Search

Background: The administration of anticancer drugs in females with comorbidity increases the risk for cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity (CTR-CVT), which in turn contributes to cardiovascular disease (CVD). Furthermore, a pathophysiological connection between cancer and cardiovascular disease may exist. Objective: To assess the long-term risks and predictors of CTR-CVT, including clinical hypertension (HT), coronary artery disease (CAD), heart failure (HF), atrial fibrillation (AF), as well as all-cause mortality in women diagnosed with early breast cancer (BC) and eligible for adjuvant chemotherapy in Sweden. Methods: Data were extracted from Swedish registers and medical records on 433 women, 18-60 years of age, diagnosed 1998-2002 with lymph nodepositive BC, and considered for adjuvant chemotherapy. CTR-CVT was defined as HT, CAD, HF, or AF after the diagnosis of BC. Follow-up was from the date of BC diagnosis until November 30, 2021, or death. Prevalence of CTR-CVT and allcause mortality were calculated. Hazard ratios (HR) were determined for factors associated with CTR-CVT. Results: The median age was 50 (interquartile range (IQR) 32) years. 910 CTRCVT events were diagnosed in 311 women with a median of 19.3 (IQR 15,3) years follow-up. The proportions of CTR-CVT events were: HT 281 (64%); CAD 198 (46%); HF 206 (47%); and AF 225 (51%). The cumulative incidence of CTR-CVT was 71.8%, and 50% of all 433 patients developed CTR-CVT within 11.7 years of BC diagnosis (standard deviation (SD) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 10.6-12.9). Age was a risk factor for CTR-CVT. Anthracycline increased the risk for HF (p=0,001; HR 2,0; 95%CI 1,4-2,8), CAD (p= 0,002; HR 1,7; 95% CI 1,2-2,4), and AF (p=0,013; HR 1,5; 95% CI 1,0-2,0). At the end of the 24-year study period, 227 of the 433 women were alive, and the total cumulative mortality was 47,6%. Conclusion: The prevalence of CTR-CVT and all-cause mortality is high after BC diagnosis and treatment, particularly in older patients and those receiving anthracyclines. These findings and the onset of CTR-CVT support cardiooncology guidelines recommending initial risk stratification and cardiovascular monitoring during treatment, followed by long-term annual screening for cardiovascular risk factors and CTR-CVT among BC survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a brief dyadic cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) programme on the health-related quality of life (HRQoL), as well as the sense of coherence in atrial fibrillation patients, up to 12 months post atrial fibrillation. Methods: A longitudinal randomised controlled trial with a pre and 12-month post-test recruitment of 163 persons and their spouses, at a county hospital in southern Sweden. In all, 104 persons were randomly assigned to either a CBT (n=56) or a treatment as usual (TAU) group (n=55). The primary outcome was changes in the HRQoL (Euroqol questionnaire; EQ-5D), and the secondary outcomes were changes in psychological distress (hospital anxiety and depression scale; HADS) and sense of coherence (sense of coherence scale; SOC-13). Results: At the 12-month follow-up, the CBT group experienced a higher HRQoL than the TAU group (mean changes in the CBT group 0.062 vs. mean changes in the TAU group −0.015; P=0.02). The sense of coherence improved in the CBT group after the 12-month follow-up, compared to the TAU group (mean changes in the CBT group 0.062 vs. mean changes in the TAU group −0.16; P=0.04). The association between the intervention effect and the HRQoL was totally mediated by the sense of coherence (z=2.07, P=0.04). Conclusions: A dyadic mindfulness-based CBT programme improved HRQoL and reduced psychological distress up to 12 months post atrial fibrillation. The sense of coherence strongly mediated the HRQoL; consequently, the sense of coherence is an important determinant to consider when designing programmes for atrial fibrillation patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heart failure (HF) is a growing, global public health issue. Despite advances in HF care, many challenges remain and HF outcomes are poor. Some of the major reasons for this are the lack of understanding and treatment for certain HF sub-types as well as the lack of implementation of treatment in areas where effective treatment exists. HF registries provide the opportunity to transform clinical research and patient care. Recently the registry-based randomized clinical trial has emerged as a pragmatic and inexpensive alternative to the gold standard in clinical trial design, the randomized controlled trial. Registries may also provide platforms for strategy trials, implementation trials, and screening. Using examples from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry and others, the present review provides insights into how registry-based research can address many of the unmet needs in HF., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest TP: None. PK: None related to the present work. Reports fee for lectures from Vifor and personal fee for lecture from AstraZeneca. LHL: None related to the present work. Outside the present work: Grants: AstraZeneca, Vifor, Boston Scientific, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, MSD; Consulting: Vifor, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Pharmacosmos, MSD, MedScape, Sanofi, Lexicon, Myokardia, Boehringer Ingelheim, Servier, Edwards Life Sciences, Alleviant; Speaker's honoraria: Abbott, OrionPharma, MedScape, Radcliffe, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer; Patent: AnaCardio., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The SOLOIST-WHF trial demonstrated efficacy of sotagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and recent worsening heart failure (HF) regardless of ejection fraction (EF). Selection criteria in trials may limit their generalizability. Therefore, we aimed to investigate eligibility for sotagliflozin based on the SOLOIST-WHF criteria in a real-world HF population., Methods and Results: SOLOIST-WHF criteria were applied to patients stabilized after HF hospitalization in the Swedish HF Registry according to (i) literal scenario (all inclusion/exclusion criteria) or (ii) pragmatic scenario (only criteria likely to influence treatment decisions). Of 5453 inpatients with T2DM and recent worsening HF, 51.4% had reduced EF (HFrEF), 19.1% mildly reduced (HFmrEF), and 29.5% preserved EF (HFpEF). Eligibility (literal) was: 27.2% (32.4% in HFrEF, 24.7% in HFmrEF, 19.7% in HFpEF) and eligibility (pragmatic) was 62.8% (69.1%, 60.3%, 53.4%, respectively). In the literal scenario, criteria limiting eligibility were HF duration <3 months, eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73 m2, age >85 years, acute coronary syndrome <3 months, and insufficiently high N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels. Eligible vs. non-eligible patients had more severe HF, higher cardiovascular (CV) comorbidity burden, higher use of HF treatments, and higher event rates (all-cause death 30.8 vs. 27.2 per 100 patient-years, CV death 19.1 vs. 16.6, and HF hospitalization 36.7 vs. 24.0)., Conclusion: In this large, real-world HF cohort with T2DM, ∼1/3 of patients were eligible for sotagliflozin in the literal and ∼2/3 of patients in the pragmatic scenario. Eligible patients had more severe HF and higher event rates, in particular CV and HF events., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aim: To determine whether brain natriuretic peptide (BNP)-guided heart failure (HF) treatment improves morbidity and/or mortality when compared with conventional treatment., Methods and Results: UPSTEP was an investigator-initiated, randomized, parallel group, multicentre study with a PROBE design. Symptomatic patients with worsening HF, New York Heart Association class II-IV, ejection fraction <40% and elevated BNP levels, were included. All patients (n= 279) were treated according to recommended guidelines and randomized to BNP-guided (BNP) or to conventional (CTR) HF treatment. The goal was to reduce BNP levels to <150 ng/L in younger patients and <300 ng/L in elderly patients, respectively. The primary outcome was a composite of death due to any cause, need for hospitalization and worsening HF. The study groups were well matched, including for BNP concentration at entry (mean: 808 vs. 899 ng/L; P= 0.34). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding either the primary outcome (P = 0.18) or any of the secondary endpoints. There were no differences for the pre-specified analyses; days out of hospital, and younger vs. elderly. A subgroup analysis comparing treatment responders (>30% decrease in baseline BNP value) vs. non-responders found improved survival among responders (P< 0.0001 for the primary outcome), and all of the secondary endpoints were also improved., Conclusions: Morbidity and mortality were not improved by HF treatment guided by BNP levels. However, BNP responders had a significantly better clinical outcome than non-responders. Future research is needed to elucidate the responsible pathophysiological mechanisms in this sub-population.