Cardiac risk stratification of breast cancer patients in a cardio-oncology clinic.

PURPOSE: The field of cardio-oncology aims to optimize the cardiac health of cancer patients. The goals of this study are to (1) describe the demographics of a cardio-oncology clinic and (2) apply the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) cardiac risk stratification guidelines among breast cancer patients to assess the development of cardiovascular events, primarily heart failure (HF). METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review on 203 consecutive cardio-oncology patients who were seen between January 2019 and March 2020. Mean follow-up for the cohort was 29.2 ± 3.1 months (range 0-113). We applied the ASCO guidelines to the breast cancer subgroup. RESULTS: The plurality of patients 82/203 (40%) referred to clinic had breast cancer. The most common reason for referral was asymptomatic left ventricular (LV) dysfunction or HF (40%). Only 36/203 (18%) of patients were referred for a pre-chemotherapy evaluation. In breast cancer patients, there was a trend toward significance in up-titrating or initiating beta-blockers in the high vs. low risk ASCO groups [46/69 (67%) vs. 5/13 (38%), p = 0.054]. Approximately 13/82 (16%) of breast cancer patients required alterations to their anti-cancer therapy. HF events occurred in 1/36 (3%) of cancer treatment naïve patients and 14/167 (8%) of those with prior therapy, specifically 9% of the breast cancer subset. CONCLUSION: Our study provides insight into referral practices, interventions, and outcomes at a cardio-oncology clinic. Furthermore, breast cancer patients continue to have high rates of HF. These findings suggest a need to shift referral practices upstream for a pre-chemotherapy evaluation to optimize cardiovascular health.

Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Computerized Adaptive Testing Versus Fixed Short Forms in Juvenile Myositis.

OBJECTIVE: Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures can be administered via computerized adaptive testing (CAT) or fixed short forms (FSFs), but the empirical benefits of CAT versus FSFs are unknown in juvenile myositis (JM). The present study was undertaken to assess whether PROMIS CAT is feasible, precise, correlated with FSFs, and less prone to respondent burden and floor/ceiling effects than FSFs in JM. METHODS: Patients 8-17 years of age (self-report and parent proxy) and parents of patients 5-7 years of age (only parent proxy) completed PROMIS fatigue, pain interference, upper extremity function, mobility, anxiety, and depressive symptoms measures. Pearson correlations, paired t-tests, and Cohen's d were calculated between PROMIS CAT and FSFs. McNemar's test assessed floor/ceiling effects between CAT and FSFs. Precision and respondent burden were examined across the T score range. RESULTS: Data from 67 patient-parent dyads were analyzed. CAT and FSF mean scores did not significantly differ except in parent proxy anxiety and fatigue (effect size 0.23 and 0.19, respectively). CAT had less pronounced floor/ceiling effects at the less symptomatic extreme in all domains except self-report anxiety. Increased item burden and higher SEs were seen in less symptomatic scorers for CAT. Modified stopping rules limiting CAT item administration did not decrease precision. CONCLUSION: PROMIS CAT appears to be feasible and correlated with FSFs. CAT had less pronounced floor/ceiling effects, allowing detection of individual differences in less symptomatic patients. Modified stopping rules for CAT may decrease respondent burden. CAT can be considered for long-term follow-up of JM patients.