Search

Active cancer is associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation (AF), which varies depending on the pre-existing substrate (particularly in older patients), the cancer type and stage, and the anticancer therapeutics being taken. To date, studies have not been able to identify the individual contribution of each factor. During anticancer drug therapy, AF may occur with a frequency of ≈ 15-20% according to several factors, including the patient's baseline cardiovascular toxicity risk and the AF-detection strategies used. Many anticancer drugs have been associated with AF or AF reporting, both in terms of incident and recurrent AF, but robust data are lacking. Only bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor associated AF (mainly ibrutinib) has a high level of evidence, with a ≈ 3-4-fold higher risk of AF. AF in patients with active cancer is associated with a twofold higher risk of systemic thromboembolism or stroke, and the "TBIP" (Thromboembolic risk, Bleeding risk, drug-drug Interactions, Patient preferences) structured approach must be used to evaluate the need for anticoagulation therapy. AF in patients with active cancer is also associated with a sixfold higher risk of heart failure, and optimal symptom control must be targeted, usually with rate-control drugs (beta-blockers), but a rhythm-control strategy may be proposed in patients remaining symptomatic despite optimal rate-control. AF is generally manageable, with the continuation of anticancer drugs (including ibrutinib); interruption of cancer drugs must be avoided whenever possible and weighed against the risk of cancer progression., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.)

Aims: The explosion of novel anticancer therapies has meant emergence of cardiotoxicity signals including atrial fibrillation (AF). Reliable data concerning the liability of anticancer drugs in inducing AF are scarce. Using the World Health Organization individual case safety report database, VigiBase®, we aimed to determine the association between anticancer drugs and AF., Methods and Results: A disproportionality analysis evaluating the multivariable-adjusted reporting odds ratios for AF with their 99.97% confidence intervals was performed for 176 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)- or European Medicines Agency (EMA)-labelled anticancer drugs in VigiBase®, followed by a descriptive analysis of AF cases for the anticancer drugs identified in VigiBase®. ClinicalTrial registration number: NCT03530215. A total of 11 757 AF cases associated with at least one anticancer drug were identified in VigiBase® of which 95.8% were deemed serious. Nineteen anticancer drugs were significantly associated with AF of which 14 (74%) are used in haematologic malignancies and 9 (45%) represented new AF associations not previously confirmed in literature including immunomodulating agents (lenalidomide, pomalidomide), several kinase inhibitors (nilotinib, ponatinib, midostaurin), antimetabolites (azacytidine, clofarabine), docetaxel (taxane), and obinutuzumab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody., Conclusion: Although cancer malignancy itself may generate AF, we identified 19 anticancer drugs significantly associated with a significant increase in AF over-reporting. This pharmacovigilance study provides evidence that anticancer drugs themselves could represent independent risk factors for AF development. Dedicated prospective clinical trials are now required to confirm these 19 associations. This list of suspected anticancer drugs should be known by physicians when confronted to AF in cancer patients, particularly in case of haematologic malignancies., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

We aimed to investigate the association between use of anticancer drugs and cardiovascular-related hospitalization (CVRH) among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). A cohort study, the Anticancer Vigilance of Cardiac Events (AVOCETTE) Study, was conducted using data from the digestive tumor registry of a French county, the Département du Calvados. Incident mCRC cases diagnosed between 2008 and 2014 were included. The follow-up end date was December 31, 2016. Data from the county hospital center pharmacy and medical information departments were matched with the registry data. A competing-risks approach was used. Statistical tests were 2-sided. A total of 1,116 mCRC patients were included, and they were administered 12,374 rounds of treatment; fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab were most common drugs used. A total of 208 CVRH events occurred in 145 patients (13.0%). The International Cancer Survival Standards type 1 standardized incidence was 84.0 CVRH per 1,000 person-years (95% confidence interval: 72.6, 95.5). Anticancer drugs were not associated with a higher incidence of CVRH. Male sex, increasing age, a prior history of CVRH, and a higher Charlson comorbidity index score were associated with a higher incidence of CVRH. CVRH was significantly associated with higher all-cause mortality (multivariable hazard ratio = 1.58, 95% confidence interval: 1.28, 1.95). In this study, anticancer drugs were not associated with a higher incidence of CVRH in mCRC patients., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The considerable progress made in the field of cancer treatment has led to a dramatic improvement in the prognosis of patients with cancer. However, toxicities resulting from these treatments represent a cost that can be harmful to short- and long-term outcomes. Adverse events affecting the cardiovascular system are one of the greatest challenges in the overall management of patients with cancer, as they can compromise the success of the optimal treatment against the tumor. Such adverse events are associated not only with older chemotherapy drugs such as anthracyclines but also with many targeted therapies and immunotherapies. Recognizing this concern, several American and European governing societies in oncology and cardiology have published guidelines on the cardiovascular monitoring of patients receiving potentially cardiotoxic cancer therapies, as well as on the management of cardiovascular toxicities. However, the low level of evidence supporting these guidelines has led to numerous discrepancies, leaving clinicians without a consensus strategy to apply. A cardio-oncology expert panel from the French Working Group of Cardio-Oncology has undertaken an ambitious effort to analyze and harmonize the most recent American and European guidelines to propose roadmaps and decision algorithms that would be easy for clinicians to use in their daily practice. In this statement, the experts addressed the cardiovascular monitoring strategies for the cancer drugs associated with the highest risk of cardiovascular toxicities, as well as the management of such toxicities.

Background: The risk of cardiovascular adverse events from rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma B-type (BRAF) and mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase (MEK) inhibitors is not fully characterized., Aim: To evaluate the cardiovascular adverse events risks related to BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors in randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials and in the real-life setting., Methods: We used two approaches. First, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials reporting the incidence of cardiovascular adverse events for BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors in cancer patients. Second, we performed a disproportionality analysis, using age- and sex-adjusted reporting odds ratios (arORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) from the World Health Organization's pharmacovigilance database (VigiBase®) of anticancer drug-associated reports, to investigate real-life data., Results: MEK inhibitors increased the risk of ejection fraction decrease (odds ratio [OR] 3.35, 95% CI 1.58-7.07), peripheral oedema (OR 2.87 95% CI 1.93-4.27) and syncope (OR 6.71, 95% CI 3.00-14.99) compared with placebo in randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials. BRAF and MEK inhibitor combination therapy further increased the risk of ejection fraction decrease. In the disproportionality analysis, we found over-reporting of ejection fraction decrease (arOR 8.42, 95% CI 7.03-10.09), peripheral oedema (arOR 1.39, 95% CI 1.17-1.66), syncope (arOR 1.56, 95% CI 1.22-1.99), torsade de pointes/QT prolongation (arOR 6.13, 95% CI 5.04-7.47) and supraventricular arrhythmias (arOR 1.50, 95% CI 1.21-1.85) for BRAF and MEK inhibitors. BRAF and MEK inhibitors were not associated with hypertension in either approach., Conclusions: In conclusion, MEK inhibitors increase the risk of ejection fraction decrease, peripheral oedema and syncope in randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials. Real-life data confirm these findings, and suggested additional risks of torsade de pointes/QT prolongation and supraventricular arrhythmias with BRAF/MEK inhibitors., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Significant advances in cancer treatment have resulted in decreased cancer related mortality for many malignancies with some cancer types now considered chronic diseases. Despite these improvements, there is increasing recognition that many cancer patients or cancer survivors can develop cardiovascular diseases, either due to the cancer itself or as a result of anticancer therapy. Much attention has focused on heart failure; however, other cardiotoxicities, notably cardiac rhythm disorders, can occur without underlying cardiomyopathy. Supraventricular tachycardias occur in cancer patients treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy (anthracyclines, gemcitabine, cisplatin and alkylating-agents) or kinase-inhibitors (KIs) such as ibrutinib. Ventricular arrhythmias, with a subset of them being torsades-de-pointes (TdP) favored by QTc prolongation have been reported: this may be the result of direct hERG-channel inhibition or a more recently-described mechanism of phosphoinositide-3-kinase inhibition. The major anticancer drugs responsible for QTc prolongation in this context are KIs, arsenic trioxide, anthracyclines, histone deacetylase inhibitors, and selective estrogen receptor modulators. Anticancer drug-induced cardiac rhythm disorders remain an underappreciated complication even by experienced clinicians. Moreover, the causal relationship of a particular anticancer drug with cardiac arrhythmia occurrence remains challenging due in part to patient comorbidities and complex treatment regimens. For example, any cancer patient may also be diagnosed with common diseases such as hypertension, diabetes or heart failure which increase an individual's arrhythmia susceptibility. Further, anticancer drugs are generally usually used in combination, increasing the challenge around establishing causation. Thus, arrhythmias appear to be an underappreciated adverse effect of anticancer agents and the incidence, significance and underlying mechanisms are now being investigated., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Simple Summary: This retrospective study investigated newly diagnosed coronary artery disease (CAD) in prostate cancer patients treated with Androgen Deprivation Therapy and who underwent cardio-onco evaluation at a Cancer Institute. The cardio-onco evaluation included a systematic evaluation of coronary status. Among the 34 patients evaluated, 20.6% were diagnosed with CAD, often asymptomatic with a median diagnosis time of 5 months. Of the 27 patients without CAD, 44.4% underwent a therapeutic intervention by the cardiologist. Our results underscore of CAD screening in this population; however, further research is needed to determine whether routine CAD screening for these patients would result in significant clinical benefits. Background: Given the potential cardiovascular risks of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), it is essential to identify patients who may be at an increased risk for coronary artery disease (CAD). Despite the recent ESC recommendations, there is no consensus on when to refer a patient to a cardiologist for further evaluation. Objective: To report on new diagnoses of CAD in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) requiring ADT who underwent a systematic cardio-onco evaluation with an assessment of their coronary status. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a retrospective, monocentric study that included patients with PCa who had completed a cardio-onco evaluation with an assessment of their coronary status in the cardio-oncology department at the Western Cancer Institute, Nantes, between January 2019 and August 2022. Intervention: The baseline cardio-onco evaluation included a physical exam, transthoracic echography, and electrocardiogram, followed with a systematic evaluation of their coronary status. Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The primary objective was to determine the incidence of newly diagnosed CAD. The secondary objective was to evaluate the number of changes in cardiovascular treatment. Results and Limitations: Among the 34 patients who underwent cardio-onco evaluation, 7 (20.6%) were diagnosed with CAD, with a median time to diagnosis of 5 months. Most patients were asymptomatic, with one who experienced a myocardial infarction. Of the 27 patients without CAD, 44.4% underwent a therapeutic intervention by the cardiologist, with no cardiac deaths during follow-up. Overall, 55.9% of patients had a therapeutic intervention after the cardio-onco evaluation. Conclusions: The high incidence of newly diagnosed CAD in asymptomatic patients supports the need for screening for CAD in this population. Further research is needed to determine whether routine screening for CAD in patients receiving ADT would result in significant clinical benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The pathophysiological mechanisms involved in systemic sclerosis (SSc), especially the triggering factor, are poorly understood. The literature supporting the role of drugs in the onset of SSc primarily relies on case reports, short series or previous studies of old drugs. We aimed to update the list of suspected drugs associated with SSc (DASSc). Analyzing the World Health Organization (WHO) pharmacovigilance database (Vigibase®), we collected all individual case safety reports (ICSRs) of drugs putatively associated with SSc reported since 1967 using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities preferred terms "systemic sclerosis" and "scleroderma". For each drug, a disproportionality analysis was performed by calculating the information component (IC). An identified drug was considered significant if the IC 025 was >0. A total of 2800 deduplicated ICSRs of DASSc were identified, accounting for 509 ICSRs and 38 suspected DASSc after exclusion of protopathic and indication biases. Anticancer drugs were the most represented drug class, accounting for 16/38 (42%) of DASSc and 317/509 (62.3%) of ICSRs, which occurred mostly in the first years after the introduction of the drugs. Among these, taxane-based agents, bleomycin, vinblastine, imatinib, dacarbazine, pembrolizumab and pemetrexed were associated with the highest disproportionate reporting. Hormone replacement therapy, romiplostim and eculizumab were associated with a significant signal. DASSc was considered a serious adverse drug reaction in 404 (92%, n = 441) cases with 41 (9%) cases resulting in death. Several new drugs with significant disproportionality signals were identified as potential drugs implicated the development of SSc, particularly anticancer drugs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We report two cases of acute hepatitis induced by crizotinib in patients with ALK-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who were treated after by a second generation of ALK inhibitor without any incident. These cases suggest that ceritinib could be used as an alternative agent when crizotinib is responsible for hepatitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]