Search

Background: New oncological treatments improved survival but also increased awareness of cardiovascular side-effects during and after cancer therapy., Methods: We report the experience of the cardio-oncology clinic at a large Belgian tertiary care center and investigated the predictability of cardiotoxicity based on referring department, cardiovascular risk factors, cancer treatment and existing risk scores of the American Society of Clinical Oncologists (ASCO) and Mayo Clinic. Cardiotoxicity was defined as a 10% reduction in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) compared to the baseline transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in asymptomatic patients or 5% in symptomatic patients., Results: Of the 324 patients included, 14.5% died during follow-up. Most deaths were oncological, yet 19% of deaths were attributable to cardiovascular diseases. Models based on cardiovascular risk factors alone and cardiovascular risk factors combined with cardiotoxic medication poorly predicted cardiotoxicity. Existing risk scores from ASCO and Mayo Clinic also poorly predicted cardiotoxicity. A weighed model based on the Mayo Clinic cardiotoxicity risk score was the best risk assessment tool with still a limited predictive value with an Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve of 0.654 (CI 95%: 0.601-0.715)., Conclusion: Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality are common in cancer patients and survivors and stress the unmet need of adequate risk prediction tools for systematic screening and rigorous cardiovascular follow-up. In our outpatient cohort, cardiotoxicity risk could not be adequately predicted by cancer type, using classic cardiovascular risk factors, nor by the combination of cardiovascular risk factors and the proposed cancer treatment. Furthermore, we showed that existing cardiotoxicity risk scores are suboptimal and should thus be interpreted with caution., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate two counseling programs in general practice to help smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to quit smoking., Methods: Cluster randomized controlled trial including 68 general practices (667 patients) using a randomly assigned intervention program with counseling and advice about nicotine replacement therapy (and additional bupropion-SR in one of the programs) or usual care. Usual care consisted of periodic regular check-ups and COPD information. The main outcome measure was biochemically verified point prevalence at 12 months., Results: The two intervention groups were treated as one in the analysis because they were equally effective. The intervention resulted in a significantly self-reported higher success rate (14.5%) compared to usual care (7.4%); odds ratio=2.1, 95% confidence interval=1.1-4.1. Biochemically verified quit rates were 7.5% (intervention) and 3.4% (usual care); odds ratio=2.3, 95% confidence interval=0.9-6.0., Conclusion: The program doubled the cessation rates (statistically nonsignificant). Too few participants used the additional bupropion-SR to prove its effectiveness., Practice Implications: The protocols can be used for COPD patients in general practice, but expectations should be modest. If quitting is unsuccessful, a stepped care approach should be considered., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)