Balanescu, Dinu Valentin

Recent data suggest that sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors have cardioprotective benefits. This effect may extend towards cardioprotection in cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction, with proposed mechanisms extending beyond glycemic control to include anti-inflammatory effects, oxidative stress reduction, and metabolic reprogramming. This review synthesizes potential mechanisms, observational data, and emerging trial evidence to support sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors as a primary prevention strategy for cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction, particularly in anthracycline-exposed populations.

Advances in cancer therapies have transformed many malignancies into chronic or manageable conditions, but have been linked to adverse, including cardiovascular, events. Vascular toxicities associated with cancer treatment range from abnormal vasoreactivity to accelerated atherosclerosis, arterial thrombotic events, vasculitis, and arterial aneurysms or dissections. 5-fluorouracil and VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) inhibitors are the agents most commonly linked to abnormal vasoreactivity, whereas BCR-ABL (breakpoint cluster region–Abelson murine leukemia viral oncogene homolog) inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors have been associated with accelerated atherosclerosis. Arterial thrombotic events are seen with VEGF and BCR-ABL inhibitors as well as platinum drugs. Vasculitis emerged with the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors, and arterial aneurysms and dissections with VEGF inhibitors. Radiation therapy can lead to several of the outlined vascular toxicities. This review comprehensively explores the mechanisms of vascular complications associated with chemotherapy, targeted therapies, immunotherapies, and radiation therapy. Key contributors include endothelial injury and dysfunction, oxidative stress, and inflammation. An understanding of the mechanisms of vascular toxicities may facilitate optimal treatment and preventive strategies in patients with cancer.

Abstract Background/Introduction Close monitoring of aortic stenosis (AS) by follow-up echocardiography is recommended by all Cardiology and Imaging Societies’ guidelines. Whether these guidelines are strictly followed is unknown. Purpose We aimed to describe our institution’s practice patterns for echocardiographic monitoring in patients with aortic sclerosis (AScl) and AS of any severity. Methods Adult patients residing in our institution’s county with an echocardiographic diagnosis of AScl or AS between 01/2005-01/2022 were identified and classified into 4 groups: AScl, mild AS, moderate AS, or severe AS, at each echocardiogram during the study timeframe. Kaplan Meier analyses were used to evaluate the composite outcome, the occurrence of follow-up echocardiogram or death. Patients were censored at the time of aortic valve replacement/repair, heart transplant, or last clinical follow-up. Guideline follow-up was considered appropriate when the primary outcome occurred by 5 years (AScl/mild AS), 2 years (moderate AS), and 1 year (severe AS). Results A total of 23,726 echocardiograms from 9,578 unique patients were included. At index echocardiogram, median patient age was 74 years (IQR 65-82) and 4,806 (50.2%) were women. AScl was observed in 7,358 (76.8%) cases, mild AS in 1,442 (15.1%) cases, moderate AS in 479 (5%), and severe AS in 301 (3.1%) cases. Rates of composite outcome achievement by the end of the guideline-recommended interval were 81%, 90%, 80%, and 72% in AScl, mild, moderate, and severe AS, respectively. Rates for men were 83%, 92%, 82%, and 75% in these groups, while rates for women were 78%, 88%, 78%, and 68%, respectively (Figure 1). Follow-up rates were similar before and after 2012 (when transcatheter aortic valve replacement was approved for treatment of severe AS in high-risk surgical patients in the USA). Follow-up rates were higher in patients managed by cardiovascular providers compared to non-cardiovascular providers (Figure 2). Conclusion Depending on disease severity, between one fourth and one tenth of patients remained alive and unfollowed at the end of their guideline-recommended surveillance interval. There is significant variability in echocardiogram monitoring based on sex and referring provider specialty. Figure 1 Figure 2

Abstract Background Concern for acute kidney injury (AKI) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a major determinant in the decision to pursue cardiac catheterization if otherwise indicated. A bedside AKI risk prediction model derived from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR), most recently updated in 2023, employs relatively complex parameters for AKI prediction. Purpose To test the efficacy of a simplified pre-procedural 5-variable bedside score for post-PCI AKI prediction based on the NCDR model. Methods We analyzed our institution’s NCDR-reported catheterization laboratory registry between Q2 2022 and Q1 2023. Inclusion criteria, variable selection, and definitions were based on the NCDR model. A bedside prediction model was validated, including 5 pre-procedural variables: anemia (hemoglobin <10 mg/dl), history of heart failure, stage 4 or 5 chronic kidney disease (glomerular filtration rate <30 mg/dl), cardiac arrest, and shock status. Results We included 840 patients, of which 593 (70.6%) were men. Mean age was 69 (±12.5). Most procedures were performed on an urgent basis (444, 52.9%). AKI developed in 107 (12.7%) patients. Compared to the non-AKI group, patients who developed AKI were older (age 74±11.5 vs 68.3 ±12.5), and more frequently had anemia (23.6% vs 7.4%), diabetes (51.4% vs 35.2%), severe frailty (45.8% vs 23.7%), heart failure (62.6% vs 29.7%), cardiac arrest (13.1% vs 2.9%), CKD (30.8% vs 6%), shock (12.1% vs 1.5%), and mechanical circulatory support (7.5% vs 2.9%), p<0.001. Utilizing integer scores, the simplified bedside model employing 5 pre-procedural variables demonstrated discrimination similar to the bedside NCDR model, with a C-statistic of 0.77 (0.60-0.88) and excellent calibration (intercept of 0.31 and slope of 1.03) (Figure), indicating the robust performance of the model (compared to bedside NCDR model with a C-statistic 0.793, intercept of -0.197, and slope of 0.957). Conclusion A simplified NCDR-based bedside score using 5 pre-procedural variables is an effective tool for predicting AKI as a complication of PCI, with comparable performance to the 2023 updated bedside NCDR AKI risk model.

Abstract Introduction Transsubclavian venous implantation of the Aveir leadless cardiac pacemaker (LCP) has not been previously reported. Methods and Results Three cases of transsubclavian implantation of the Aveir LCP are reported. Two cases were postbilateral orthotopic lung transplant, without appropriate femoral or jugular access due to recent ECMO cannulation and jugular central venous catheters. In one case, there was strong patient preference for same‐day discharge. Stability testing confirmed adequate fixation and electrical testing confirmed stable parameters in all cases. All patients tolerated the procedure well without significant immediate complications. Conclusions We demonstrate the feasibility of transsubclavian implantation of the Aveir LCP.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is the third most common cause of cardiovascular death and necessitates prompt, accurate risk assessment at initial diagnosis to guide treatment and reduce associated mortality. Intermediate-risk PE, defined as the presence of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction in the absence of hemodynamic compromise, carries a significant risk for adverse clinical outcomes and represents a unique diagnostic challenge. While small clinical trials have evaluated advanced treatment strategies beyond standard anticoagulation, such as thrombolytic or endovascular therapy, there remains continued debate on the optimal care for this patient population. Here, we review the most recent risk stratification models, highlighting differences between prediction scores and their limitations, and discuss the utility of serologic biomarkers and imaging modalities to detect right ventricular dysfunction. Additionally, we examine current treatment recommendations including anticoagulation strategies, use of thrombolytics at full and reduced doses, and utilization of invasive treatment options. Current knowledge gaps and ongoing studies are highlighted.

Background and Objectives: Cancer and coronary artery disease (CAD) often coexist. Compared to quantitative coronary angiography (QCA), fractional flow reserve (FFR) has emerged as a more reliable method of identifying significant coronary stenoses. We aimed to assess the specific management, safety and outcomes of FFR-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in cancer patients with stable CAD. Materials and Methods: FFR was used to assess cancer patients that underwent coronary angiography for stable CAD between September 2008 and May 2016, and were found to have ≥50% stenosis by QCA. Patients with lesions with an FFR > 0.75 received medical therapy alone, while those with FFR ≤ 0.75 were revascularized. Procedure-related complications, all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularizations were analyzed. Results: Fifty-seven patients with stable CAD underwent FFR on 57 lesions. Out of 31 patients with ≥70% stenosis as measured by QCA, 14 (45.1%) had an FFR ≥ 0.75 and lesions were reclassified as moderate and did not receive PCI nor DAPT. Out of 26 patients with <70% stenosis as measured by QCA, 6 (23%) had an FFR < 0.75 and were reclassified as severe and were treated with PCI and associated DAPT. No periprocedural complications, urgent revascularization, acute coronary syndromes, or cardiovascular deaths were noted. There was a 22.8% mortality at 1 year, all cancer related. Patients who received a stent by FFR assessment showed a significant association with decreased risk of all-cause death (HR: 0.37, 95% CI 0.15–0.90, p = 0.03). Conclusions: Further studies are needed to define the optimal therapeutic approach for cancer patients with CAD. Using an FFR cut-off point of 0.75 to guide PCI translates into fewer interventions and can facilitate cancer care. There was an overall reduction in mortality in patients that received a stent, suggesting increased resilience to cancer therapy and progression.

In patients with cancer, myocardial infarction (MI) has distinct features and mechanisms compared to the non-oncology population. Triggers of myocardial ischemia specific to the oncology population have been increasingly identified. Coronary plaque disruption, coronary vasospasm, coronary microvascular dysfunction, spontaneous coronary artery dissection, and coronary oxygen supply-demand mismatch are all causes of MI that have been shown to have specific triggers related to either the treatments or complications of cancer. MI can occur in the presence or absence of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease (CAD). MI with nonobstructive CAD (MINOCA) is a heterogeneous syndrome that has distinct pathophysiology and different epidemiology from MI with significant CAD (MI-CAD). Recognition and differentiation of MI-CAD and MINOCA is essential in the oncology population, due to unique etiology and impact on diagnosis, management, and overall outcomes. There are currently no reports in the literature concerning MINOCA as a unified syndrome in oncology patients. The purpose of this review is to analyze the literature for studies related to known triggers of myocardial ischemia in cancer patients, with a focus on MINOCA. We propose that certain cancer treatments can induce MINOCA-like states, and further research is warranted to investigate mechanisms that may be unique to certain cancer states and types of treatment.