Background: With recent improvements in survival of cancer patients and common use of high-value care at end of life, the management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients with cancer is increasingly important. To our knowledge, there are no current U.S. data examining how the presence and extent of cancer influence cardiologists' decision making for common cardiovascular conditions. Methods: An anonymous online vignette-based survey of cardiologists was conducted at five U.S. institutions investigating how the extent of gastrointestinal and thoracic malignancies (prior/localized, metastatic) would influence treatment recommendations for atrial fibrillation (AF), aortic stenosis, unstable angina (UA), and obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Results: Thirty-three percent (86/259) of cardiologists completed the survey between September and November 2019. Participants were 67% male, 51% below age 40, and 58% had five or more years of clinical experience. Majority of cardiologists practiced at teaching hospitals (72%) and were noninterventional (63%). Cardiologists were more likely to recommend procedural interventions for patients with localized cancer than for those with metastatic disease: AF (left atrial appendage occlusion: 20% vs. 8%), atrial stenosis (aortic valve repair: 83% vs. 11%), UA (left heart catheter: 70% vs. 27%), and obstructive CAD (percutaneous coronary intervention: 81% vs. 38%). In patients with metastatic cancer, most cardiologists sought an oncology (82%) or a palliative care (69%) consultation. However, a persistent trend of undertreatment in patients with localized cancers and overtreatment in patients with end-of-life disease was apparent. Conclusions: Cardiologists were less likely to recommend invasive cardiovascular therapies to patients with metastatic cancer. This preference pattern likely reflects the influence of comorbidities and quality of life expectation on cardiologists' treatment recommendations but may also be related to the stigma of advanced cancer. Better communication between cardiologists and oncologists is necessary to provide a personalized care of patients with cancer and CVD that would maximize treatment benefit with least morbidity.

No abstract

Several FLT3 inhibitors(i) are available to treat relapsed/refractory (R/R) FLT3-internal tandem duplicated acute myeloid leukemia (AML). This study analyzes the efficacies of various FLT3i (types 1 and 2) tested in clinical trials in treating R/R AML and high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (HR-MDS). PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for single/double-arm phase I/II/III R/R AML or HR-MDS clinical trials published between 1/1/2000 and 6/1/2021. The outcomes studied were composite response rate (CRc) and overall response rate (ORR). Toxicities were compared based on the organ system. The 28 studies analyzed had 1927 patients. The pooled ORR and (CRc) for all FLT3i were 53% (95% CI, 43%-63%) and 34% (95% CI, 26%-44%). Pooled ORR and CRc were 37% (95% CI, 25%-51%) and 35% (95% CI, 21%-52%) for type 1 and 58% (95% CI, 43%-71%) and 38% (95% CI, 27%-50%) for type 2, respectively. Gastrointestinal (GI) and hematological toxicity occurred in 22% (95% CI, 19%-25.4%) and 74.6% (95% CI, 70%-79%) with type 1 and 13.9% (95% CI, 12%-16%) and 57.7% (95% CI, 54.6%-60.8%) with type 2 FLT3i. QTc prolongation occurred in 2.06% (95% CI, 1.03%-3.65%) with type 1 and 7% (95% CI, 5.3%-9%) with type 2 FLT3i. Type 2 FLT3i had less GI toxicity but more QTc prolongation. Prospective studies are needed to compare the efficacy of type 1 and 2 FLT3i.

No abstract