Blaes, Anne H

ABSTRACT Introduction and Methods Cancer therapy–related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD) is a well established and potentially life‐threatening complication of contemporary oncologic treatment. Although comprehensive cardio‐oncology guidelines have been developed, their integration into routine hematology and oncology practice remains inconsistent. This consensus statement, developed by a multidisciplinary panel of cardio‐oncology experts, aims to provide practical, case‐based guidance to help oncology providers recognize, assess, and manage CTRCD across a spectrum of malignancies and cardiovascular presentations. Clinical Scenarios and Discussion We present representative clinical scenarios that illustrate real‐world challenges in cardio‐oncology and apply evidence‐based recommendations from current guidelines, including those from the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the International Cardio‐Oncology Society (ICOS)—to support informed decision‐making. Key areas of focus include baseline cardiovascular risk stratification prior to initiating potentially cardiotoxic therapies, with an emphasis on biomarker and imaging surveillance strategies tailored to individual risk profiles. Also, this document outlines the application of guideline‐directed medical therapy (GDMT) for cancer patients with heart failure. Conclusion By offering a structured, user‐friendly framework, this document seeks to bridge the implementation gap between oncology and cardiology disciplines. Our goal is to equip oncology providers with accessible tools that facilitate early recognition, consistent surveillance, and timely referral, thereby preserving cancer treatment intensity while minimizing cardiovascular morbidity.

Abstract Objectives We describe the development and implementation of a system for monitoring patient-reported adverse events and quality of life using electronic Patient Reported Outcome (ePRO) instruments in the I-SPY2 Trial, a phase II clinical trial for locally advanced breast cancer. We describe the administration of technological, workflow, and behavior change interventions and their associated impact on questionnaire completion. Materials and Methods Using the OpenClinica electronic data capture system, we developed rules-based logic to build automated ePRO surveys, customized to the I-SPY2 treatment schedule. We piloted ePROs at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) to optimize workflow in the context of trial treatment scenarios and staggered rollout of the ePRO system to 26 sites to ensure effective implementation of the technology. Results Increasing ePRO completion requires workflow solutions and research staff engagement. Over two years, we increased baseline survey completion from 25% to 80%. The majority of patients completed between 30% and 75% of the questionnaires they received, with no statistically significant variation in survey completion by age, race or ethnicity. Patients who completed the screening timepoint questionnaire were significantly more likely to complete more of the surveys they received at later timepoints (mean completion of 74.1% vs 35.5%, P < .0001). Baseline PROMIS social functioning and grade 2 or more PRO-CTCAE interference of Abdominal Pain, Decreased Appetite, Dizziness and Shortness of Breath was associated with lower survey completion rates. Discussion and Conclusion By implementing ePROs, we have the potential to increase efficiency and accuracy of patient-reported clinical trial data collection, while improving quality of care, patient safety, and health outcomes. Our method is accessible across demographics and facilitates an ease of data collection and sharing across nationwide sites. We identify predictors of decreased completion that can optimize resource allocation by better targeting efforts such as in-person outreach, staff engagement, a robust technical workflow, and increased monitoring to improve overall completion rates. Trial Registration https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01042379.

Abstract The discipline of Cardio-Oncology has seen tremendous growth over the past decade. It is devoted to the cardiovascular (CV) care of the cancer patient, especially to the mitigation and management of CV complications or toxicities of cancer therapies, which can have profound implications on prognosis. To that effect, many studies have assessed CV toxicities in patients undergoing various types of cancer therapies; however, direct comparisons have proven difficult due to lack of uniformity in CV toxicity endpoints. Similarly, in clinical practice, there can be substantial differences in the understanding of what constitutes CV toxicity, which can lead to significant variation in patient management and outcomes. This document addresses these issues and provides consensus definitions for the most commonly reported CV toxicities, including cardiomyopathy/heart failure and myocarditis, vascular toxicity, and hypertension, as well as arrhythmias and QTc prolongation. The current document reflects a harmonizing review of the current landscape in CV toxicities and the definitions used to define these. This consensus effort aims to provide a structure for definitions of CV toxicity in the clinic and for future research. It will be important to link the definitions outlined herein to outcomes in clinical practice and CV endpoints in clinical trials. It should facilitate communication across various disciplines to improve clinical outcomes for cancer patients with CV diseases.

Abstract In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the Cardio-Oncology and Imaging Councils of the American College of Cardiology offers recommendations to clinicians regarding the cardiovascular care of cardio-oncology patients in this expert consensus statement. Cardio-oncology patients—individuals with an active or prior cancer history and with or at risk of cardiovascular disease—are a rapidly growing population who are at increased risk of infection, and experiencing severe and/or lethal complications by COVID-19. Recommendations for optimizing screening and monitoring visits to detect cardiac dysfunction are discussed. In addition, judicious use of multimodality imaging and biomarkers are proposed to identify myocardial, valvular, vascular, and pericardial involvement in cancer patients. The difficulties of diagnosing the etiology of cardiovascular complications in patients with cancer and COVID-19 are outlined, along with weighing the advantages against risks of exposure, with the modification of existing cardiovascular treatments and cardiotoxicity surveillance in patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.