scholarly journals Impact of prior cancer history on the survival of patients with larynx cancer

BMC Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaiquan Zhu ◽  
Renyu Lin ◽  
Ziheng Zhang ◽  
Huanqi Chen ◽  
Xingwang Rao

Abstract Background Patients with a prior history of cancer are commonly excluded from clinical trial. Increasing number of studies implied that a prior cancer did not adversely affect the clinical outcome among various types of cancer patients. However, the impact of prior cancer on survival of larynx cancer patients remains largely unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of prior cancer and assess its impact on survival of patients diagnosed with larynx cancer. Methods Patients with larynx cancer as the first or second primary malignancy diagnosed from 2004 to 2015 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to balance baseline characteristics. Kaplan-Meier method, multivariate Cox proportional hazard model, and multivariate competing risk model were performed for survival analysis. Results A total of 24,812 eligible patients with larynx cancer were included in the study, wherein a total of 2436 patients (9.8%) had a prior history of cancer. Prostate (36%), lung and bronchus (10%), urinary bladder (7%), and breast (6%) were the most common types of prior cancer. A prior cancer history served as a risk factor for overall survival (AHR =1.30; 95% CI [1.21–1.41]; P < 0.001) but a protective factor for cancer-specific mortality (AHR = 0.83; 95% CI [0.72–0.94]; P = 0.004) in comparison with those without prior cancer. The subgroup analysis showed that a prior history of cancer adversely affected overall survival of patients with larynx cancer in most subgroups stratified by timing and types of prior cancer, as well as by different clinicopathologic features. Conclusion Our study indicated an adverse survival impact of a prior history of cancer on patients with larynx cancer. Except for a few particular prior cancer, clinical trials should be considered prudently for laryngeal cancer patients with prior cancers.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10572-10572
Author(s):  
Amelia Sawyers ◽  
Margaret Chou ◽  
Paul Johannet ◽  
Nicholas Gulati ◽  
Yingzhi Qian ◽  
...  

10572 Background: Several reports have suggested that cancer patients are at increased risk for contracting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and suffering worse coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes. However, little is known about the impact of cancer status on presentation and outcome. Here, we report on the association between cancer status and survival in hospitalized patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the height of pandemic in New York City. Methods: Of the 6,724 patients who were hospitalized at NYU Langone Health (3/16/20 - 7/31/20) and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, 580 had either active cancer (n = 221) or a history of cancer (n = 359). Patients were classified as having active malignancy if they either received treatment within six months of their COVID-19 diagnosis or they had measurable disease documented at the time of their hospitalization. Patients were categorized as having a history of cancer if there was no evidence of measurable disease or there were no treatments administered within six months of their COVID-19 diagnosis. We compared the baseline clinicodemographic characteristics and hospital courses of the two groups, and the relationship between cancer status and the rate of admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), use of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and all-cause mortality. Results: There was no differences between the two groups in their baseline laboratory results associated with COVID-19 infection, incidence of venous thromboembolism, or incidence of severe COVID-19. Active cancer status was not associated with the rate of ICU admission ( P = 0.307) or use of IMV ( P = 0.236), but was significantly associated with worse all-cause mortality in both univariate and multivariate analysis with ORs of 1.48 (95% CI: 1.04-2.09; P = 0.028) and 1.71 (95% CI: 1.12-2.63; P = 0.014), respectively. Conclusions: Active cancer patients had worse survival outcomes compared to patients with a history of cancer despite similar COVID-19 disease characteristics in the two groups. Our data suggest that cancer care should continue with minimal interruptions during the pandemic to bring about response and remission as soon as possible. Additionally, these findings support the growing body of evidence that malignancy portends worse COVID-19 prognosis, and demonstrate that the risk may even apply to those without active disease.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 1447-1447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alok A. Khorana ◽  
Frank Peacock ◽  
Sally G Tamayo ◽  
Zhong Yuan ◽  
Nicholas Sicignano ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Cancer patients are at increased risk of both venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding, but real world bleeding rates with contemporary anticoagulants are not known. Purpose: To describe the incidence of major bleeding (MB) in VTE patients treated with rivaroxaban, and to compare differences in MB incidence and characteristics among patients with active cancer, history of cancer, and no current or past cancer. Methods: We queried over 10 million electronic medical records (EMRs) from the United States Department of Defense healthcare system from November 2, 2012 to September 30, 2015 to identify MB events in VTE patients treated with rivaroxaban. The Cunningham algorithm was used for identifying MB, and VTE was determined by diagnosis codes. Presence of cancer was assessed from 5 years prior to index rivaroxaban exposure through end of study, and categorized by active cancer, history of cancer, and no cancer. Active cancer was defined by one of the following: 1) a metastatic diagnosis code within 6 months prior to or overlapping with rivaroxaban exposure, 2) chemotherapy and/or radiation codes within 6 months prior to rivaroxaban exposure, 3) cancer-related surgery overlapping with rivaroxaban exposure, or 4) leukemia and/or indolent lymphoma codes at any point within the entire assessment window. History of cancer was defined as the presence of any cancer diagnosis within the 5-year baseline period not meeting the definition of active cancer. Patients with active cancer or history of cancer were further categorized by cancer site/type. Incidence, outcomes, demographics, and bleeding risk scores were evaluated by cancer status. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess the association between cancer status and rate of MB adjusting for baseline characteristics. Results: The study population comprised 9,638 VTE patients on rivaroxaban, including 1,728 (17.9%) with active cancer, 1,548 (16.1%) with history of cancer and 6,362 (66.0%) with no cancer. Of these, 130 (1.3%) experienced MB. After stratifying by cancer status, MB occurred at a rate of 2.61 (95% CI 1.80-3.78) per 100 person-years in those with active cancer, 3.18 (95% CI 2.17-4.67) per 100 person-years in those with history of cancer, and 2.25 (95% CI 1.80-2.81) per 100 person-years in those with no cancer. No significant difference in the incidence of MB was found between those with cancer (active or history) and those without cancer (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.70-1.47, p-value 0.94) after adjusting for age, sex, and baseline comorbidities. Neither history of cancer nor active cancer when independently compared to no cancer was significantly associated with MB after multivariate adjustment. MB rates varied notably by cancer site. Additional key findings are presented in Table 1. Conclusion: In this large United States Department of Defense cohort study of rivaroxaban users treated for VTE, incidence of MB is relatively low and not significantly different between cancer and non-cancer patients. Fatal outcomes associated with bleeding hospitalization were also uncommon across all the cancer groups. These data should provide assurance to oncology providers regarding the safety of rivaroxaban use in the real-world setting. Disclosures Khorana: Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Leo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Halozyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Peacock:Phillips: Consultancy; Comprehensive Research Associates LLC: Equity Ownership; Pfizer: Research Funding; Banyan: Research Funding; Cardiorentis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Portola: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbott: Research Funding; Emergencies in Medicine LLC: Equity Ownership; Ischemia Care: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Alere: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; The Medicine's Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; ZS Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Prevencio: Consultancy. Yuan:Janssen Research and Development: Employment; Johnson & Johnson: Other: Mr. Yuan owns stocks in Johnson & Johnson.. Sicignano:Janssen Research and Development: Other: NMS is an employee of Health ResearchTx LLC, which has a business relationship with Janssen.. Hopf:Janssen Research and Development: Other: KPH is an independent contractor for Health ResearchTx LLC, which has a business relationship with Janssen . Patel:National Heart Lung and Blood Institute: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Heart Flow Technologies: Research Funding; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: Research Funding.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19054-e19054
Author(s):  
Shreni Shah ◽  
Madeline MacDonald ◽  
Yuanyuan Lu ◽  
Smitha Pabbathi ◽  
Abu-Sayeef Mirza

e19054 Background: Uninsured patients diagnosed with cancer receive fewer screenings, frequently present with later-stage cancer, and are often unable to access standard-of-care treatment when compared to insured patients. We previously performed a study demonstrating that uninsured patients with cancer histories have higher levels of comorbidity. However, there is limited data on long-term studies describing comorbid chronic conditions among uninsured cancer patients. Here we examine socioeconomic factors and comorbid chronic conditions in uninsured patients with a cancer history over a period of three years. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted from 10 free clinics around the Tampa Bay region. Patients with any documented history of cancer who utilized a free clinic between 2016 and 2018 were included. Patients with no documentation of cancer history were excluded. Demographics, chronic disease parameters, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores were extracted and analyzed. Results: Between 2016 – 2018, a total of 17,003 uninsured patients were treated at 10 free clinics. Of these patients, 455 (2.7%) had a documented history of cancer, 9021 (53.1%) had no history of cancer, and 7527 (44.3%) had no documentation of cancer in their charts. Cancer patients were mostly women (305, 67.0%) and the average age was 55.2 years. Patients with cancer had significantly higher CCI scores compared to patients without cancer in 2016 (3.0 [2.0 SD] versus 0.94 [1.2 SD]), 2017 (2.71 [2.38 SD] versus 0.93 [1.26 SD]), and 2018 (3.27 [2.22 SD] versus 1.08 [1.26 SD]), p < 0.001. Patients with a cancer history were also more likely to be current drinkers (16.9% versus 13.0%) or smokers (17.8% versus 11.0%) compared to patients without a history of cancer. Conclusions: The results demonstrate that uninsured cancer patients consistently have higher levels of chronic disease and comorbidity compared to uninsured patients without a cancer diagnosis. This study increases awareness of the disease burden and mortality risk specific to uninsured cancer survivors which could inform free clinics and volunteer providers to better address the needs of this vulnerable population.


2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Apar Kishor Ganti ◽  
Abe E. Sahmoun ◽  
Amit W. Panwalkar ◽  
Ketki K. Tendulkar ◽  
Anil Potti

Purpose Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in women. Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is frequently prescribed to postmenopausal women, but there is little data on its effect on lung cancer. Hence, we conducted a retrospective study to examine the impact of HRT on the natural history of lung cancer. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of women diagnosed with lung cancer between January 1994 and December 1999. Data collected included age, stage, past history of cancer, smoking history, family history of cancer, HRT use, treatment, and overall survival. The effects of various clinical features on survival were examined using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results Four hundred ninety-eight women (median age, 67 years; range, 31 to 93 years) with lung cancer were included. A history of smoking was present in 429 women (86%), whereas 86 women (17%) had taken HRT. Women with lung cancer who received HRT were younger than women with lung cancer who never received HRT (63 v 68 years old, respectively; P < .0001). Overall survival was significantly higher in patients with no HRT compared with patients who received HRT (79 v 39 months, respectively; hazard ratio = 1.97; 95% CI, 1.14 to 3.39). This effect seemed to be more pronounced in women with a smoking history. Conclusion HRT may affect outcomes from lung cancer adversely. Further studies examining the role of HRT use on outcomes from lung cancer, especially in women with a history of smoking, are urgently needed to clarify this important problem.


2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
C D Khairani ◽  
B M Barns ◽  
S M Rizzo ◽  
M B Pfeferman ◽  
J E Snyder ◽  
...  

Abstract Background In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, active cancer has been identified as a potential risk factor for adverse cardiovascular outcomes, including thrombosis. However, the impact of COVID-19 on outcomes in patients with a remote history of cancer is poorly understood. We evaluated hospitalized patients with a history of remote cancer and COVID-19 to examine whether a history of cancer contributes to 30-day major adverse cardiovascular outcomes among patients with COVID-19. Methods Using a retrospective cohort of 1114 patients from CORONA-VTE (Registry of Arterial and Venous Thromboembolic Complications in Patients With COVID-19), we looked at 399 hospitalized patients diagnosed with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed COVID-19 within a large heath care network that consists of two large academic medical centers and several community hospitals. Twenty-six patients with active cancer or receiving cancer treatment within 1-year of COVID-19 diagnosis and five patients with unknown cancer history were excluded. We assessed 46 patients with a history of cancer and 322 patients without any history of cancer. The primary endpoint was the frequency of adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular outcomes, defined as myocardial infarction, stroke, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and mortality. Results Among the 46 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and a history of cancer, 23.9% were non-white and 43.48% women. Compared to patients without any history of cancer, patients with a history of cancer were older (median 59.0 vs. 75.5 years, p&lt;0.001) and had higher BMI (median 26.4 vs. 29.6 kg/m2, p&lt;0.05). Patients with a history of cancer had higher rates of underlying CVD than those without (42.4% vs. 23.2%). Rates of major adverse cardiovascular events were similar in patients with and without a history of cancer (28.3% vs. 23.6%, respectively). Those with a history of cancer had a higher mortality rate (28.9% vs. 11.2%, p&lt;0.05). Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and preexisting CVD were independently associated with mortality in this patient cohort (OR 19.7, 95% CI 7.5–51.7 and OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.2–6.9). History of remote cancer was not independently associated with mortality (OR 2.39, 95% CI 0.93–6.15, p=0.07). Conclusion Our findings indicate that a history of remote cancer is not independently associated with increased mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. These data suggest that the cause of death among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and history of cancer is most likely multifactorial, with a strong contribution from cardiovascular disease. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Janssen Pharmaceuticals


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5576-5576 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandre Andre B. A. Da Costa ◽  
Marcela Marinelli Salvadori ◽  
Camila Vieira Valadares ◽  
Carlos Stecca ◽  
Louise Brot ◽  
...  

5576 Background: Ovarian carcinomas show homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) in up to 50% of cases and in 15 to 20% of cases occur due to germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. BRCA mutated tumors are more sensitive to PARP inhibitors and platinum based chemotherapy. The objective of this study was to characterize a cohort of ovarian cancer patients regarding HRD and to evaluate the impact of these scores in prolonged platinum sensitivity. Methods: Thirty one ovarian cancer patients with platinum resistant recurrence reexposed to platinum based chemotherapy were selected. Paraffin embedded tumor samples from 14 patients were analyzed using ONCOSCAN assay (Affymetrix) to evaluate HRD scores. The association of the scores with response rate to platinum rechallenge, overall survival and clinical pathologic factors was evaluated. Results: From the cohort of 31 patients, 15 samples from 14 patients were analyzed for genomic alterations. Median scores were 19.5 for TAI, 12.5 for cnLOH+L, 26.0 for LST and 6.3 for HRD. High scores were found in 10 out of 14 (for cnLOH+L score) and 9 out of 14 (for LST score) patients. Seven of the 14 patients analyzed analyzed for genomic alterations had response, which suggested homologous recombination deficiency. No significant differences were observed between response rates for high versus low scores. Numerically, cnLOH+L, LST and HDR scores were higher in patients with response to treatment compared to those without response. Median overall survival was 13.4 months from the beginning of platinum rechallenge and no difference in survival according to scores was observed. Among the clinical pathologic factors, family history of breast or ovarian cancer or personal history of breast cancer was associated to higher response rate to platinum rechallenge. Conclusions: In conclusion,HRD scores showed to be potential markers of response to platinum rechallenge in the platinum resistant setting. Further studies are necessary to clarify the best cutoffs for each score, the impact of tumor heterogeneity and the analysis of tumor samples in the moment of treatment. Positive family history of cancer is a clinical factor predictvie of platinum rechallenge response.


Author(s):  
Noriaki Tabata ◽  
Marcel Weber ◽  
Atsushi Sugiura ◽  
Can Öztürk ◽  
Kenichi Tsujita ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Little is known about the prevalence of a history of cancer and its impact on clinical outcome in mitral regurgitation (MR) patients undergoing transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR). Objectives The purpose of this study is to investigate the prevalence of cancer, baseline inflammatory parameters, and clinical outcome in MR patients undergoing TMVR. Methods Consecutive patients undergoing a MitraClip procedure were enrolled, and the patients were stratified into two groups: cancer and non-cancer. Baseline complete blood counts (CBC) with differential hemograms were collected prior to the procedure to calculate the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR). All-cause death within a one-year was examined. Results In total, 82 out of 446 patients (18.4%) had a history of cancer. Cancer patients had a significantly higher baseline PLR [181.4 (121.1–263.9) vs. 155.4 (109.4–210.4); P = 0.012] and NLR [5.4 (3.5–8.3) vs. 4.0 (2.9–6.1); P = 0.002] than non-cancer patients. A Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed that cancer patients had a significantly worse prognosis than non-cancer (estimated 1-year mortality, 20.2 vs. 9.2%; log-rank P = 0.009), and multivariable analyses of three models showed that cancer history was an independent factor for 1-year mortality. Patients who died during follow-up had a significantly higher baseline PLR [214.2 (124.2–296.7) vs. 156.3 (110.2–212.1); P = 0.007] and NLR [6.4 (4.2–12.5) vs. 4.0 (2.9–6.2); P < 0.001] than survivors. Conclusions In MitraClip patients, a history of cancer was associated with higher inflammatory parameters and worse prognosis compared to non-cancer patients. Graphical Abstract Central Illustration. Clinical outcomes and baseline PLR and NLR values accord-ing to one-year mortality. (Left) Patients who died within the follow-up period had a significantly higher baseline PLR (214.2 [124.2–296.7] vs 156.3 [110.2–212.1]; P = 0.007) and NLR (6.4 [4.2–12.5] vs 4.0 [2.9–6.2]; P < 0.001) than patients who survived. PLR, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (Right) A Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that cancer patients had a significantly worse prognosis than non-cancer patients (estimated one-year mortality, 20.2 vs 9.2%; log-rank P = 0.009).


ESMO Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. e000608
Author(s):  
Jiaqing Liu ◽  
Huaqiang Zhou ◽  
Yaxiong Zhang ◽  
Wenfeng Fang ◽  
Yunpeng Yang ◽  
...  

BackgroundPatients with a history of prior cancer are frequently excluded from cancer trials. Previous studies indicated that prior cancer does not adversely impact clinical outcomes for patients with lung cancer older than 65 years. However, it remains unknown whether these results are applicable to patients with lung cancer aged younger than 65 years old. The study aimed to investigate the impact of prior cancer history on younger patients with lung cancer.MethodsWe identified younger patients with lung cancer (<65 years) diagnosed between 2004 and 2009 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Propensity score matching was performed to balance differences in baseline characteristics between groups. Kaplan-Meier method and the Cox proportional hazards model were used to evaluate the impact of prior cancer on overall survival (OS).ResultsAmong 103 370 eligible patients with lung cancer, 15.18% had a history of prior cancer. Lung and bronchus (25.83%), breast (14.13%), prostate (8.85%) and cervix uteri (4.74%) were the most common prior cancer types. Of prior cancers, 61.56% are localised and regional stages. More than 67.98% of prior cancers were diagnosed within 5 years of the index lung cancer diagnosis. The median times of diagnosis for prior cancers were 38 months. Patients with prior cancer had the same/non-inferior OS as that of patients without a prior cancer diagnosis (propensity score-adjusted HR=1.01, 95% CI=0.99 to 1.04, p=0.324). Subgroup analyses stratified by timing of prior cancer displayed almost the same tendency (p>0.05). Interestingly, early-stage patients with a history of prior cancer had adverse survival curves (p<0.05). Advanced-stage patients with prior cancer had non-inferior survival (p>0.05).ConclusionsA prior cancer diagnosis has a heterogeneous effect on the survival of patients with lung cancer aged <65 years across different stages, but further prospective studies are still warranted.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (55) ◽  
pp. 22-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela B Mariotto ◽  
Joan L Warren ◽  
Chris Zeruto ◽  
Diarmuid Coughlan ◽  
Michael J Barrett ◽  
...  

Abstract Medical care costing studies have excluded patients with a prior cancer history. This study aims to update methods for estimating medical care costs attributable to cancer and to evaluate the effect of a prior history of cancer on costs for colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data and matched cancer patients to controls without cancer to estimate cancer-attributable costs by phases of care using Medicare 2007–2013 claims. CRC annualized average cancer-attributable costs were $56.0 K, $5.3 K, $92.5 K, and $24.3 K in the initial, continuing, and end-of-life cancer and noncancer death phases, respectively, in 2014 dollars. Costs were higher for patients diagnosed with more advanced stage, younger ages, and nonwhite races. Costs for patients with prior cancers were consistently higher than patients without prior cancers, especially in the continuing (4.9 K vs 7.2 K) and end-of-life noncancer death (22.7 K vs 30.0 K). Our CRC costs improve previous estimates by using more recent data and updated methods.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
K Tanimura ◽  
H Otake ◽  
H Kawamori ◽  
T Toba ◽  
A Nagasawa ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Although previous studies have reported that patients with a history of cancer have 2–3 times higher risks for acute coronary syndrome (ACS), morphological culprit plaque characteristics in ACS patients with a cancer history and their relations with clinical outcomes remain unknown. Methods The Kobe University ACS-OCT registry is a multi-center registry of consecutive ACS patients who underwent OCT-guided emergent PCI in Japanese four centers. All patients were categorized into the patients without a history of cancer (non-cancer), those with a history of cancer who diagnosed more than one year before ACS (historical), and those with ongoing cancer treatment or diagnosis within one year before ACS (current). ACS culprit lesions were classified into plaque rupture (PR), plaque erosion (PE), and calcified nodule (CN) according to morphological features by OCT and clinical events were collected after the onset of ACS. Results Among 436 patients, 63 patients (14.4%) had a history of cancer or ongoing treatment of cancer (cancer patients). Cancer patients were significantly older than non-cancer patients (73.4±9.4 vs. 66.9±12.9, p=0.001), and non-ST segment elevation ACS was more frequently observed in cancer patients than in non-cancer patients (57.1% vs. 43.2%, p=0.039). Regarding the ACS culprit lesion, the frequency of PR was significantly lower and the frequencies of PE and CN were significantly higher in the cancer patients than in the non-cancer patients (Figure A1). The cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE: composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and any revascularization, stroke, and heart failure with admission) after the onset of ACS in cancer patients was significantly higher than that in the non-cancer patients (Figure B1). When the cancer patients were categorized into the historical and the current cancer patients, the frequency of PE was higher in the current and the historical cancer patients than the non-cancer patients. Also, the incidence of CN was significantly higher in the historical cancer patients than others (Figure A2). The cumulative incidence of MACE was significantly higher in the current cancer patients, followed by historical and non-cancer patients (Figure B2). Cox regression analyses demonstrated that the non-PR lesion (hazard ratio (HR) 0.65, 0.46–0.94, p=0.021), patients with multivessel disease (HR 2.55, 1.79–3.64, p&lt;0.001), older patients (HR 1.02, 1.00–1.03, p=0.043) were independently associated with MACE after ACS. Moreover, multivariate analysis demonstrated that cancer history (HR 4.64, 2.34–9.21, p&lt;0.001) and non-ST segment elevation ACS (HR 0.66, 2.34–9.21, p=0.038) were independently associated with non-PR lesion. Conclusions The present study revealed the difference in morphological plaque characteristics between cancer and non-cancer patients, which might explain potential underlying mechanisms for worse outcomes in cancer patients. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document