In the cardio-oncology population, drug interactions are of particular importance given the complex pharmacological profile, narrow therapeutic index, and inherent risk of therapies used to manage cardiovascular disease and cancer. Drug interactions may be beneficial or detrimental to the desired therapeutic effect. Clinicians in both cardiology and oncology should be cognizant of these potential drug-drug interactions that may reduce the efficacy or safety of either cardiovascular or cancer therapies. These risks can be mitigated through increased recognition of potential drug-drug interaction, use of alternative medications when possible, and careful monitoring. This scientific statement provides clinicians with an overview of pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions in patients with cancer exposed to common cardiovascular and cancer medications.

Despite increasing prevalence in critical care units, cardiogenic shock related to HF (HF-CS) is incompletely understood and distinct from acute myocardial infarction related CS. This review highlights the pathophysiology, evaluation, and contemporary management of HF-CS.

No abstract

The recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) challenges pharmacists worldwide. Alongside other specialized pharmacists, we re‐evaluated daily processes and therapies used to treat COVID‐19 patients within our institutions from a cardiovascular perspective and share what we have learned. To develop a collaborative approach for cardiology issues and concerns in the care of confirmed or suspected COVID‐19 patients by drawing on the experiences of cardiology pharmacists across the country. On March 26, 2020, a conference call was convened composed of 24 cardiology residency‐trained pharmacists (23 actively practicing in cardiology and 1 in critical care) from 16 institutions across the United States to discuss cardiology issues each have encountered with COVID‐19 patients. Discussion centered around providing optimal pharmaceutical care while limiting staff exposure. The collaborative of pharmacists found for the ST‐elevation myocardial infarction patient, many institutions were diverting COVID‐19 rule‐out patients to their Emergency Department (ED). Thrombolytics are an alternative to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) allowing for timely treatment of patients and decreased staff exposure. An emergency response grab and go kit includes initial drugs and airway equipment so the patient can be treated and the cart can be left outside the room. Cardiology pharmacists have developed policies and procedures to address monitoring of QT prolonging medications, the use of inhaled prostacyclins, and national drug shortages. Technology has allowed us to practice social distancing, while staying in close contact with our teams, patients, and colleagues and continuing to teach. Residents are engaged in unique decision‐making processes with their preceptors and assist as pharmacist extenders. Cardiology pharmacists are in a unique position to work with other pharmacists and health care professionals to implement safe and effective practice changes during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Ongoing monitoring and adjustments are necessary in rapidly changing times.

It has been suggested pleural effusions may develop in right heart failure in the absence of left heart disease. The incidence and prognostic significance of pleural effusions in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is uncertain. Patients with PAH followed at our tertiary care center were reviewed. Survival was examined based on the subsequent development of a pleural effusion. 191 patients with PAH met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of pleural effusions on initial assessment was 7.3%. Among patients without a pleural effusion on initial imaging and at least one follow-up CT (N=142), pleural effusion developed in 27.5% (N=39) of patients. No alternative etiology of the effusion was identified in 19 (48.7%) cases and effusions deemed related to PAH occurred at an incident rate of 38.6 cases per 1000 person-years. Of these, 14 (73.7%) were bilateral, 3 (15.8%) were right-sided, and 2 (10.5%) were left-sided. Effusion size was trace or small in 18 patients (94.7%). Development of a new pleural effusion was associated with attenuated survival in unadjusted survival analysis (HR: 3.80; 95% CI: 1.55-9.31), multivariate analysis (HR: 5.13; 95% CI: 1.86-14.16), and after the multivariate model was adjusted for concomitant pericardial effusion (HR: 4.86; 95% CI: 1.51-15.71). Negative impact on survival remained unchanged when effusions more likely related to an alternative cause were removed from analysis. In conclusion, pleural effusions can complicate PAH in the absence of left heart disease. These effusions are frequently small in size, bilateral in location, and their presence is associated with decreased survival. Attenuated survival appears independent of the risk associated with a new pericardial effusion.