BACKGROUND: Several chemotherapy agents are associated with the development of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NIC). When chemotherapy-induced cardiomyopathy (CHIC) is associated with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 35% or lower, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is often utilized to improve cardiac function and relieve symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To determine the echocardiographic and clinical outcomes of CRT in patients with CHIC. METHODS: The study included 29 patients with CHIC (CHIC group) and 58 patients with other types of NIC (control group) who underwent CRT implantation between 2004 and 2017. The primary endpoints were changes in LVEF, left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD), and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) at 6-18 months after CRT. The secondary outcomes included changes in left ventricular global longitudinal strain (GLS), systolic strain rate (SRS), early diastolic strain rate (SRE), and overall survival. RESULTS: Out of 29 patients with CHIC, 62.1% received chemotherapy for lymphoma, 13.7% for breast cancer, and 24.1% for sarcoma. The agent implicated in 93.1% of the patients was an anthracycline. Half of the patients had LBBB. The mean baseline LVEF was 28% ± 8%. The mean baseline QRS duration was 146 ± 26 ms. Twenty-eight patients had post-CRT follow-up data. CRT was associated with improvement in echocardiographic outcomes in the CHIC group and the control group. There was no difference in overall survival between the two groups (log-rank p = .148). CONCLUSION: CRT improves left ventricular function and reverses remodeling in patients with CHIC.
BACKGROUND: Several chemotherapy agents are associated with the development of non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NIC). When chemotherapy-induced cardiomyopathy (CHIC) is associated with left bundle branch block (LBBB) and a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 35% or lower, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is often utilized to improve cardiac function and relieve symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To determine the echocardiographic and clinical outcomes of CRT in patients with CHIC. METHODS: The study included 29 patients with CHIC (CHIC group) and 58 patients with other types of NIC (control group) who underwent CRT implantation between 2004 and 2017. The primary endpoints were changes in LVEF, left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD), and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) at 6-18 months after CRT. The secondary outcomes included changes in left ventricular global longitudinal strain (GLS), systolic strain rate (SRS), early diastolic strain rate (SRE), and overall survival. RESULTS: Out of 29 patients with CHIC, 62.1% received chemotherapy for lymphoma, 13.7% for breast cancer, and 24.1% for sarcoma. The agent implicated in 93.1% of the patients was an anthracycline. Half of the patients had LBBB. The mean baseline LVEF was 28% ± 8%. The mean baseline QRS duration was 146 ± 26 ms. Twenty-eight patients had post-CRT follow-up data. CRT was associated with improvement in echocardiographic outcomes in the CHIC group and the control group. There was no difference in overall survival between the two groups (log-rank p = .148). CONCLUSION: CRT improves left ventricular function and reverses remodeling in patients with CHIC.
Authors: Jean-Claude Daubert; Leslie Saxon; Philip B Adamson; Angelo Auricchio; Ronald D Berger; John F Beshai; Ole Breithard; Michele Brignole; John Cleland; David B DeLurgio; Kenneth Dickstein; Derek V Exner; Michael Gold; Richard A Grimm; David L Hayes; Carsten Israel; Christophe Leclercq; Cecilia Linde; JoAnn Lindenfeld; Bela Merkely; Lluis Mont; Francis Murgatroyd; Frits Prinzen; Samir F Saba; Jerold S Shinbane; Jagmeet Singh; Anthony S Tang; Panos E Vardas; Bruce L Wilkoff; Jose Luis Zamorano; Inder Anand; Carina Blomström-Lundqvist; John P Boehmer; Hugh Calkins; Serge Cazeau; Victoria Delgado; N A Mark Estes; David Haines; Fred Kusumoto; Paco Leyva; Frank Ruschitzka; Lynne Warner Stevenson; Christian Tobias Torp-Pedersen Journal: Europace Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Alexander H Maass; Kevin Vernooy; Sofieke C Wijers; Jetske van 't Sant; Maarten J Cramer; Mathias Meine; Cornelis P Allaart; Frederik J De Lange; Frits W Prinzen; Bart Gerritse; Erna Erdtsieck; Coert O S Scheerder; Michael R S Hill; Marcoen Scholten; Mariëlle Kloosterman; Iris A H Ter Horst; Adriaan A Voors; Marc A Vos; Michiel Rienstra; Isabelle C Van Gelder Journal: Europace Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 5.214
Authors: Eugene S Chung; Angel R Leon; Luigi Tavazzi; Jing-Ping Sun; Petros Nihoyannopoulos; John Merlino; William T Abraham; Stefano Ghio; Christophe Leclercq; Jeroen J Bax; Cheuk-Man Yu; John Gorcsan; Martin St John Sutton; Johan De Sutter; Jaime Murillo Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-05-05 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Olujimi A Ajijola; K Veena Nandigam; Bruce A Chabner; Mary Orencole; G William Dec; Jeremy N Ruskin; Jagmeet P Singh Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2008-03-10 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Jagmeet P Singh; Scott D Solomon; Michael G Fradley; Ana Barac; Kristina A Kremer; Christopher A Beck; Mary W Brown; Scott McNitt; Susan Schleede; Wojciech Zareba; Ilan Goldenberg; Valentina Kutyifa Journal: JAMA Date: 2019-11-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Kathleen A Cronin; Andrew J Lake; Susan Scott; Recinda L Sherman; Anne-Michelle Noone; Nadia Howlader; S Jane Henley; Robert N Anderson; Albert U Firth; Jiemin Ma; Betsy A Kohler; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: Cancer Date: 2018-05-22 Impact factor: 6.860