1136/heartjnl-2015-307848 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, Bueno H, Cleland JGF, Coats AJS, et al. . (2016). ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure. Eur Heart J. (2016) 37:2129–200. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehw128 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Zamorano JL, Lancellotti P, Rodriguez Muñoz D, Aboyans V, Asteggiano R, Galderisi M, et al. . 2016 ESC Position Paper on cancer treatments and cardiovascular toxicity developed under the auspices of the ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines. Eur Heart J. (2016) 37:2768–801. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehw211 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Martín-García A, Díaz-Peláez E, Martín-García AC, Sánchez-González J, Ibáñez B, Sánchez PL. Myocardial function and structure improvement with sacubitril/valsartan in cancer therapy-induced cardiomyopathy. Rev Esp Cardiol. (2020) 73:268–9. 10.1016/j.rec.2019.07.006 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Martín-Garcia A, López-Fernández T, Mitroi C, Chaparro-Muñoz M, Moliner P, Martin-Garcia AC, et al. . Effectiveness of sacubitril–valsartan in cancer patients with heart failure. ESC Hear Fail. (2020) 7:763–7. 10.1002/ehf2.12627 - DOI - PMC - PubMed