scholarly journals Clinical Impact of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Cancer Patients With Suspected Cardiomyopathy

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giv Heidari-Bateni ◽  
Jean-Bernard Durand ◽  
Cezar Iliescu ◽  
Greg Gladish ◽  
Anita Deswal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Clinical Impact ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Presumptive Diagnosis ◽  
Infiltrative Cardiomyopathy ◽  
Tertiary Cancer Center

Objectives: To assess the clinical impact of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance (CMR) in clinical decision making of cancer patients with a suspected cardiomyopathy in a tertiary cancer center.Background: Cardiomyopathies of diverse etiologies are frequently encountered in a Cardio-Oncology practice. The clinical impact of CMR after a presumptive diagnosis of cardiomyopathy has not been studied in cancer patients.Methods: We reviewed data on cancer patients with presumptive diagnosis of cardiomyopathy who underwent CMR in a tertiary cancer center. The clinical impact of CMR was defined as either change in clinical diagnosis or management post CMR results. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to assess whether any of the baseline characteristics were predictive of the clinical impact of CMR.Results: A total of 110 consecutive patients were identified. Clinical impact of CMR was seen in 68 (62%) patients. Change in the clinical diagnosis and management was seen in 56 (51%) and 41 (37%) of patients, respectively. The most common change was prevention of endomyocardial biopsy in 26 patients (24%). Overall, patients with higher left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by echocardiography (echo), clinical impact was influenced more by CMR (LVEF of 37.2 ± 12.3% vs. 51.5 ± 11.6%, p < 0.001). Cancer diagnosis of multiple myeloma was associated with change in the management post CMR (adjusted OR of 25.6, 95% CI 4.0–162.4, p = 0.001). Suspicion of infiltrative cardiomyopathy was associated with a higher likelihood of change in diagnosis. Having an LVEF≥40 by echo was associated with change in diagnosis and management by CMR.Conclusions: Utilization of CMR has a significant clinical impact in cancer patients with suspected cardiomyopathy. Patients with cancer diagnosis of multiple myeloma, suspicion of infiltrative cardiomyopathy and those with higher LVEF by echo seem to benefit more from CMR.

Opioid use among cancer patients in the final hospitalization in a Tertiary Cancer Center in Jordan

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 369-374
Author(s):  
Omar Shamieh ◽  
Sewar Salmany ◽  
Odai Khamash ◽  
Stella Daoud ◽  
Mustafa Khraisat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Tertiary Cancer Center

scholarly journals Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use at a Comprehensive Cancer Center

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qianlai Luo ◽  
Gary N. Asher
Keyword(s):  
Alternative Medicine ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Cancer Diagnosis ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Medicine Use ◽  
Energy Medicine ◽  
Cam Use ◽  
After Cancer ◽  
Oncology Providers

Background. Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is common among cancer patients, but the majority of CAM studies do not specify the time periods in relation to cancer diagnoses. We sought to define CAM use by cancer patients and investigate factors that might influence changes in CAM use in relation to cancer diagnoses. Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of adults diagnosed with breast, prostate, lung, or colorectal cancer between 2010 and 2012 at the Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center. Questionnaires were sent to 1794 patients. Phone calls were made to nonrespondents. Log binomial/Poisson regressions were used to investigate the association between cancer-related changes in CAM use and conversations about CAM use with oncology providers. Results. We received 603 (33.6 %) completed questionnaires. The mean age (SD) was 64 (11) years; 62% were female; 79% were white; and 98% were non-Hispanic. Respondents reported the following cancer types: breast (47%), prostate (27%), colorectal (14%), lung (11%). Eighty-nine percent reported lifetime CAM use. Eighty-five percent reported CAM use during or after initial cancer treatment, with category-specific use as follows: mind-body medicine 39%, dietary supplements 73%, body-based therapies 30%, and energy medicine 49%. During treatment CAM use decreased for all categories except energy medicine. After treatment CAM use returned to pretreatment levels for most CAMs except chiropractic. Initiation of CAM use after cancer diagnosis was positively associated with a patient having a conversation about CAM use with their oncology provider, mainly driven by patient-initiated conversations. Conclusions. Consistent with previous studies, CAM use was common among our study population. Conversations about CAM use with oncology providers appeared to influence cessation of mind-body medicine use after cancer diagnosis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document