| Literature DB >> 28395671 |
Ashita Barthur1, Christine Brezden-Masley2,3, Kim A Connelly3,4,5, Vinita Dhir2, Kelvin K W Chan6, Rashida Haq2, Anish Kirpalani1,3, Joseph J Barfett1,3, Laura Jimenez-Juan7, Gauri R Karur1, Djeven P Deva8,9, Andrew T Yan10,11,12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the effects of trastuzumab on the right ventricle (RV). Therefore, we sought to evaluate the temporal changes in right ventricular (RV) structure and function as measured by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR), and their relationship with left ventricular (LV) structure and function in breast cancer patients treated with trastuzumab.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiotoxicity; Cardiovascular magnetic resonance; Right ventricle; Trastuzumab
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28395671 PMCID: PMC5387372 DOI: 10.1186/s12968-017-0356-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson ISSN: 1097-6647 Impact factor: 5.364
Baseline characteristics of the study population
|
| |
|---|---|
| Demographics | |
| Age | 52 ± 11 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 26.8 ± 6.3 |
| Cardiovascular risk factors | |
| Hypertension | 10 (24.4%) |
| Diabetes | 4 (9.8%) |
| Hypercholesterolemia | 3 (7.3%) |
| Coronary artery disease | 1 (2.4%) |
| Smoking | 10 (24.4%) |
| Medications: | |
| Beta-blocker | 3 (9%) |
| ACE inhibitor | 3 (9%) |
| NYHA class III/IV | 0 |
| Cancer-related variables | |
| Breast cancer site | |
| Left | 27 (65.9%) |
| Stage of disease | |
| Early | 27 (68%) |
| Locally invasive | 13 (32%) |
| Type of surgery | |
| Breast-conserving surgery | 22 (53.7%) |
| Mastectomy | 19 (46.3%) |
| Chemotherapeutic regimen | |
| Anthracycline based | 23 (56.1%) |
| Left sided radiation | 12 (29.3) |
| Biomarkers: | |
| High sensitivity-troponin I, ng/mL ( | <0.006 (<0.006–0.012) |
| NT-BNP, ng/mL ( | 57 (33–128) |
| LV parameters | |
| LVEDV, ml | 129.7 ± 24.9 |
| LVESV, ml | 51.5 ± 12 |
| LVEF, % | 60.4 ± 4.2 |
| RV parameters | |
| RVEDV, ml | 121 ± 24 |
| RVESV, ml | 51 ± 11 |
| RVEF, % | 58.3 ± 3.8 |
Data presented as frequency (percentages) or mean ± standard deviation unless otherwise specified
amedian (interquartile range)
Fig. 1Longitudinal measurements of RVEDV over 18 months. There were significant changes in RVEDV over time (p = 0.004). By Sidak-adjusted pairwise comparisons with the baseline, the mean RVEDV showed a small but significant increase at 6 months (p = 0.002), that was no longer significant at 18 months (p = 0.82). Data shown as mean and 95% confidence intervals (vertical bars)
Fig. 2Longitudinal measurements of RVESV over 18 months. There were significant changes in RVESV over time (p < 0.001). By Sidak-adjusted pairwise comparisons with the baseline, the mean RVESV showed a small but significant increase at 6 and 12 months (both p < 0.001), that was no longer significant at 18 months (p = 0.14). Data shown as mean and 95% confidence intervals (vertical bars)
Fig. 3Longitudinal measurements of RVEF over 18 months. There were significant changes in RVEF over time (p < 0.001). By Sidak-adjusted pairwise comparisons with the baseline, the mean RVEF showed a small but significant decrease at 6 and 12 months (p < 0.001 for both), that was no longer significant at 18 months (p = 0.08). Data shown as mean and 95% confidence intervals (vertical bars)
Fig. 4Relationship between LVEF and RVEF over 18 months. The changes in LVEF and RVEF paralleled each other over time. Both the LVEF and RVEF showed significant changes at 6 and 12 months that recover at 18 months
Fig. 5Relationship between changes in RVEF and LVEF over 6 months