Key result
Cardiac neoplasm on LGE-CMR is linked to ~3-fold higher mortality vs thrombus in advanced cancer.
Why the study?
Prognostic implications of cardiac mass subtypes differentiated by late gadolinium enhancement CMR among systemic cancer patients are unknown.
Observational (n=126)
No
Hazard Ratio: 3.13 (95% CI 1.54–6.39)
p-value: p=0.002
LGE-CMR differentiation of neoplasm from thrombus may stratify short-term mortality risk in cancer patients with masses; leaves open whether it should guide therapy or surveillance.
Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE-) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is well-validated for cardiac mass (C MASS ) tissue characterization to differentiate neoplasm (C NEO ) from thrombus (C THR ): Prognostic implications of C MASS subtypes among systemic cancer patients are unknown. C MASS + patients and controls (C MASS -) matched for cancer diagnosis and stage underwent a standardized CMR protocol, including LGE-CMR (IR-GRE) for tissue characterization and balanced steady state free precession cine-CMR (SSFP) for cardiac structure/function. C MASS subtypes (C NEO , C THR ) were respectively defined by presence or absence of enhancement on LGE-CMR; lesions were quantified for tissue properties (contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR); signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and size. Clinical follow-up was performed to evaluate prognosis in relation to C MASS etiology. The study population comprised 126 patients with systemic neoplasms referred for CMR, of whom 50% ( n = 63) had C MASS + (C NEO = 32%, C THR = 18%). Cancer etiology differed between C NEO (sarcoma = 20%, lung = 18%) and C THR (lymphoma = 30%, GI = 26%); cardiac function (left ventricular ejection fraction: 63 ± 9 vs. 62 ± 10%; p = 0.51 ∣ right ventricular ejection fraction: 53 ± 9 vs. 54 ± 8%; p = 0.47) and geometric indices were similar (all p = NS). LGE-CMR tissue properties assessed by CNR (13.1 ± 13.0 vs. 1.6 ± 1.0; p < 0.001) and SNR (29.7 ± 20.4 vs. 15.0 ± 11.4, p = 0.003) were higher for C NEO , consistent with visually-assigned diagnostic categories. C THR were more likely to localize to the right atrium (78% vs. 25%, p < 0.001); nearly all (17/18) were associated with central catheters. Lesion size (17.3 ± 23.8 vs. 2.0 ± 1.5 cm 2 ; p < 0.001) was greater with C NEO vs. C THR , as was systemic disease burden (cancer-involved organs: 3.6 ± 2.0 vs. 2.3 ± 2.1; p = 0.02). Mortality during a median follow-up of 2.5 years was markedly higher among patients with C NEO compared to those with C THR (HR = 3.13 [CI 1.54–6.39], p = 0.002); prognosis was similar when patients were stratified by lesion size assessed via area (HR = 0.99 per cm 2 [CI 0.98–1.01], p = 0.40) or maximal diameter (HR = 0.98 per cm [CI 0.91–1.06], p = 0.61). C THR conferred similar mortality risk compared to cancer-matched controls without cardiac involvement ( p = 0.64) whereas mortality associated with C NEO was slightly higher albeit non-significant ( p = 0.12). Among a broad cancer cohort with cardiac masses, C NEO defined by LGE-CMR tissue characterization conferred markedly poorer prognosis than C THR , whereas anatomic assessment via cine-CMR did not stratify mortality risk. Both C NEO and C THR are associated with similar prognosis compared to C MASS - controls matched for cancer type and disease extent.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chan et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Advanced systemic cancer with cardiac mass (n=126). Cardiac neoplasm (CNEO) vs. Cardiac thrombus (CTHR) was evaluated on All-cause mortality (HR 3.13, 95% CI 1.54-6.39, p=0.002). Cardiac neoplasm defined by LGE-CMR tissue characterization conferred a markedly higher mortality risk compared to cardiac thrombus (HR 3.13) among patients with advanced systemic cancer.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: