Literature DB >> 31800032

Acute myocardial infarction treatments and outcomes in 6.5 million patients with a current or historical diagnosis of cancer in the USA.

Aditya Bharadwaj1, Jessica Potts2, Mohamed O Mohamed2, Purvi Parwani1, Pooja Swamy1, Juan C Lopez-Mattei3, Muhammad Rashid2, Chun Shing Kwok2, David L Fischman4, Vassilios S Vassiliou5, Philip Freeman6, Erin D Michos7,8, Mamas A Mamas2.   

Abstract

AIMS: The aim of this study is to evaluate temporal trends, treatment, and clinical outcomes of patients who present with an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and have a current or historical diagnosis of cancer, according to cancer type and presence of metastases. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Data from 6 563 255 patients presenting with an AMI between 2004 and 2014 from the US National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database were analysed. A total of 5 966 955 had no cancer, 186 604 had current cancer, and 409 697 had a historical diagnosis of cancer. Prostate, breast, colon, and lung cancer were the four most common types of cancer. Patients with cancer were older with more comorbidities. Differences in invasive treatment were noted, 43.9% received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients without cancer, whilst only 21.0% of patients with lung cancer received PCI. Lung cancer was associated with the highest in-hospital mortality [odds ratio (OR) 2.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.62-2.80], major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular complications (OR 2.38, 95% CI 2.31-2.45), and stroke (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.80-2.02), while colon cancer was associated with highest risk of bleeding (OR 2.82, 95% CI 2.68-2.98). Irrespective of the type of cancer, presence of metastasis was associated with worse in-hospital outcomes, and historical cancer did not adversely impact on survival (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.89-0.91).
CONCLUSION: A concomitant cancer diagnosis is associated with a conservative medical management strategy for AMI, and worse clinical outcomes, compared to patients without cancer. Survival and clinical outcomes in the context of AMI vary significantly according to the type of cancer and metastasis status. The management of this high-risk group is challenging and requires a multidisciplinary and patient-centred approach to improve their outcomes. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
© The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  AMI; Cancer; Complications; Mortality

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31800032     DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz851

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Heart J        ISSN: 0195-668X            Impact factor:   29.983


  19 in total

Review 1.  Nuclear Imaging for the Assessment of Cardiotoxicity from Chemotherapeutic Agents in Oncologic Disease.

Authors:  Jayakumar Sreenivasan; Urvashi Hooda; Pragya Ranjan; Diwakar Jain
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2021-05-07       Impact factor: 2.931

2.  Coronary artery disease, left ventricular function and cardiac biomarkers determine all-cause mortality in cancer patients-a large monocenter cohort study.

Authors:  Daniel Finke; Markus B Heckmann; Susanna Wilhelm; Lukas Entenmann; Hauke Hund; Nina Bougatf; Hugo A Katus; Norbert Frey; Lorenz H Lehmann
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 5.460

3.  Impact of malignancy on In-hospital mortality, stratified by the cause of admission: An analysis of 67 million patients from the National Inpatient Sample.

Authors:  Ofer Kobo; Sherry-Ann Brown; Tarek Nafee; Mohamed O Mohamed; Kamal Sharma; Sedralmontaha Istanbuly; Ariel Roguin; Richard K Cheng; Mamas A Mamas
Journal:  Int J Clin Pract       Date:  2021-09-14       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Index Admission and Thirty-Day Readmission Outcomes of Patients With Cancer Presenting With STEMI.

Authors:  Mohammed Osman; Mina M Benjamin; Sudarshan Balla; Babikir Kheiri; Christopher Bianco; Partho P Sengupta; Ramesh Daggubati; Midhun Malla; Stephen V Liu; Mamas Mamas; Brijesh Patel
Journal:  Cardiovasc Revasc Med       Date:  2021-04-16

5.  Clinical predictors and sequelae of computed tomography defined leaflet thrombosis following transcatheter aortic valve replacement at medium-term follow-up.

Authors:  Hashrul N Rashid; Michael Michail; Abdul R Ihdayhid; Cameron Dowling; Nancy Khav; Sean Tan; Jaineel Ramnarain; James D Cameron; Arthur Nasis; Stephen J Nicholls; Robert P Gooley
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2021-03-04       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 6.  Common Pathophysiology in Cancer, Atrial Fibrillation, Atherosclerosis, and Thrombosis: JACC: CardioOncology State-of-the-Art Review.

Authors:  Orly Leiva; Duaa AbdelHameid; Jean M Connors; Christopher P Cannon; Deepak L Bhatt
Journal:  JACC CardioOncol       Date:  2021-11-16

7.  Validation of the 4-Item PRECISE-DAPT Score: A SWEDEHEART Study.

Authors:  Axel Wester; Moman A Mohammad; Göran Olivecrona; Jasminka Holmqvist; Troels Yndigegn; Sasha Koul
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2021-10-06       Impact factor: 5.501

Review 8.  Cardiac Computed Tomography in Cardio-Oncology: JACC: CardioOncology Primer.

Authors:  Juan C Lopez-Mattei; Eric H Yang; Maros Ferencik; Lauren A Baldassarre; Susan Dent; Matthew J Budoff
Journal:  JACC CardioOncol       Date:  2021-12-21

9.  Prognosis of Acute Ischaemic Stroke Patients with Cancer: A National Inpatient Sample Study.

Authors:  Tiberiu A Pana; Mohamed O Mohamed; Mamas A Mamas; Phyo K Myint
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 10.  Challenges and Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome in Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Isabela Bispo Santos da Silva Costa; Fernanda Thereza de Almeida Andrade; Diego Carter; Vinicius B Seleme; Maycon Santos Costa; Carlos M Campos; Ludhmila Abrahão Hajjar
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2021-06-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.