4.1 Article

Anthracycline induced cardiotoxicity in adult cancer patients: a prospective cohort study from a specialized oncology treatment centre in Uganda

Journal

AFRICAN HEALTH SCIENCES
Volume 19, Issue 1, Pages 1647-1656

Publisher

MAKERERE UNIV, FAC MED
DOI: 10.4314/ahs.v19i1.40

Keywords

Anthracycline induced cardiotoxicity; cancer patients; Uganda

Funding

  1. Fogarty International Center
  2. National Heart Lung and Blood Institute
  3. Common Fund of the National Institutes of Health [5R24 TW008861]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To determine the cumulative incidence of anthracycline induced cardiotoxicity (AIC), its predictors, and associated electrocardiographic and echocardiographic manifestations in adult cancer patients at Uganda Cancer Institute (UCI). Methods: We enrolled 160 participants between June 2013 and April 2014 and followed them up for a median of 146 days. Data on clinical, electrocardiographic and echocardiographic findings was obtained at baseline, and at completion of chemotherapy. The Pearson chi square test was used to identify the predictors associated with cardiotoxicity. Results: Of the 64 patients who were accessible for follow-up electrocardiography (ECG) and echocardiography (ECHO), fourteen participants developed cardiotoxicity hence a cumulative incidence rate of 21.9% with 95% CI 13.5%-33.43%. The predictors of AIC were female gender (p=0.025), LVEF (p=0.014) and LVFS (P=0.019). Anthracycline therapy was associated with shortening of the QRS duration (84.3 +/- 7.9 Vs 82.1 +/- 11.8 ms, p=0.005), prolongation of the QTc interval (411.9 +/- 30.7 Vs 447.2 +/- 39.4 ms, p=<0.001) and reduction in the LVEF (66.4 +/- 7.7 Vs 63.9 +/- 8.4%, p=0.026) and LVFS (36.9 +/- 6.2 Vs 35.1 +/- 6.6%, p=0.03). Conclusion: The cumulative incidence of AIC in this study cohort was high. Our findings emphasize the need for early monitoring for AIC.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available