Research Information System
JAMA Cardiology, vol.7, no.3, pp.330-340, 2022 (SCI-Expanded)
© 2022 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.Importance: Diagnosis of cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD) remains a challenge. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) provides accurate measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), but access to repeated scans is limited. Objective: To develop a diagnostic model for CTRCD using echocardiographic LVEF and strain and biomarkers, with CMR as the reference standard. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this prospective cohort study, patients were recruited from University of Toronto-affiliated hospitals from November 2013 to January 2019 with all cardiac imaging performed at a single tertiary care center. Women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive early-stage breast cancer were included. The main exclusion criterion was contraindication to CMR. A total of 160 patients were recruited, 136 of whom completed the study. Exposures: Sequential therapy with anthracyclines and trastuzumab. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patients underwent echocardiography, high-sensitivity troponin I (hsTnI), B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), and CMR studies preanthracycline and postanthracycline every 3 months during and after trastuzumab therapy. Echocardiographic measures included 2-dimensional (2-D) LVEF, 3-D LVEF, peak systolic global longitudinal strain (GLS), and global circumferential strain (GCS). LVEF CTRCD was defined using the Cardiac Review and Evaluation Committee Criteria, GLS or GCS CTRCD as a greater than 15% relative change, and abnormal hsTnI and BNP as greater than 26 pg/mL and ≥ 35 pg/mL, respectively, at any follow-up point. Combinations of echocardiographic measures and biomarkers were examined to diagnose CMR CTRCD using conditional inference tree models. Results: Among 136 women (mean [SD] age, 51.1 [9.2] years), CMR-identified CTRCD occurred in 37 (27%), and among those with analyzable images, in 30 of 131 (23%) by 2-D LVEF, 27 of 124 (22%) by 3-D LVEF, 53 of 126 (42%) by GLS, 61 of 123 (50%) by GCS, 32 of 136 (24%) by BNP, and 14 of 136 (10%) by hsTnI. In isolation, 3-D LVEF had greater sensitivity and specificity than 2-D LVEF for CMR CTRCD while GLS had greater sensitivity than 2-D or 3-D LVEF. Regression tree analysis identified a sequential algorithm using 3-D LVEF, GLS, and GCS for the optimal diagnosis of CTRCD (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 89.3%). The probability of CTRCD when results for all 3 tests were negative was 1.0%. When 3-D LVEF was replaced by 2-D LVEF in the model, the algorithm still performed well; however, its primary value was to rule out CTRCD. Biomarkers did not improve the ability to diagnose CTRCD. Conclusions and Relevance: Using CMR CTRCD as the reference standard, these data suggest that a sequential approach combining echocardiographic 3-D LVEF with 2-D GLS and 2-D GCS may provide a timely diagnosis of CTRCD during routine CTRCD surveillance with greater accuracy than using these measures individually. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02306538.