Alison M Brann1, Charlotte J Bai1, John F Hibbeln2, Kim A Williams1, Tochi M Okwuosa3,4. 1. Division of Cardiology, Rush University Medical Center, 1717 W. Congress Pkwy, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 South First Ave., Maywood, IL, 60153, USA. 3. Division of Cardiology, Rush University Medical Center, 1717 W. Congress Pkwy, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA. Tokwuosa@rush.edu. 4. Cardio-Oncology Services, Rush University Medical Center, 1717 West Congress Parkway, Kellogg Bldg, Suite 320, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA. Tokwuosa@rush.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The presence and burden of coronary artery calcium (CAC) is a strong predictor of cardiovascular events. In an effort to gain insight into the utility of CAC for coronary artery disease (CAD) screening in cancer patients with heart disease, we sought to determine the presence and burden of CAC detected on routine chest CT in patients referred to a cardio-oncology clinic, comparing them to a conventional cardiology clinic with the general population as controls. METHODS: Patients from the cardio-oncology clinic, general cardiology clinic, and the general clinic population at Rush University Medical Center who had a chest CT as part of their previous treatment were identified. Each CT scan was evaluated for presence, extent, and severity of CAC by 3 independent readers. RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, when compared with cardio-oncology clinic, CAC was more prevalent in the CT scans of cardiology patients (p = 0.04), but not the general clinic population (p = 0.5); CAC extent (p = 0.05) and severity (p = 0.05) was significantly higher in the cardiology patients but the extent (p = 0.05) and severity (p = 0.92) was similar in the general clinic population. CONCLUSION: Despite being matched by age and sex, controlling for other major cardiovascular risk factors, patients referred to our cardio-oncology clinic had similar and less prevalent/severe CAC burden compared with the general population and conventional cardiology clinics respectively. Whether this translates to less utility of CAC for CAD screening, or to less overall coronary events in a cardio-oncology clinic, is of interest.
BACKGROUND: The presence and burden of coronary artery calcium (CAC) is a strong predictor of cardiovascular events. In an effort to gain insight into the utility of CAC for coronary artery disease (CAD) screening in cancerpatients with heart disease, we sought to determine the presence and burden of CAC detected on routine chest CT in patients referred to a cardio-oncology clinic, comparing them to a conventional cardiology clinic with the general population as controls. METHODS:Patients from the cardio-oncology clinic, general cardiology clinic, and the general clinic population at Rush University Medical Center who had a chest CT as part of their previous treatment were identified. Each CT scan was evaluated for presence, extent, and severity of CAC by 3 independent readers. RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, when compared with cardio-oncology clinic, CAC was more prevalent in the CT scans of cardiology patients (p = 0.04), but not the general clinic population (p = 0.5); CAC extent (p = 0.05) and severity (p = 0.05) was significantly higher in the cardiology patients but the extent (p = 0.05) and severity (p = 0.92) was similar in the general clinic population. CONCLUSION: Despite being matched by age and sex, controlling for other major cardiovascular risk factors, patients referred to our cardio-oncology clinic had similar and less prevalent/severe CAC burden compared with the general population and conventional cardiology clinics respectively. Whether this translates to less utility of CAC for CAD screening, or to less overall coronary events in a cardio-oncology clinic, is of interest.
Authors: Berthe M P Aleman; Alexandra W van den Belt-Dusebout; Marie L De Bruin; Mars B van 't Veer; Margreet H A Baaijens; Jan Paul de Boer; Augustinus A M Hart; Willem J Klokman; Marianne A Kuenen; Gabey M Ouwens; Harry Bartelink; Flora E van Leeuwen Journal: Blood Date: 2006-11-21 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Philip Greenland; Robert O Bonow; Bruce H Brundage; Matthew J Budoff; Mark J Eisenberg; Scott M Grundy; Michael S Lauer; Wendy S Post; Paolo Raggi; Rita F Redberg; George P Rodgers; Leslee J Shaw; Allen J Taylor; William S Weintraub Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-01-23 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Allen J Taylor; Jody Bindeman; Irwin Feuerstein; Felix Cao; Michael Brazaitis; Patrick G O'Malley Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-09-06 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Tamar S Polonsky; Robyn L McClelland; Neal W Jorgensen; Diane E Bild; Gregory L Burke; Alan D Guerci; Philip Greenland Journal: JAMA Date: 2010-04-28 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Matthew J Budoff; Leslee J Shaw; Sandy T Liu; Steven R Weinstein; Tristen P Mosler; Philip H Tseng; Ferdinand R Flores; Tracy Q Callister; Paolo Raggi; Daniel S Berman Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-04-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Robert Detrano; Alan D Guerci; J Jeffrey Carr; Diane E Bild; Gregory Burke; Aaron R Folsom; Kiang Liu; Steven Shea; Moyses Szklo; David A Bluemke; Daniel H O'Leary; Russell Tracy; Karol Watson; Nathan D Wong; Richard A Kronmal Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-03-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Maartje J Hooning; Akke Botma; Berthe M P Aleman; Margreet H A Baaijens; Harry Bartelink; Jan G M Klijn; Carolyn W Taylor; Flora E van Leeuwen Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2007-03-07 Impact factor: 13.506