Key result
Continuing 5-FU therapy after pre-treatment with calcium channel blockers and/or nitrates significantly decreased the risk of death (HR 0.42) compared to stopping 5-FU in patients with 5-FU-associated coronary vasospasm.
Why the study?
Coronary vasospasm is a known side effect of fluorouracil therapy, but beyond switching to non-fluorouracil chemotherapy, established treatments are lacking.
Does re-challenge with 5-FU after pre-treatment with calcium channel blockers and/or nitrates improve overall survival in patients with 5-FU associated coronary vasospasm?
Cohort (n=115)
No
Does re-challenge with 5-FU after pre-treatment with calcium channel blockers and/or nitrates improve overall survival in patients with 5-FU associated coronary vasospasm?
Hazard Ratio: 0.42 (95% CI 0.23–0.77)
Absolute Event Rate: 47% vs 18.3%
p-value: p=0.005
In patients with 5-FU-associated coronary vasospasm, re-challenge with 5-FU after pre-treatment with calcium channel blockers and nitrates is safe and associated with improved overall survival compared to stopping 5-FU therapy.
May permit 5-FU continuation after pre-treatment with lower mortality; hypothesis-generating and needs prospective validation.
BACKGROUND: Coronary vasospasm is a known side effect of 5-FU (fluorouracil) therapy. Beyond switching to non-5FU-based chemotherapy, there are no established treatments for 5-FU associated coronary vasospam. Our objective was to assess the safety and efficacy of re-challenge with 5-FU after pre-treatment with calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and long-acting nitrates among patients 5-FU associated coronary vasospasm. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients with 5-FU coronary vasospasm at a single academic center. By protocol, those referred to cardio-oncology received pre-treatment with either combination [nitrates and CCBs] or single-agent therapy [nitrates or CCBs]) prior to re-challenge with 5-FU. Our primary outcome was overall survival. Other important outcomes included progression-free survival and safety. RESULTS: Among 6,606 patients who received 5-FU from January 2001 to Dec 2020, 115 (1.74%) developed coronary vasospasm. Of these 115 patients, 81 patients continued 5-FU therapy, while 34 stopped. Of the 81 who continued, 78 were referred to cardio-oncology and prescribed CCBs and/or nitrates prior to subsequent 5-FU, while the remaining 3 continued 5-FU without cardiac pre-treatment. Of the 78, 56.4% (44/78) received both nitrates and CCBs, 19.2% (15/78) received CCBs alone, and 24.4% (19/78) received nitrates alone. When compared to patients who stopped 5-FU, those who continued 5-FU after pre-treatment (single or combination therapy) had a decreased risk of death (HR 0.42, P = 0.005 [95% CI 0.23-0.77]) and a trend towards decreased cancer progression (HR 0.60, P = 0.08 [95% CI 0.34-1.06]). No patient in the pre-treatment group had a myocardial infarct after re-challenge; however, chest pain (without myocardial infarction) recurred in 19.2% (15/78) among those who received cardiac pre-treatment vs. 66.7% (2/3) among those who did not (P = 0.048). There was no difference in efficacy or the recurrence of vasospasm among patients who received pre-treatment with a single agent (nitrates or CCBs) or combination therapy (14.7% (5/34) vs. 25.0% (11/44), P = 0.26). CONCLUSION: Re-challenge after pre-treatment with CCBs and nitrates guided by a cardio-oncology service was safe and allowed continued 5-FU therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zafar et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in 5-FU (Fluorouracil)-associated coronary vasospasm (n=115). Re-challenge with 5-FU after pre-treatment with calcium channel blockers and/or long-acting nitrates vs. Stopping 5-FU therapy was evaluated on Overall survival (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.23-0.77, p=0.005). Continuing 5-FU therapy after pre-treatment with calcium channel blockers and/or nitrates significantly decreased the risk of death (HR 0.42) compared to stopping 5-FU in patients with 5-FU-associated coronary vasospasm.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: