Advancing the care of individuals with cancer through innovation & technology: Proceedings from the cardiology oncology innovation summit 2020 and 2021.

As cancer therapies increase in effectiveness and patients' life expectancies improve, balancing oncologic efficacy while reducing acute and long-term cardiovascular toxicities has become of paramount importance. To address this pressing need, the Cardiology Oncology Innovation Network (COIN) was formed to bring together domain experts with the overarching goal of collaboratively investigating, applying, and educating widely on various forms of innovation to improve the quality of life and cardiovascular healthcare of patients undergoing and surviving cancer therapies. The COIN mission pillars of innovation, collaboration, and education have been implemented with cross-collaboration among academic institutions, private and public establishments, and industry and technology companies. In this report, we summarize proceedings from the first two annual COIN summits (inaugural in 2020 and subsequent in 2021) including educational sessions on technological innovations for establishing best practices and aligning resources. Herein, we highlight emerging areas for innovation and defining unmet needs to further improve the outcome for cancer patients and survivors of all ages. Additionally, we provide actionable suggestions for advancing innovation, collaboration, and education in cardio-oncology in the digital era.

Simplified rules-based tool to facilitate the application of up-to-date management recommendations in cardio-oncology.

BACKGROUND: Millions of cancer survivors are at risk of cardiovascular diseases, a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Tools to potentially facilitate implementation of cardiology guidelines, consensus recommendations, and scientific statements to prevent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and other cardiovascular diseases are limited. Thus, inadequate utilization of cardiovascular medications and imaging is widespread, including significantly lower rates of statin use among cancer survivors for whom statin therapy is indicated. METHODS: In this methodological study, we leveraged published guidelines documents to create a rules-based tool to include guidelines, expert consensus, and medical society scientific statements relevant to point of care cardiovascular disease prevention in the cardiovascular care of cancer survivors. Any overlap, redundancy, or ambiguous recommendations were identified and eliminated across all converted sources of knowledge. The integrity of the tool was assessed with use case examples and review of subsequent care suggestions. RESULTS: An initial selection of 10 guidelines, expert consensus, and medical society scientific statements was made for this study. Then 7 were kept owing to overlap and revisions in society recommendations over recent years. Extensive formulae were employed to translate the recommendations of 7 selected guidelines into rules and proposed action measures. Patient suitability and care suggestions were assessed for several use case examples. CONCLUSION: A simple rules-based application was designed to provide a potential format to deliver critical cardiovascular disease best-practice prevention recommendations at the point of care for cancer survivors. A version of this tool may potentially facilitate implementing these guidelines across clinics, payers, and health systems for preventing cardiovascular diseases in cancer survivors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.Gov Identifier: NCT05377320.

Patient similarity and other artificial intelligence machine learning algorithms in clinical decision aid for shared decision-making in the Prevention of Cardiovascular Toxicity (PACT): a feasibility trial design.

BACKGROUND: The many improvements in cancer therapies have led to an increased number of survivors, which comes with a greater risk of consequent/subsequent cardiovascular disease. Identifying effective management strategies that can mitigate this risk of cardiovascular complications is vital. Therefore, developing computer-driven and personalized clinical decision aid interventions that can provide early detection of patients at risk, stratify that risk, and recommend specific cardio-oncology management guidelines and expert consensus recommendations is critically important. OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of the use of an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered clinical decision aid tool in shared decision making between the cancer survivor patient and the cardiologist regarding prevention of cardiovascular disease. DESIGN: This is a single-center, double-arm, open-label, randomized interventional feasibility study. Our cardio-oncology cohort of > 4000 individuals from our Clinical Research Data Warehouse will be queried to identify at least 200 adult cancer survivors who meet the eligibility criteria. Study participants will be randomized into either the Clinical Decision Aid Group (where patients will use the clinical decision aid in addition to current practice) or the Control Group (current practice). The primary endpoint of this study is to assess for each patient encounter whether cardiovascular medications and imaging pursued were consistent with current medical society recommendations. Additionally, the perceptions of using the clinical decision tool will be evaluated based on patient and physician feedback through surveys and focus groups. This trial will determine whether a clinical decision aid tool improves cancer survivors' medication use and imaging surveillance recommendations aligned with current medical guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.Gov Identifier: NCT05377320.

Connected Health Innovation Research Program (C.H.I.R.P.): A bridge for digital health and wellness in cardiology and oncology.

Study objective: Cancer and heart disease are leading causes of mortality, and cardio-oncology is emerging as a new field addressing the cardiovascular toxicities related to cancer and cancer therapy. Interdisciplinary research platforms that incorporate digital health to optimize cardiovascular health and wellness in cancer survivors are therefore needed as we advance in the digital era. Our goal was to develop the Connected Health Innovation Research Program (C.H.I.R.P.) to serve as a foundation for future integration and assessments of adoption and clinical efficacy of digital health tools for cardiovascular health and wellness in the general population and in oncology patients. Design/setting/participants: Partner companies were identified through the American Medical Association innovation platform, as well as LinkedIn and direct contact by our team. Company leaders met with our team to discuss features of their technology or software. Non-disclosure agreements were signed and data were discussed and obtained for descriptive or statistical analysis. Results: A suite of companies with technologies focused on wellness, biometrics tracking, audio companions, oxygen saturation, weight trends, sleep patterns, heart rate variability, electrocardiogram patterns, blood pressure patterns, real-time metabolism tracking, instructional video modules, or integration of these technologies into electronic health records was collated. We formed an interdisciplinary research team and established an academia-industry collaborative foundation for connecting patients with wellness digital health technologies. Conclusions: A suite of software and device technologies accessible to the cardiology and oncology population has been established and will facilitate retrospective, prospective, and case research studies assessing adoption and clinical efficacy of digital health tools in cardiology/oncology.

The beneficial effect of weight reduction on adverse cardiovascular outcomes following bariatric surgery is attenuated in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.

Weight loss after bariatric surgery is associated with reduction in adverse cardiovascular outcomes; however, the impact of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) on reduction of cardiovascular outcomes after bariatric surgery in morbidly obese patients is not known. We retrospectively assessed differences in cardiovascular events after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB)-induced weight loss in patients with and without OSA before and after propensity score matching for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and major comorbidities between the two groups and determined predictors of poor outcomes. OSA was present in 222 out of 830 patients (27 per cent) who underwent LAGB between 2001 and 2011. Despite a similar reduction in BMI (20.0 and 20.8 per cent), a significantly higher percentage of cardiovascular events were observed in patients with than without OSA (35.6 vs 6.9 per cent; p < 0.001) at 3 years (mean follow-up 6.0 ± 3.2; range: 0.5 to 13 years). The differences in the cumulative endpoint of new onset stroke, heart failure, myocardial infarction, venous thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism between the OSA and non-OSA groups were maintained after propensity matching. Patients with OSA treated with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) during sleep [n = 66] had lower cardiovascular event rates at 30 months compared with those not treated (p < 0.041). OSA (hazard ratio: 6.92, 95% CI: 3.39-14.13, p < 0.001) remained an independent predictor of cardiovascular events after multivariate analysis. Thus, patients with OSA, despite a similar initial weight loss after LAGB, had a higher incidence of cardiovascular events compared with a propensity-matched group without OSA. Treatment with CPAP appears to reduce such events.

Comparative Effectiveness of Hybrid Ablation Versus Endocardial Catheter Ablation Alone in Patients With Persistent Atrial Fibrillation.

OBJECTIVES: The outcomes of hybrid ablation versus endocardial catheter ablation alone were evaluated in patients with persistent and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). BACKGROUND: Variable outcomes exist following endocardial catheter ablation in medically refractory patients with persistent AF. A hybrid epicardial-endocardial approach has emerged as an alternative to endocardial ablation. METHODS: In 133 consecutive patients, 69 received endocardial ablation alone (pulmonary vein isolation and radiofrequency catheter ablation [endo group]) and 64 received endocardial catheter ablation and epicardial ablation (hybrid group). Recurrence was defined as any arrhythmia following the 3-month blanking period. RESULTS: Patients were followed for a median of 16 months. The hybrid and endo groups were similar in age (61 ± 10 years vs. 62 ± 8 years), body mass index (35 ± 6 kg/m2 vs. 35 ± 7 kg/m2), CHA2D2-VASc score (2 ± 1 vs. 2 ± 1), and ejection fraction (54 ± 11% vs. 53 ± 8%). The hybrid group had longer AF duration (median [interquartile range (IQR)] (12 months [IQR: 8 to 28 months] vs. 7 months [IQR: 5 to 12 months]; p < 0.001) and more previous ablations (58% vs. 25%; p < 0.001). Both groups had similar antiarrhythmic drug use at follow-up (55% vs. 48%). The hybrid group was less likely to have recurrence (37% vs. 58%; p = 0.013) and repeat ablation (9% vs. 26%; p = 0.012), and had an AF-free survival of 72% versus 51% (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with persistent AF, hybrid ablation is associated with less AF recurrence and fewer re-do ablations. Prospective large-scale randomized trials are needed to validate these results.