Traditional markers of cardiac toxicity fail to detect marked reductions in cardioresriratory fitness among cancer patients undergoing anti-cancer treatment

Aims Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is standard of care for evaluating chemotherapy-associated cardiotoxicity, although global longitudinal strain (GLS) offers advantages. However, neither change in LVEF or GLS has been associated with short-term symptoms, functional capacity, or long-term heart failure (HF) risk. We sought to determine whether an integrative measure of cardiovascular function (VO(2)peak) that is strongly associated with HF risk would be more sensitive to cardiac damage induced by cancer treatment than LVEF, GLS, or cardiac biomarkers. Methods and results Patients (n = 206, 53 +/- 13 years, 35% male) scheduled to commence anti-cancer treatment completed assessment prior to, and within 6 months after therapy. Changes in echocardiographic measures of LV function (LVEF, GLS), cardiac biomarkers (troponin and BNP), and cardiorespiratory fitness (VO(2)peak) were measured. LV function was normal prior to treatment (LVEF 61 +/- 5%; GLS -19.4 +/- 2.1), but VO(2)peak was only 88 +/- 26% of age-predicted. After treatment, VO 2 peak was reduced by 7 +/- 15% (equivalent of 7 years normal ageing, P < 0.0001) and the rates of functional disability (defined as VO(2)peak < 18 mUmin/kg) almost doubled (15% vs. 26%, P = 0.016). In contrast, small, reductions in LVEF (59 +/- 5% vs. 58 +/- 5%, P= 0.03) and GLS (-19.4 +/- 2.1 vs. -18.9 +/- 2.2, P = 0.002) and an increase in troponin levels (4.0 +/- 6.9 vs. 26.4 +/- 26.2 ng/mL, P < 0.0001) were observed. Conclusion Anti-cancer treatment is associated with marked reductions in functional capacity that occur independent of reductions in LVEF and GLS. The assessment of VO(2)peak prior to, and following treatment may be a more sensitive means of identifying patients at increased risk of HF.

Automated summary

The study found that an integrative measure of cardiovascular function (VO(2)peak) may be more sensitive to cardiac damage induced by cancer treatment compared to LVEF, GLS, or cardiac biomarkers. After treatment, there was a significant reduction in VO(2)peak, while changes in LVEF and GLS were minor. This suggests that assessing VO(2)peak before and after cancer treatment may be helpful in identifying patients at increased risk of heart failure.