Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk and Longitudinal Risk Factor Management Among Patients With Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of noncancer mortality for breast cancer survivors. Data are limited regarding patient-level atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk estimation and preventive medication use. This study aimed to characterize ASCVD risk and longitudinal preventive medication use for a cohort of patients with nonmetastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 326 patients at an academic medical center in Boston, Massachusetts diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ from January 2009 through December 2015. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, laboratory studies, medication exposure, and incident cardiovascular outcomes were collected. Estimated 10-year ASCVD risk was calculated for all patients from nonlaboratory clinical parameters. RESULTS: Median follow up time was 6.5 years (IQR 5.0, 8.1). At cancer diagnosis, 23 patients (7.1%) had established ASCVD. Among those without ASCVD, 10-year estimated ASCVD risk was ≥20% for 77 patients (25.4%) and 7.5% to <20% for 114 patients (37.6%). Two-hundred and sixteen patients (66.3%) had an indication for lipid-lowering therapy at cancer diagnosis, 123 of whom (57.0%) received a statin during the study. Among 100 patients with ASCVD or estimated 10-year ASCVD risk ≥20%, 92 (92.0%) received an antihypertensive medication during the study. Clinic blood pressure >140/90 mmHg was observed in 33.0% to 55.6% of these patients at each follow up assessment. CONCLUSION: A majority of patients in this breast cancer cohort had an elevated risk of ASCVD at the time of cancer diagnosis. Modifiable ASCVD risk factors were frequently untreated or uncontrolled in the years following cancer treatment.

The use of PYP scan for evaluation of ATTR cardiac amyloidosis at a tertiary medical centre.

Cardiac transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR) is an often underdiagnosed disease that can lead to significant morbidity and mortality for patients. In recent years, technetium-99m pyrophosphate scintigraphy (PYP) imaging has become a standard of care diagnostic tool to help clinicians identify this disease. With newly emerging therapies for ATTR cardiomyopathy, it is critical to identify patients who are eligible for therapy as early as possible. At our institution, we sought to describe the frequency of PYP scanning and how it has impacted the management of a patient suspected to have amyloid cardiomyopathy. Between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2020, we identified 273 patients who completed PYP scanning for evaluation of cardiac amyloidosis at Tufts Medical Center, a tertiary care centre. We reviewed pertinent clinical data for all study subjects. A PYP scan was considered positive when the heart to contralateral lung ratio was greater than or equal to 1.5, with a visual grade of 2 or 3, and confirmation with single-photon emission computerised tomography (SPECT) imaging. In total there were 55 positive, 202 negative, and 16 equivocal PYP scans. Endomyocardial biopsies were rarely performed following PYP results. Of the seven patients with a positive PYP scan who underwent biopsy, five were positive for ATTR amyloid; of the patients with a negative scan who were biopsied, none were positive for ATTR amyloidosis and two were positive for amyloid light-chain (AL) amyloidosis. The biomarkers troponin I, B-type naturietic peptide (BNP), and N-terminal pro-BNP (NT-proBNP), as well as the interventricular septal end-diastolic thickness (IVSd) seen on echocardiogram, were all found to be statistically higher in the PYP positive cohort than in the PYP negative cohort using Mann-Whitney U statistical analysis. In total, 27 out of the 55 patients with a positive PYP scan underwent therapy specific for cardiac amyloid. In conclusion, this study reinforces the clinical significance of the PYP scan in the diagnosis and management of cardiac amyloidosis. A positive scan allowed physicians to implement early amyloid-directed treatment while a negative scan encouraged physicians to pursue an alternative diagnosis.

EATING AND GLYCEMIC CONTROL AMONG CRITICALLY ILL PATIENTS RECEIVING CONTINUOUS INTRAVENOUS INSULIN.

Objective: Consensus guidelines recommend that intensive care unit (ICU) patients with blood glucose (BG) levels >180 mg/dL receive continuous intravenous insulin (CII). The effectiveness of CII at controlling BG levels among patients who are eating relative to those who are eating nothing by mouth (nil per os; NPO) has not been described. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 260 adult patients (156 eating, 104 NPO) admitted to an ICU between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2014, who received CII. Patients were excluded for a diagnosis of diabetic ketoacidosis or hyperglycemic hyperosmolar nonketotic syndrome, admission to an obstetrics service, or receiving continuous enteral or parenteral nutrition. Results: Among 22 baseline characteristics, the proportion of patients receiving glucocorticoid treatment (GCTx) (17.3% eating, 37.5% NPO; P<.001) and APACHE II score (15.0 ± 7.5 eating, 17.9 ± 7.9 NPO; P = .004) were significantly different between eating and NPO patients. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of patient-day weighted mean BG overall (153 ± 8 mg/dL eating, 156 ± 7 mg/dL NPO; P = .73), or day-by-day BG (P = .37) adjusted for GCTx and APACHE score. Surprisingly, there was a significant difference in the distribution of BG values, with eating patients having a higher percentage of BG readings in the recommended range of 140 to 180 mg/dL. However, eating patients showed greater glucose variability (coefficient of variation 23.1 ± 1.0 eating, 21.2 ± 1.0 NPO; P = .034). Conclusion: Eating may not adversely affect BG levels of ICU patients receiving CII. Whether or not prandial insulin improves glycemic control in this setting should be studied. Abbreviations: BG = blood glucose; CII = continuous insulin infusion; CV = coefficient of variation; HbA1c = hemoglobin A1c; ICU = intensive care unit; NPO = nil per os; PDWMBG = patient day weighted mean blood glucose.