Inna Y Gong1, Andrew T Yan1,2, Dennis T Ko1,3,4, Craig C Earle1,3,4,5, Winson Y Cheung6,7, Stuart Peacock6,8, Marlous Hall9, Chris P Gale9, Kelvin K W Chan1,4,8. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 2. Division of Cardiology, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 3. Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 4. Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 5. Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 6. British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 7. Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 8. Canadian Center for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Ontario and British Columbia, Canada. 9. Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of information about treatment and mortality trends after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) for cancer survivors (CS). METHODS: In this population-based study, the authors compared temporal trends of treatments and outcomes (mortality, nonfatal cardiovascular outcomes), among CS and patients without cancer (the noncancer patient [NCP] group) with AMI in Ontario (Canada) using inverse probability treatment weight (IPTW)-adjusted modeling. RESULTS: Of 270,089 patients with AMI (22,907 CS, 247,182 NCP, 1995-2013; median follow-up, 10.1 and 11.0 years, respectively), the use of invasive coronary strategies and pharmacotherapies increased and mortality declined for CS and NCP (all Ptrend < .001). At 30 days after AMI, there was no difference between CS and NCP in the receipt of coronary angiography (incidence risk ratio [IRR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96-1.01; P = .23), percutaneous coronary intervention (IRR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.94-1.02; P = .29), or bypass (IRR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.85-1.02; P = .11). At 90 days after AMI, there was no difference in the receipt of β-blockers, clopidogrel, or nitrates; but CS were less often prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers and statins. CS had higher all-cause mortality at 30 days (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07-1.17; P < .001), at 1 year (1.16; 95% CI, 1.12-1.20; P < .001), and long term (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.17-1.25; P < .001) and had a greater risk of heart failure (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.14; P = .001), but not myocardial re-infarction (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.95-1.01; P = .22) or stroke (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.97-1.16; P = .18). CONCLUSIONS: Among CS and NCP with AMI in Ontario, similar improvements in mortality and receipt of treatments were observed between 1995 and 2013. However, compared with NCP, CS had a higher risk of mortality and heart failure. Cancer 2018;124:1269-78.
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of information about treatment and mortality trends after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) for cancer survivors (CS). METHODS: In this population-based study, the authors compared temporal trends of treatments and outcomes (mortality, nonfatal cardiovascular outcomes), among CS and patients without cancer (the noncancer patient [NCP] group) with AMI in Ontario (Canada) using inverse probability treatment weight (IPTW)-adjusted modeling. RESULTS: Of 270,089 patients with AMI (22,907 CS, 247,182 NCP, 1995-2013; median follow-up, 10.1 and 11.0 years, respectively), the use of invasive coronary strategies and pharmacotherapies increased and mortality declined for CS and NCP (all Ptrend < .001). At 30 days after AMI, there was no difference between CS and NCP in the receipt of coronary angiography (incidence risk ratio [IRR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96-1.01; P = .23), percutaneous coronary intervention (IRR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.94-1.02; P = .29), or bypass (IRR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.85-1.02; P = .11). At 90 days after AMI, there was no difference in the receipt of β-blockers, clopidogrel, or nitrates; but CS were less often prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers and statins. CS had higher all-cause mortality at 30 days (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07-1.17; P < .001), at 1 year (1.16; 95% CI, 1.12-1.20; P < .001), and long term (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.17-1.25; P < .001) and had a greater risk of heart failure (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.14; P = .001), but not myocardial re-infarction (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.95-1.01; P = .22) or stroke (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.97-1.16; P = .18). CONCLUSIONS: Among CS and NCP with AMI in Ontario, similar improvements in mortality and receipt of treatments were observed between 1995 and 2013. However, compared with NCP, CS had a higher risk of mortality and heart failure. Cancer 2018;124:1269-78.