Search

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. 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Diffuse liver diseases have a high incidence among the general population and even higher in patients with a solid cancer. Since many patients with a solid tumor die of liver metastases, the aim of this systematic review of the literature was to explore the correlation between diffuse liver diseases and the risk of having liver metastases at diagnosis or during follow-up. To summarize the results of included studies, a meta-analysis was also conducted. The results of our systematic review should encourage the research community to further investigate the complex relationship between the liver's microscopic environment and metastases, which may also affect prognosis and response to therapy. This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to assess the effect of diffuse liver diseases (DLD) on the risk of synchronous (S-) or metachronous (M-) liver metastases (LMs) in patients with solid neoplasms. Relevant databases were searched for systematic reviews and cross-sectional or cohort studies published since 1990 comparing the risk of LMs in patients with and without DLD (steatosis, viral hepatitis, cirrhosis, fibrosis) in non-liver solid cancer patients. Outcomes were prevalence of S-LMs, cumulative risk of M-LMs and LM-free survival. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We report the pooled relative risks (RR) for S-LMs and hazard ratios (HR) for M-LMs. Subgroup analyses included DLD, primary site and continent. Nineteen studies were included (n = 37,591 patients), the majority on colorectal cancer. ROB appraisal results were mixed. Patients with DLD had a lower risk of S-LMs (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.34–0.76), with a higher effect for cirrhosis and a slightly higher risk of M-LMs (HR 1.11 95% CI, 1.03–1.19), despite a lower risk of M-LMs in patients with vs without viral hepatitis (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40–0.82). There may have been a publication bias in favor of studies reporting a lower risk for patients with DLD. DLD are protective against S-LMs and slightly protective against M-LMs for viral hepatitis only. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]