Cardio-oncology rehabilitation: are we ready?

Cardio-oncology rehabilitation (CORE) is not only an essential component of cancer rehabilitation but also a pillar of preventive cardio-oncology. Cardio-oncology rehabilitation is a comprehensive model based on a multitargeted approach and its efficacy has been widely documented; when compared with an 'exercise only' programme, comprehensive CORE demonstrates a better outcome. It involves nutritional counselling, psychological support, and cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment, and it is directed to a very demanding population with a heavy burden of CV diseases driven by physical inactivity, cancer therapy-induced metabolic derangements, and cancer therapy-related CV toxicities. Despite its usefulness, CORE is still underused in cancer patients and we are still at the dawning of remote models of rehabilitation (tele-rehabilitation). Not all CORE is created equally: a careful screening procedure to identify patients who will benefit the most from CORE and a multidisciplinary customized approach are mandatory to achieve a better outcome for cancer survivors throughout their cancer journey. The aim of this paper is to provide an updated review of CORE not only for cardiologists dealing with this peculiar population of patients but also for oncologists, primary care providers, patients, and caregivers. This multidisciplinary team should help cancer patients to maintain a healthy and active life before, during, and after cancer treatment, in order to improve quality of life and to fight health inequities.

[ANMCO Position paper in collaboration with ITACARE-P: Cardio-oncology rehabilitation. Are we ready?] / Position paper ANMCO in collaborazione con ITACARE-P: Riabilitazione cardio-oncologica. "Are we ready?".

Cardio-oncology rehabilitation (CORE) is not only an essential component of cancer rehabilitation, but also a pillar of preventive cardio-oncology. CORE is a comprehensive model based on a multitargeted approach and its efficacy has been widely documented; when compared to an "exercise only" program, comprehensive CORE demonstrates a better outcome. It involves nutritional counseling, psychological support and cardiovascular risk assessment, and it is directed to a very demanding population with a heavy burden of cardiovascular diseases driven by physical inactivity, cancer therapy-induced metabolic derangements and cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicities. Despite its usefulness, CORE is still underused in cancer patients and we are still at the dawning of remote models of rehabilitation (telerehabilitation). Not all cardio-oncology rehabilitation is created equal: a careful screening procedure to identify patients who will benefit the most from CORE and a multidisciplinary customized approach are mandatory to achieve a better outcome for cancer survivors throughout their cancer journey.The aim of this position paper is to provide an updated review of CORE not only for cardiologists dealing with this peculiar patient population, but also for oncologists, primary care providers, patients and caregivers. This multidisciplinary team should help cancer patients to maintain a healthy and active life before, during and after cancer treatment, in order to improve quality of life and to fight health inequities.

Corrigendum: Cancer survivorship at heart: a multidisciplinary cardio-oncology roadmap for healthcare professionals.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1223660.].

Cancer survivorship at heart: a multidisciplinary cardio-oncology roadmap for healthcare professionals.

In cancer, a patient is considered a survivor from the time of initial diagnosis until the end of life. With improvements in early diagnosis and treatment, the number of cancer survivors (CS) has grown considerably and includes: (1) Patients cured and free from cancer who may be at risk of late-onset cancer therapy-related cardiovascular toxicity (CTR-CVT); (2) Patients with long-term control of not-curable cancers in whom CTR-CVT may need to be addressed. This paper highlights the importance of the cancer care continuum, of a patient-centered approach and of a prevention-oriented policy. The ultimate goal is a personalized care of CS, achievable only through a multidisciplinary-guided survivorship care plan, one that replaces the fragmented management of current healthcare systems. Collaboration between oncologists and cardiologists is the pillar of a framework in which primary care providers and other specialists must be engaged and in which familial, social and environmental factors are also taken into account.

Prospective, Multicenter Phase II Trial of Non-Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin Combined with Ifosfamide in First-Line Treatment of Advanced/Metastatic Soft Tissue Sarcomas.

Doxorubicin is a widely used anticancer agent as a first-line treatment for various tumor types, including sarcomas. Its use is hampered by adverse events, among which is the risk of dose dependence. The potential cardiotoxicity, which increases with higher doses, poses a significant challenge to its safe and effective application. To try to overcome these undesired effects, encapsulation of doxorubicin in liposomes has been proposed. Caelyx and Myocet are different formulations of pegylated (PLD) and non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (NPLD), respectively. Both PLD and NPLD have shown similar activity compared with free drugs but with reduced cardiotoxicity. While the hand-foot syndrome exhibits a high occurrence among patients treated with PLD, its frequency is notably reduced in those receiving NPLD. In this prospective, multicenter, one-stage, single-arm phase II trial, we assessed the combination of NPLD and ifosfamide as first-line treatment for advanced/metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Patients received six cycles of NPLD (50 mg/m2) on day 1 along with ifosfamide (3000 mg/m2 on days 1, 2, and 3 with equidose MESNA) administered every 3 weeks. The overall response rate, yielding 40% (95% CI: 0.29-0.51), resulted in statistical significance; the disease control rate stood at 81% (95% CI: 0.73-0.90), while only 16% (95% CI: 0.08-0.24) of patients experienced a progressive disease. These findings indicate that the combination of NPLD and ifosfamide yields a statistically significant response rate in advanced/metastatic STS with limited toxicity.

Corrigendum: Cardio-oncology in the COVID Era (Co & Co): The never-ending story.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.821193.].

Women at heart: Introducing gender cardio-oncology.

As cardio-oncology imposed itself as the reference specialty for a comprehensive cardiovascular approach to all patients with cancer, a more specific and careful cardiac evaluation of women entering their journey into cancer care is needed. Gender medicine refers to the study of how sex-based biological and gender-based socioeconomic and cultural differences influence people's health. Gender-related aspects could account for differences in the development, progression, and clinical signs of diseases as well as in the treatment of adverse events. Gender also accounts for major differences in access to healthcare. As for medicine and healthcare in general, gender-related characteristics have gained significance in cardio-oncology and should no longer be neglected in both clinical practice and research. We aimed to review the most relevant cardiovascular issues in women related to the cardio-oncology approach to offer a specific gender-related point of view for clinicians involved in the care process for both cancer and cardiovascular disease.

Differential diagnosis of cardiac tumors: General consideration and echocardiographic approach.

Cardiac tumors may be primary (either benign or malignant) or secondary (malignant) and are first detected by echocardiography in most cases. The cardiologist often challenges their identification, the differential diagnosis and the best therapeutic approach. Malignant tumors have usually a poor prognosis, which may be significantly improved by appropriate and timely therapies. The echocardiographic aspects of benign and malignant cardiac tumors described in this article, along with a clinical evaluation may orient the differential diagnosis and aid in choosing the further steps useful to define the nature of the mass.

The puzzling clinical presentation of fluoropyrimidines cardiotoxicity.

The cardiotoxicity of fluoropyrimidines (FP) [5-Fluorouracil and Capecitabine] is often reported as acute cardiac ischemia with rest typical angina, signs of ischemia at electrocardiogram (ECG), and ventricular kinetics abnormalities. However, silent ischemia, effort-related toxicity, and ventricular arrhythmias (VA) have been also described. The aim of this study is to report a consecutive series of 115 patients with FP cardiotoxicity observed in a single center both within clinical prospective studies and during the clinical routine. The clinical presentation widely varied as regards symptoms, ECG abnormalities, and clinical outcomes. We report also the strategies used to prevent cardiotoxicity in a subgroup of 35 patients who continued o rechallenged FP therapy after cardiotoxicity. In nearly half of the patients, the cardiotoxicity was triggered by physical effort. Typical angina was rare: the symptoms were absent in 51% of cases and were atypical in half of the other cases. ST-segment elevation and VA were the most frequent ECG abnormality; however, ST segment depression or negative T waves were the only abnormalities in 1/3 of the cases. Troponins essays were often within the normal limits, even in presence of extensive signs of ischemia. The most effective strategy to prevent cardiotoxicity at rechallenge was reducing FP dosage and avoiding physical effort. Anti-ischemic therapies were not always effective. Raltitrexed was a safe alternative to FP. Fluoropyrimidine cardiotoxicity shows a wide variety of clinical presentations in real life, from silent ischemia to atypical symptoms, acute coronary syndrome, left ventricular dysfunction (LVD), VA, or complete atrio-ventricular block. Physical effort is the trigger of cardiotoxicity in nearly half of the cases. The recognition of cardiotoxicity cannot rely on symptoms only but requires an active screening with ECG and stress test in selected cases.

[Cardio-oncogeriatrics: ANMCO position paper on cardio-oncology management of elderly patients]. / Cardioncogeriatria: position paper ANMCO sulla gestione cardioncologica del paziente anziano.

Geriatric patients are an increasing population and cancer treatment in this population is a challenging and unsolved issue. Ageing is characterized by low-grade inflammation (inflamm-ageing), an important driver for age-related diseases such as cardiovascular diseases and cancer. These chronic conditions share pathophysiological bases, risk factors and may coexist. The burden of comorbidities lowers the threshold for cardiotoxic effects of oncologic treatments. Geriatric assessment is helpful in identifying the peculiar vulnerabilities of this complex population, but a multidisciplinary approach (with oncologists and cardio-oncologists) is needed to improve the appropriateness of care. In this ANMCO position paper, we define the role of cardio-oncologists in the different scenarios of older cancer patients (active cancer, long-term survivors), the importance of geriatric assessment, the unmet needs of survivors and the complexity of comorbidity management.

Corrigendum: Cardio-Oncology in the COVID Era (Co & Co): The Never Ending Story.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.821193.].

Corrigendum: Portrait of Italian Cardio-Oncology: Results of a Nationwide Associazione Nazionale Medici Cardiologi Ospedalieri (ANMCO) Survey.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.677544.].

Trabectedin and Radiation Therapy for Cardiac Metastasis From Leiomyosarcoma: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.

Leiomyosarcoma (LMS) is one of the most frequent subtypes of soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs). Metastatic spread to the heart in cancer patients carries a poor prognosis and there is no known effective treatment. Cardiac metastases of STSs are very rare. Here we present the case of a 55-year-old patient who underwent surgical resection of a retroperitoneal leiomyosarcoma and then developed widespread metastatic disease, treated with a combination of local treatment and systemic therapy. Three years after surgical resection she presented with a cardiac intraventricular mass, which was treated with radiation therapy, while receiving systemic therapy with trabectedin. Such combination therapy was well-tolerated and effective, allowing a substantial dimensional reduction which is perduring to date, 18 months after diagnosis of cardiac metastasis. Available literature and data point to the feasibility and good tolerability of radiation therapy and trabectedin in metastatic sarcoma, yet this is the first report on the effectiveness of the combination for the treatment of cardiac disease. The extended survival since a metastatic relapse (more than 3 years) is likely the result of integrated systemic and loco-regional treatment, which should be always discussed within the framework of a multiprofessional and multidisciplinary setting.

Cardiotoxicity from Capecitabine Chemotherapy: Prospective Study of Incidence at Rest and During Physical Exercise.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity may increase the risk of cardiotoxicity (myocardial ischemia, major arrhythmias) of 5-Fluorouracil, but this risk has never been investigated for its prodrug capecitabine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and ninety-two consecutive patients undergoing capecitabine chemotherapy from December 1, 2010 through July 31, 2016 were prospectively evaluated. The baseline evaluation included electrocardiography (ECG) and echocardiography (2DE); a follow-up evaluation, including ECG and exercise stress testing (2DE in case of ECG abnormalities), was done after ≥10 days of treatment. Cardiotoxicity was suspected from ischemic ECG changes, new kinetic abnormalities at 2DE, Lown classification ≥2 ventricular arrhythmia, symptomatic arrhythmias, or positive stress test, and confirmed by a negative stress test after capecitabine washout. RESULTS: Cardiotoxicity was diagnosed in 32 patients (16.7%): six at rest and 26 during exercise. All 32 patients had ECG abnormalities: ST-segment changes (24 patients), negative T-waves (2) and/or arrhythmias: ventricular arrhythmias (14 cases), supraventricular tachycardia (2), complete heart block (1). Eight patients had typical symptoms, 6 had atypical symptoms, 1 had syncope, 17 (53%) were asymptomatic. Cardiotoxicity was more common in patients with atypical symptoms during daily life (OR = 15.7) and in those on a therapeutic schedule of 5 days/week (OR = 9.44). CONCLUSION: Capecitabine cardiotoxicity is frequent, and often elicited by physical effort. Oncologists, cardiologists, and general practitioners should be aware of this risk. Active cardiotoxicity surveillance with ECG (and echocardiogram and/or stress testing in suspected cases) during therapy is recommended. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRO-2010-17.

Cardio-Oncology in the COVID Era (Co & Co): The Never Ending Story.

The pathophysiology of some non-communicable diseases (NCDs) such as hypertension, cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes, and cancer includes an alteration of the endothelial function. COVID-19 is a pulmonary and vascular disease with a negative impact on patients whose damaged endothelium is particularly vulnerable. The peculiar SARS-CoV-2-induced "endothelitis" triggers an intriguing immune-thrombosis that affects both the venous and arterial vascular beds. An increased liability for infection and an increased likelihood of a worse outcome have been observed during the pandemic in patients with active cancer and in cancer survivors. "Overlapping commonalities" between COVID-19 and Cardio-Oncology have been described that include shared phenotypes of cardiovascular toxicities such as left ventricular dysfunction, ischemic syndromes, conduction disturbances, myocarditis, pericarditis and right ventricular failure; shared pathophysiologic mechanisms such as inflammation, release of cytokines, the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-pathway, coagulation abnormalities, microthrombosis and endothelial dysfunction. For these features and for the catalyst role of NCDs (mainly CVD and cancer), we should refer to COVID-19 as a "syndemic." Another challenging issue is the persistence of the symptoms, the so-called "long COVID" whose pathogenesis is still uncertain: it may be due to persistent multi-organ viral attacks or to an abnormal immune response. An intensive vaccination campaign is the most successful pharmacological weapon against SARS-CoV-2, but the increasing number of variants has reduced the efficacy of the vaccines in controlling SARS-CoV-2 infections. After a year of vaccinations we have also learned more about efficacy and side-effects of COVID-19 vaccines. An important byproduct of the COVID-19 pandemic has been the rapid expansion of telemedicine platforms across different care settings; this new modality of monitoring cancer patients may be useful even in a post pandemic era. In this paper we analyze the problems that the cardio-oncologists are facing in a pandemic scenario modified by the extensive vaccination campaign and add actionable recommendations derived from the ongoing studies and from the syndemic nature of the infection.

Cardiologic Long-Term Follow-Up of Patients Treated With Chest Radiotherapy: When and How?

Introduction: Radiotherapy may cause valvular (VHD), pericardial, coronary artery disease (CAD), left ventricular dysfunction (LVD), arrhythmias. The risk of radiation induced heart disease (RIHD) increases over time. The current guidelines suggest a screening for RIHD every 5 years in the long-term survivors who had been treated by chest RT. Methods: We reviewed the clinical and instrumental data of 106 patients diagnosed with RIHD. In one group (Group A: 69 patients) RIHD was diagnosed in an asymptomatic phase through a screening with ECG, echocardiogram and stress test. A second group (37 patients) was seen when RIHD was symptomatic. We compared the characteristics of the two groups at the time of RT, of RIHD detection and at last follow-up. Results: Overall, 64 patients (60%) had CAD (associated to other RIHD in 18); 39 (36.7%) had LVD (isolated in 20); 24 (22.6%) had VHD (isolated in 10 cases). The interval between the last negative test and the diagnosis of moderate or severe RIHD was <5 years in 26 patients, and <4 years in 18. In group A, 63% of the patients with CAD had silent ischemia. The two groups did not differ with regard to type of tumor, cardiovascular risk factors, use of anthracycline-based chemotherapy, age at RT treatment, radiation dose and interval between RT and toxicity detection. The mean time from RT and RIHD was 16 years in group A and 15 in group B. Interventional therapy at RIHD diagnosis was more frequent in group B (54 vs. 30%, p < 0.05). At last follow-up, 27 patients had died (12 of cancer, 9 of cardiac causes, 6 of other causes); mean ejection fraction was 60% in group A and 50% in group B (p < 0.01). Patients with ejection fraction ≤ 50% were 14.5% in group A and 40% in group B (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Clinically relevant RIHD become evident at a mean interval of 16 years after RT. The most frequent clinical manifestations are CAD and LVD. RIHD diagnosis in asymptomatic patients may preserve their cardiac function with timely interventions. We suggest -after 10 years from radiotherapy- a screening every 2-3 years.

[ANMCO Position paper: Cardio-oncology in the COVID-19 era]. / Position paper ANMCO: Cardio-oncologia in era COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease have confirmed the particular vulnerability of this population. Indeed, not only a higher risk of contracting the infection has been reported, but also an increased occurrence of a more severe course and unfavorable outcome. Beyond the direct consequences of COVID-19, the pandemic has an enormous impact on global health systems. Screening programs and non-urgent tests have been postponed; clinical trials have suffered a setback. Similarly, in the area of cardiology care, a significant decline in ST-elevation myocardial infarction accesses and an increase in cases of late presenting heart attacks with increased mortality and complication rates have been reported. Health care systems must therefore get ready to tackle the "rebound effect" that will likely show a relative increase in the short and medium term incidence of diseases such as heart failure, myocardial infarction, arrhythmias and cardio- and cerebrovascular complications. Scientific societies are taking action to provide general guidance and recommendations aimed at mitigating the unfavorable outcomes of this pandemic emergency. Cardio-oncology, as an emerging discipline, is more flexible in modulating care pathways and represents a beacon of innovation in the development of multi-specialty patient management. In the era of the COVID-19 pandemic, cardio-oncology has rapidly modified its clinical care pathways and implemented flexible monitoring protocols that include targeted use of cardiac imaging, increased use of biomarkers, and telemedicine systems. The goal of these strategic adjustments is to minimize the risk of infection for providers and patients while maintaining standards of care for the treatment of oncologic and cardiovascular diseases. The aim of this position paper is to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of cardio-oncologic patients with the-state-of-the-art knowledge about SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 in order to optimize medical strategies during and after the pandemic.

ANMCO POSITION PAPER: cardio-oncology in the COVID era (CO and CO).

The COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease have confirmed the particular vulnerability of these populations. Indeed, not only a higher risk of contracting the infection has been reported but also an increased occurrence of a more severe course and unfavourable outcome. Beyond the direct consequences of COVID-19 infection, the pandemic has an enormous impact on global health systems. Screening programmes and non-urgent tests have been postponed; clinical trials have suffered a setback. Similarly, in the area of cardiology care, a significant decline in STEMI accesses and an increase in cases of late presenting heart attacks with increased mortality and complication rates have been reported. Health care systems must therefore get ready to tackle the 'rebound effect' that will likely show a relative increase in the short- and medium-term incidence of diseases such as heart failure, myocardial infarction, arrhythmias, and cardio- and cerebrovascular complications. Scientific societies are taking action to provide general guidance and recommendations aimed at mitigating the unfavourable outcomes of this pandemic emergency. Cardio-oncology, as an emerging discipline, is more flexible in modulating care pathways and represents a beacon of innovation in the development of multi-specialty patient management. In the era of the COVID-19 pandemic, cardio-oncology has rapidly modified its clinical care pathways and implemented flexible monitoring protocols that include targeted use of cardiac imaging, increased use of biomarkers, and telemedicine systems. The goal of these strategic adjustments is to minimize the risk of infection for providers and patients while maintaining standards of care for the treatment of oncologic and cardiovascular diseases. The aim of this document is to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on the management of cardio-oncologic patients with the-state-of-the-art knowledge about severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in order to optimize medical strategies during and after the pandemic.