Background. Adjuvant trastuzumab therapy improves the outcome of patients with early breast cancer (EBC) and overexpression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). However, it is potentially cardiotoxic. This study aims to evaluate the relationship between the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/receptor blockers (ACEi/ARBs) and/or β-blockers and development of heart failure (HF) and/or left ventricular dysfunction during 1 year of adjuvant trastuzumab therapy. Methods. A total of 499 women receiving adjuvant trastuzumab therapy for EBC entered in a multicenter registry and were divided into four subgroups according to treatment with ACEi/ARBs and/or β-blockers. Occurrence of HF and decrease of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF; minimum 10 percentage points) were recorded. Results. HF occurred in 2% of patients who did not take either ACEi/ARBs or β-blockers, 8% of patients receiving ACEi/ARBs alone, 8% receiving β-blockers alone (p = .03), and 19% receiving both medications (p < .01). The prevalence of patients with LVEF that decreased by at least 10 percentage points was similar in all groups. Combined ACEi/ARBs and β-blocker therapy was independently associated with hypertension and a significant reduction of LVEF from baseline to 3-month evaluation. The use of ACEi/ARBs alone or β-blockers alone was predicted only by hypertension. Combined therapy of ACEi/ARBs plus β-blockers predicted LVEF recovery from the 3-month to 12-month evaluation. Conclusions. In clinical practice, the degree of hypertension and decrease in LVEF during the first 3 months of adjuvant trastuzumab therapy for EBC are associated with the use of ACEi/ARBs and β-blockers. The combined use of these two medications is associated with a recovery of LVEF during months 3–12 of adjuvant trastuzumab therapy.

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a devastating complication of cancer that can significantly impact a patient’s health and life. The incidence of CAT is approximately 20%, and 1 in 5 cancer patients will develop CAT annually. Indeed, CAT can promote pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis, leading to increased morbidity and mortality that dramatically impact survival. CAT can also provoke delay or discontinuation of anticancer treatment, which may result in a lack of treatment efficacy and high costs for patients, institutions, and society. Current guidelines advocate direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) as the first-line anticoagulant option in CAT. Compared to low-molecular-weight-heparins (LMWHs), DOACs are advantageous in that they typically have an oral route of administration, do not require laboratory monitoring, and have a more predictable anticoagulant effect. However, in patients with thrombocytopenia, renal failure, or those receiving anticancer regimens with potential for drug-drug interactions, LMWH is still the mainstay of care. The main limitation of current anticoagulant agents is related to bleeding risk (BR), both for DOACs and LMWHs. Specifically, DOACs have been associated with high BR in gastrointestinal and genitourinary cancers. In this challenging scenario, abelacimab, an anti-factor XI agent, could represent a viable option in the management of CAT due to its “hemostasis sparing” effect. The safe profile of abelacimab could be useful in patients with active malignancy and CAT, as long-term anticoagulant therapy is often required. Two ongoing international phase III trials (Aster and Magnolia) compare abelacimab with the standard of care (i.e., apixaban in patients with CAT and dalteparin in those with CAT and high BR, respectively). Abelacimab is a new and attractive anticoagulant for the management of CAT, especially in the insidious and critical scenario of active cancer patients with venous thromboembolism and high BR. The aim of this narrative review is to discuss the updated evidence on the performance of DOACs and LMWHs in the treatment of CAT and to focus on the potential role of abelacimab in CAT and its promising associated clinical trials.

—Previous studies have found that respiratory variations of ventricular response in atrial fibrillation are infrequent and inconsistent. This asynchrony between heart rate and respiration may characterize the physiological mechanisms coupling heart rate and systolic blood pressure oscillations in the respiratory band. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether synchronous variations in systolic blood pressure and respiration depend on a simultaneous change in heart rate. Univariate and bivariate spectral analyses were made of the R-R interval, systolic blood pressure, and respiratory signals during controlled respiration (16 breaths/min) in 24 patients with atrial fibrillation before and after efficacious electrical cardioversion and in 24 age- and sex-matched control subjects. During atrial fibrillation, the spectral coherence between respiration and heart rate was low (0.18±0.03), but there was a high level of coherence between respiration and systolic blood pressure (0.67±0.05). After cardioversion, the coherence between respiration and heart rate increased to 0.86±0.04, whereas the geometric mean values of the concomitant respiratory systolic blood pressure oscillations decreased by 72% (from 21.1 to 5.9 mm Hg²,P<0.001), which was similar to that observed in the control group (5.7 mm Hg²). These results confirm the inconsistent effect of respiration on heart rate response during atrial fibrillation and demonstrate that respiratory sinus arrhythmia is not a prerequisite for systolic blood pressure oscillations but may play an antioscillatory role in respiratory systolic blood pressure variability, which is probably mediated by arterial baroreflex mechanisms.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is considered the most common and potentially life-threatening cardiovascular complication in cancer and the second leading cause of death after cancer progression itself. In recent years, the steadily increasing rate of cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) seems mainly related to amelioration in imaging techniques and the placements of central venous catheters (CVCs). The pivotal role of CVCs in the switch from hospital to home care is offset by its high thrombotic burden. The peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) offers advantages (convenience, fast access, and cost-effectiveness) in comparison to centrally inserted devices (PORT), but increased thrombotic risk is reported. The aim of this narrative review was to offer a comprehensive overview of the existing literature about PICC-related thrombosis (PICC-VTE) by analyzing the current knowledge and related gaps. We further discussed advancements in insertion techniques, underscored the role of the novel PICC-PORT lines, and provided a “head-to-head” comparison among major guidelines on primary thromboprophylaxis.

(2012). Antineoplastic drug-induced bradyarrhythmias. Expert Opinion on Drug Safety: Vol. 11, No. 5, pp. 739-751.