Sabine Rohrmann1,2, Fabienne Witassek3, Paul Erne4, Hans Rickli5, Dragana Radovanovic3. 1. 1 Division of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, University of Zurich, Switzerland. 2. 2 Cancer Registry Zurich and Zug, Zurich, Switzerland. 3. 3 AMIS Plus Data Center, University of Zurich, Switzerland. 4. 4 AMIS Plus, Zurich, Switzerland. 5. 5 Division of Cardiology, Kantonsspital St Gallen, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although cancer treatment considerably affects cardiovascular health, little is known about how cancer patients are treated for an acute myocardial infarction. We aimed to investigate whether acute myocardial infarction patients with a history of cancer received the same guideline recommended treatment as those acute myocardial infarction patients without and whether they differ with respect to inhospital outcome. METHODS: All patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, enrolled between 2002 and mid-2015 in the acute myocardial infarction in Switzerland (AMIS Plus) registry with comorbidity data based on the Charlson comorbidity index were analysed. Patients were classified as having cancer if one of the cancer diseases of the Charlson comorbidity index was indicated. Immediate treatment strategies and inhospital outcomes were compared between groups using propensity score matching. RESULTS: Of 35,249 patients, 1981 (5.6%) had a history of cancer. After propensity score matching for age, gender, Killip class >2, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and renal disease (1981 patients per group), significant differences were no longer found for a history of acute myocardial infarction, hypertension, diabetes, heart failure and cerebrovascular disease between cancer and non-cancer patients. However, cancer patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention less frequently (odds ratio (OR) 0.76; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.88) and received P2Y12 blockers (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.71-0.94) and statins (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.76-0.99) less frequently. Inhospital mortality was significantly higher in cancer patients (10.7% vs. 7.6%, OR 1.45; 95% CI 1.17-1.81). However, the main cause of death was cardiac in both groups ( P=0.06). CONCLUSION: Acute myocardial infarction patients with a history of cancer were less likely to receive guideline recommended treatment and had worse inhospital outcomes than non-cancer patients.
BACKGROUND: Although cancer treatment considerably affects cardiovascular health, little is known about how cancerpatients are treated for an acute myocardial infarction. We aimed to investigate whether acute myocardial infarctionpatients with a history of cancer received the same guideline recommended treatment as those acute myocardial infarctionpatients without and whether they differ with respect to inhospital outcome. METHODS: All patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, enrolled between 2002 and mid-2015 in the acute myocardial infarction in Switzerland (AMIS Plus) registry with comorbidity data based on the Charlson comorbidity index were analysed. Patients were classified as having cancer if one of the cancer diseases of the Charlson comorbidity index was indicated. Immediate treatment strategies and inhospital outcomes were compared between groups using propensity score matching. RESULTS: Of 35,249 patients, 1981 (5.6%) had a history of cancer. After propensity score matching for age, gender, Killip class >2, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and renal disease (1981 patients per group), significant differences were no longer found for a history of acute myocardial infarction, hypertension, diabetes, heart failure and cerebrovascular disease between cancer and non-cancerpatients. However, cancerpatients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention less frequently (odds ratio (OR) 0.76; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.88) and received P2Y12 blockers (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.71-0.94) and statins (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.76-0.99) less frequently. Inhospital mortality was significantly higher in cancerpatients (10.7% vs. 7.6%, OR 1.45; 95% CI 1.17-1.81). However, the main cause of death was cardiac in both groups ( P=0.06). CONCLUSION: Acute myocardial infarctionpatients with a history of cancer were less likely to receive guideline recommended treatment and had worse inhospital outcomes than non-cancerpatients.
Authors: Michela Chianca; Giorgia Panichella; Iacopo Fabiani; Alberto Giannoni; Serena L'Abbate; Alberto Aimo; Annamaria Del Franco; Giuseppe Vergaro; Chrysanthos Grigoratos; Vincenzo Castiglione; Carlo Maria Cipolla; Antonella Fedele; Claudio Passino; Michele Emdin; Daniela Maria Cardinale Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-07-06
Authors: Katarzyna Styczkiewicz; Marek Styczkiewicz; Monika Myćka; Sabina Mędrek; Tomasz Kondraciuk; Anna Czerkies-Bieleń; Andrzej Wiśniewski; Sebastian Szmit; Piotr Jankowski Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 1.889
Authors: Mohammad E Yadegarfar; Chris P Gale; Tatendashe B Dondo; Chris G Wilkinson; Martin R Cowie; Marlous Hall Journal: BMC Med Date: 2020-08-24 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Wesley T O'Neal; J'Neka S Claxton; Pratik B Sandesara; Richard F MacLehose; Lin Y Chen; Lindsay G S Bengtson; Alanna M Chamberlain; Faye L Norby; Pamela L Lutsey; Alvaro Alonso Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2018-10-16 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Muzna Hussain; Yuan Hou; Chris Watson; Rohit Moudgil; Chirag Shah; Jame Abraham; G Thomas Budd; W H Wilson Tang; J Emanuel Finet; Karen James; Jerry D Estep; Bo Xu; Bo Hu; Paul Cremer; Christine Jellis; Richard A Grimm; Neil Greenberg; Zoran B Popovic; Leslie Cho; Milind Y Desai; Steven E Nissen; Samir R Kapadia; Lars G Svensson; Brian P Griffin; Feixiong Cheng; Patrick Collier Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2020-09-28 Impact factor: 2.778