4.5 Article

Assessment of global longitudinal strain at low-dose anthracycline-based chemotherapy, for the prediction of subsequent cardiotoxicity

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jew223

关键词

strain; anthracyclines; cardiotoxicity; echocardiography; left ventricular function

资金

  1. local DRCI (Delegation a la recherche clinique et a l'innovation)
  2. Centre Hospitalier de Versailles

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims We sought to assess whether global longitudinal strain (GLS) measured early during treatment with anthracyclines (at a cumulative dose of 150 mg/m(2)) can predict subsequent alterations in left ventricular ejection fraction. Methods and results Eighty-six patients with Hodgkin's disease, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, or acute leukaemia and receiving anthracyclines were prospectively included. Patients underwent complete echocardiography on four occasions: baseline (V1); after reaching a cumulative dose of 150 mg/m(2) (V2); end of treatment (V3); and 1 year follow-up (V4). Six patients developed cardiotoxicity, defined as a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction of>10 percentage points, to a value<53%, at V4. GLS measured at V1 and V2 was significantly lower in the cardiotoxicity group vs. the controls (P = 0.042 and P = 0.01, respectively). Compared with GLS at V1, GLS obtained at V2 provided incremental predictive information and appeared to be the strongest predictor of cardiotoxicity (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve, 0.82). At a threshold of -17.45% for GLS measured at V2, the sensitivity and specificity of detecting cardiotoxicity were 67% (95% confidence interval 33-100) and 97% (95% confidence interval 94-100), respectively. Conclusion GLS greater than -17.45%, obtained after 150 mg/m(2) of anthracycline therapy, is an independent predictor of future anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity. These findings should encourage physicians to perform echocardiography earlier during treatment with anthracyclines.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据