Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator for the Primary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death among Patients With Cancer.

Data are limited regarding the characteristics and outcomes of patients with cancer who are found eligible for primary defibrillator therapy. We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of patients with preexisting cancer diagnoses who become eligible for a primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) or cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) defibrillator. Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial-ICD (MADIT-ICD) benefit scores were calculated. The study included 75 cancer patients at a median age of 73 (interquartile range 64, 81) years at heart failure diagnosis. Active cancer was present in 51%. Overall, 55% of the cohort had coronary artery disease and 37% were CRT eligible. We found that 48%, 49%, and 3% of cohorts had low, intermediate, and high MADIT-ICD Benefit scores, respectively. Only 27% of patients underwent primary defibrillator implantation. Using multivariate analysis, indication for CRT and intermediate/high MADIT-ICD Benefit categories were found as independent predictors for implantation (odds ratio 8.42 p <0.001 and odds ratio 3.74 p = 0.040, respectively). During a median follow-up of 5.3 (interquartile range 4.5, 7.2) years, one patient (5%) with a defibrillator had appropriate shock therapy and 2 patients (10%) had bacteremia. Of 13 patients with CRT defibrillator-implants, one patient was admitted for heart failure exacerbation (8%). Using a time-varying covariate model, we did not observe statistically significant differences in the survival of patients with cancer implanted versus those not implanted with primary defibrillators (hazard ratio 0.521, p = 0.127). In conclusion, although primary defibrillator therapy is underutilized in patients with cancer, its relative benefit is limited because of competing risk of nonarrhythmic mortality. These findings highlight the need for personalized cardiologic and oncologic coevaluation.

Safety of High-Dose Dabigatran in Elderly and Younger Patients with a Low Bleeding Risk: A Prospective Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) at risk for stroke, dabigatran 150 mg twice a day (DE150) is superior to warfarin for stroke prevention. However, there is paucity of data with respect to bleeding risk at this dose in elderly patients (≥75 years). We aimed to evaluate the safety of DE150 in comparison to warfarin in a real-world population with AF and low bleeding risk (HAS-BLED score ≤2). METHODS: In this prospective observational study, 754 consecutive patients with AF and HAS-BLED score ≤2 were included. We compared outcome of elderly patients (age ≥75 tears) to younger patients (age <75 years). The primary end point was the combined incidence of all-cause mortality, stroke, systemic emboli, and major bleeding event during a mean follow-up of 1 year. RESULTS: There were 230 (30%) elderly patients, 151 patients were treated with warfarin, and 79 were treated with DE150. Fifty-two patients experienced the primary endpoint during the 1-year follow-up. Among the elderly, at 1-year of follow-up, the cumulative event rate of the combined endpoint in the DE150 and warfarin was 8.9 and 15.9% respectively (p = 0.14). After adjustment for age and gender, patients who were treated with DE150 had a nonsignificant difference in the risk for the combined end point as patients treated with warfarin both among the elderly and among the younger population (HR 0.58, 95% C.I = 0.25-1.39 and HR = 1.12, 95% C.I 0.62-2.00, respectively [p for age-group-by-treatment interaction = 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that Dabigatran 150 mg twice a day can be safely used among elderly AF patients with low bleeding risk.