癌症幸存者心力衰竭风险评估工具的比较。

IF 3.2 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Cardio-oncology Pub Date : 2024-10-11 DOI:10.1186/s40959-024-00267-5
Cheng Hwee Soh, Thomas H Marwick
{"title":"癌症幸存者心力衰竭风险评估工具的比较。","authors":"Cheng Hwee Soh, Thomas H Marwick","doi":"10.1186/s40959-024-00267-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cancer survivors have an increased risk of incident heart failure (HF) attributable to shared risk factors and cancer treatment-induced cardiac dysfunction. Selection for HF screening depends on risk assessment, but the optimal means of assessing risk is undefined. We undertook a comparison of HF risk calculators among survivors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this study from the UK Biobank, cancer and HF diagnoses were determined based on the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 code and non-cancer participants were included as controls. Participants' risk of incident HF was determined using the Heart Failure Association-International Cardio-oncology Society (HFA-ICOS), the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC-HF) and the Pooled Cohort Equations to Prevent Heart Failure (PCP-HF). The predictive performances of each were compared using the area under the curve (AUC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After propensity matching with age and sex, 9,232 survivors from breast cancer or lymphoma (mean age 59.9 years, 87.8% female), and 23,800 survivors from other cancer types (mean age 59.1 years, 85.8% female) were included in the analysis. The discriminative value for HFA-ICOS (AUC 0.753 [95%CI: 0.739-0.766]) and ARIC-HF (0.757 [95%CI: 0.744-0.770]) were similar, and superior to PCP-HF (0.717 [95%CI: 0.702-0.732]). The overall performance for each risk score was better among participants in other cancer types than those with breast cancer and lymphoma.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>HFA-ICOS and ARIC-HF outperformed the PCP-HF among cancer- and non-cancer cohort, although all showed modest discrimination for incident HF to be applied to clinical practice. A cancer-specific HF prediction tool could facilitate HF prevention among survivors.</p>","PeriodicalId":9804,"journal":{"name":"Cardio-oncology","volume":"10 1","pages":"67"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11468191/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of heart failure risk assessment tools among cancer survivors.\",\"authors\":\"Cheng Hwee Soh, Thomas H Marwick\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40959-024-00267-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cancer survivors have an increased risk of incident heart failure (HF) attributable to shared risk factors and cancer treatment-induced cardiac dysfunction. Selection for HF screening depends on risk assessment, but the optimal means of assessing risk is undefined. We undertook a comparison of HF risk calculators among survivors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this study from the UK Biobank, cancer and HF diagnoses were determined based on the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 code and non-cancer participants were included as controls. Participants' risk of incident HF was determined using the Heart Failure Association-International Cardio-oncology Society (HFA-ICOS), the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC-HF) and the Pooled Cohort Equations to Prevent Heart Failure (PCP-HF). The predictive performances of each were compared using the area under the curve (AUC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After propensity matching with age and sex, 9,232 survivors from breast cancer or lymphoma (mean age 59.9 years, 87.8% female), and 23,800 survivors from other cancer types (mean age 59.1 years, 85.8% female) were included in the analysis. The discriminative value for HFA-ICOS (AUC 0.753 [95%CI: 0.739-0.766]) and ARIC-HF (0.757 [95%CI: 0.744-0.770]) were similar, and superior to PCP-HF (0.717 [95%CI: 0.702-0.732]). The overall performance for each risk score was better among participants in other cancer types than those with breast cancer and lymphoma.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>HFA-ICOS and ARIC-HF outperformed the PCP-HF among cancer- and non-cancer cohort, although all showed modest discrimination for incident HF to be applied to clinical practice. A cancer-specific HF prediction tool could facilitate HF prevention among survivors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9804,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cardio-oncology\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"67\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11468191/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cardio-oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40959-024-00267-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardio-oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40959-024-00267-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:癌症幸存者发生心力衰竭(HF)的风险增加,这归因于共同的风险因素和癌症治疗引起的心功能障碍。高血压筛查的选择取决于风险评估,但风险评估的最佳方法尚未确定。我们对幸存者中的高血压风险计算器进行了比较:在这项来自英国生物库的研究中,癌症和高血压诊断是根据国际疾病分类(ICD)-10 编码确定的,非癌症参与者被列为对照组。采用心力衰竭协会-国际心脏病-肿瘤协会(HFA-ICOS)、社区动脉粥样硬化风险(ARIC-HF)和预防心力衰竭队列汇总方程(PCP-HF)确定参与者发生心力衰竭的风险。结果:根据年龄和性别进行倾向匹配后,9232 名乳腺癌或淋巴瘤幸存者(平均年龄 59.9 岁,87.8% 为女性)和 23800 名其他类型癌症幸存者(平均年龄 59.1 岁,85.8% 为女性)被纳入分析。HFA-ICOS(AUC 0.753 [95%CI:0.739-0.766])和 ARIC-HF(0.757 [95%CI:0.744-0.770])的判别值相似,优于 PCP-HF(0.717 [95%CI:0.702-0.732])。与乳腺癌和淋巴瘤患者相比,其他癌症类型参与者的各风险评分的总体表现更好:结论:HFA-ICOS和ARIC-HF在癌症和非癌症队列中的表现优于PCP-HF,但它们对HF事件的区分度都不高,无法应用于临床实践。癌症特异性高血压预测工具有助于幸存者预防高血压。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of heart failure risk assessment tools among cancer survivors.

Background: Cancer survivors have an increased risk of incident heart failure (HF) attributable to shared risk factors and cancer treatment-induced cardiac dysfunction. Selection for HF screening depends on risk assessment, but the optimal means of assessing risk is undefined. We undertook a comparison of HF risk calculators among survivors.

Methods: In this study from the UK Biobank, cancer and HF diagnoses were determined based on the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 code and non-cancer participants were included as controls. Participants' risk of incident HF was determined using the Heart Failure Association-International Cardio-oncology Society (HFA-ICOS), the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC-HF) and the Pooled Cohort Equations to Prevent Heart Failure (PCP-HF). The predictive performances of each were compared using the area under the curve (AUC).

Results: After propensity matching with age and sex, 9,232 survivors from breast cancer or lymphoma (mean age 59.9 years, 87.8% female), and 23,800 survivors from other cancer types (mean age 59.1 years, 85.8% female) were included in the analysis. The discriminative value for HFA-ICOS (AUC 0.753 [95%CI: 0.739-0.766]) and ARIC-HF (0.757 [95%CI: 0.744-0.770]) were similar, and superior to PCP-HF (0.717 [95%CI: 0.702-0.732]). The overall performance for each risk score was better among participants in other cancer types than those with breast cancer and lymphoma.

Conclusions: HFA-ICOS and ARIC-HF outperformed the PCP-HF among cancer- and non-cancer cohort, although all showed modest discrimination for incident HF to be applied to clinical practice. A cancer-specific HF prediction tool could facilitate HF prevention among survivors.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cardio-oncology
Cardio-oncology Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
3.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊最新文献
Incidence and survival outcomes of myocarditis and pericardial diseases associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Is the pendulum slowly starting to swing back? Exercise and cardiovascular health among breast cancer survivors: a scoping review of current observational evidence. Incidence and risk factors of trastuzumab-induced cardiac dysfunction in a predominantly Hispanic South Texas population: a descriptive study. Survivorship clinic attendance improves completion but not timeliness of cardiac surveillance post anthracyclines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1