Key result
Anti-cancer therapy is linked to an 11% absolute increase in functional disability.
Why the study?
Standard measures of chemotherapy-associated cardiotoxicity such as LVEF and GLS have not been associated with short-term symptoms, functional capacity, or long-term heart failure risk, necessitating evaluation of more sensitive cardiovascular function measures.
Does VO2peak assessment detect cardiac damage induced by anti-cancer treatment more sensitively than LVEF, GLS, or cardiac biomarkers in cancer patients?
Cohort (n=206)
Does VO2peak assessment detect cardiac damage induced by anti-cancer treatment more sensitively than LVEF, GLS, or cardiac biomarkers in cancer patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 26% vs 15%
p-value: p=0.016
Cardiorespiratory fitness (VO2peak) is significantly reduced following anti-cancer treatment, identifying functional impairment that is not captured by traditional markers of cardiotoxicity like LVEF and GLS.
VO2peak decline after cancer therapy occurred independent of LVEF or GLS changes; leaves open whether routine assessment improves HF risk stratification.
AIMS: Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is standard of care for evaluating chemotherapy-associated cardiotoxicity, although global longitudinal strain (GLS) offers advantages. However, neither change in LVEF or GLS has been associated with short-term symptoms, functional capacity, or long-term heart failure (HF) risk. We sought to determine whether an integrative measure of cardiovascular function (VO2peak) that is strongly associated with HF risk would be more sensitive to cardiac damage induced by cancer treatment than LVEF, GLS, or cardiac biomarkers. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n = 206, 53 ± 13 years, 35% male) scheduled to commence anti-cancer treatment completed assessment prior to, and within 6 months after therapy. Changes in echocardiographic measures of LV function (LVEF, GLS), cardiac biomarkers (troponin and BNP), and cardiorespiratory fitness (VO2peak) were measured. LV function was normal prior to treatment (LVEF 61 ± 5%; GLS -19.4 ± 2.1), but VO2peak was only 88 ± 26% of age-predicted. After treatment, VO2peak was reduced by 7 ± 15% (equivalent of 7 years normal ageing, P < 0.0001) and the rates of functional disability (defined as VO2peak ≤ 18 mL/min/kg) almost doubled (15% vs. 26%, P = 0.016). In contrast, small, reductions in LVEF (59 ± 5% vs. 58 ± 5%, P = 0.03) and GLS (-19.4 ± 2.1 vs. -18.9 ± 2.2, P = 0.002) and an increase in troponin levels (4.0 ± 6.9 vs. 26.4 ± 26.2 ng/mL, P < 0.0001) were observed. CONCLUSION: Anti-cancer treatment is associated with marked reductions in functional capacity that occur independent of reductions in LVEF and GLS. The assessment of VO2peak prior to, and following treatment may be a more sensitive means of identifying patients at increased risk of HF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Howden et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Cancer (n=206). Anti-cancer treatment vs. Pre-treatment baseline was evaluated on Functional disability (VO2peak ≤ 18 mL/min/kg) (p=0.016). Anti-cancer treatment was associated with a 7% reduction in VO2peak (P<0.0001) and an increase in functional disability from 15% to 26% (P=0.016), independent of small reductions in LVEF and GLS.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: