Hubbry Logo
CardiotoxicityCardiotoxicityMain
Open search
Cardiotoxicity
Community hub
Cardiotoxicity
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Cardiotoxicity
Cardiotoxicity
Cardiotoxicity
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Cardiotoxicity is the occurrence of heart dysfunction as electric or muscle damage, resulting in heart toxicity.[1] This can cause heart failure, arrhythmia, myocarditis, and cardiomyopathy,[2] resulting in a weakened heart that is not as efficient at pumping blood. While some of these effects are reversible, others can cause permanent damage, requiring further treatment. Cardiotoxicity may be caused by chemotherapy (a usual example is the class of anthracyclines)[3][4] treatment and/or radiotherapy;[5] complications from anorexia nervosa; adverse effects of heavy metals intake;[6] the long-term abuse of or ingestion at high doses of certain strong stimulants such as cocaine;[7] or an incorrectly administered drug such as bupivacaine.[8]

Mechanism

[edit]

Many mechanisms have been used to explain cardiotoxicity. While many times, differing etiologies share the same mechanism, it generally depends on the agent inducing cardiac damage. For example, the primary mechanism is thought to be oxidative stress on cardiac myocytes.[8] It is thought that reactive oxygen species (ROS) overwhelm the antioxidant defenses of cardiac cells, causing direct cellular damage. This oxidative damage can disrupt mitochondrial function, therefore disrupting energy production in the heart muscle itself, leading to energy depletion via depleted ATP and promoting cell death through apoptosis or necrosis.[9]

Other mechanisms of cardiotoxicity include inflammatory,[10] DNA damaging, and disrupted cell signaling. DNA damage and disrupted cellular signaling are the proposed mechanism for many cardiotoxic chemotherapeutics.[11]

Regardless of the mechanism, clinical manifestations include heart failure, arrhythmia, myocarditis, and cardiomyopathy that can be permanent.[2] These conditions can greatly alter mortality and morbidity in patients meaning careful monitoring is necessary in patients exposed to cardiotoxic agents.

Inciting agents

[edit]

The list of inciting agents is vast and involves various classes of medication as well as environmental agents. The effects of the cardiotoxic substances vary and are not all identical.

Chemotherapy drugs

[edit]

Source:[12]

Other medications

[edit]

Environmental toxins

[edit]

Abused substances

[edit]

Source:[17]

Others

[edit]
  • Biological toxins such as diphtheria toxin[18]
  • Radiation therapy is known to cause radiation-induced heart disease (RIHD) [19]

These agents can lead to varying degrees of cardiotoxicity, and their effects may be dose-dependent and influenced by individual factors such as pre-existing cardiovascular disease and genetic predispositions that can foster greater sensitivity to any cardiac damage.

Treatment

[edit]

The most likely effective treatment is to stop exposure to the inciting agent as soon as possible whether a pharmacologic or environmental agent. While some may fully recover from cardiotoxicity caused from exposure, many are left with permanent damage that may need further management. The management varies on the damage sustained, but generally follows guidelines for each condition such as heart failure, arrhythmias, and myocarditis.[20]

Patients taking anthracyclines can take dexrazoxane as a cardioprotective agent to prevent extensive cardiac damage.[21]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Cardiotoxicity

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Cardiotoxicity refers to the harmful effects of toxic substances on the heart, encompassing a range of dysfunctions including arrhythmias, myocardial injury, reduced contractility, and . This condition arises primarily from exposure to pharmaceuticals, environmental toxins, or other agents that disrupt cardiac cellular processes, often manifesting as subclinical changes or severe clinical events such as or sudden cardiac death. While cardiotoxicity can occur acutely or chronically, its clinical significance lies in its potential irreversibility and impact on patient outcomes, particularly in therapeutic contexts where benefits must be weighed against cardiac risks. A primary cause of cardiotoxicity is anticancer therapy, including traditional chemotherapeutic agents like (e.g., ) and monoclonal antibodies (e.g., ), as well as emerging immunotherapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (e.g., ) that can induce immune-mediated . , for instance, generate (ROS) leading to and in cardiomyocytes, often resulting in type I cardiotoxicity characterized by cumulative, irreversible injury. Beyond , cardiotoxicity affects multiple drug classes, including agents like antipsychotics (e.g., , causing ) and antidepressants (e.g., , prolonging ), as well as anti-infectives (e.g., ) and anti-inflammatory drugs (e.g., ). Risk factors exacerbating these effects include patient age, preexisting , genetic predispositions, and concurrent therapies such as radiation. At the molecular level, cardiotoxicity involves multifaceted mechanisms, prominently including blockade—such as inhibition of the hERG leading to QT prolongation and arrhythmias—and mitochondrial dysfunction from impaired energy production or excessive ROS. Contractility disruptions occur via altered calcium handling or pathways, while off-target effects like vascular endothelial damage contribute to or ischemia. Type II cardiotoxicity, exemplified by , is typically reversible and non-cumulative, stemming from interference with HER2 signaling rather than direct myocyte toxicity. These pathways highlight the need for vigilant monitoring, such as for left ventricular (LVEF) assessment, to detect early subclinical changes and guide interventions like dose adjustments or cardioprotective agents (e.g., ). The clinical implications of cardiotoxicity extend to and , with over 27 drugs withdrawn from markets due to cardiac risks, underscoring the importance of preclinical screening for hERG liability and mitochondrial effects. In cancer survivors, late-onset cardiotoxicity can emerge years post-treatment, emphasizing long-term surveillance in cardio-oncology programs. Advances in precision medicine, including biomarkers like troponins and genetic profiling, aim to personalize and mitigate these toxicities, balancing therapeutic efficacy with cardiac safety.

Overview

Definition and Scope

Cardiotoxicity refers to the adverse effects on cardiac structure or function induced by exposure to toxic agents, encompassing a range of cardiac pathologies such as , arrhythmias, and . This condition arises from various xenobiotics, including chemotherapeutic drugs, environmental toxins, and other medications, and is often quantified clinically by a decline in left ventricular (LVEF), such as a ≥5% drop to below 55% with heart failure symptoms or a ≥10% drop to below 55% without symptoms. The term highlights the heart's vulnerability to insults that impair its mechanical, electrical, or structural integrity, distinguishing it from general by its specific focus on cardiovascular endpoints. The recognition of cardiotoxicity emerged prominently in the 1960s with the introduction of , such as , as breakthrough anticancer agents derived from soil bacteria, which revolutionized but revealed unexpected cardiac risks through early reports of . Initially termed in 1946 to describe cardiac effects from agents like local anesthetics and , the concept evolved in the to specifically address anthracycline-related toxicities, expanding from acute events during treatment to chronic, long-term manifestations observed years later. This historical shift broadened the understanding from isolated acute insults to a spectrum including delayed-onset damage, influencing modern surveillance protocols in cardio-oncology. The scope of cardiotoxicity includes both direct myocardial toxicity, which involves primary damage to cardiomyocytes—such as and from —and indirect effects, like or induced by agents such as fluoropyrimidines. Damage may be reversible, as seen in functional impairments that recover upon discontinuation of the offending agent, or irreversible, characterized by permanent cardiomyocyte loss and progressive remodeling. Fundamentally, cardiotoxicity exhibits a dose-dependent nature, where risk escalates with cumulative exposure; for instance, thresholds for significant range from 250–300 mg/m² for equivalents, though this varies by specific agent and patient-specific factors including age, genetic predispositions, and comorbidities.

Epidemiology and Risk Factors

Cardiotoxicity affects approximately 10-20% of cancer survivors receiving cardiotoxic therapies, with the incidence rising due to improved and expanded use of such treatments in an aging population. In a retrospective analysis of 96 cancer patients, the incidence was reported as 12.5%, highlighting variability across settings but underscoring the substantial burden. This contributes significantly to cardiovascular mortality, accounting for 7-27% of such events in affected individuals. Demographic factors play a key role in susceptibility, with higher risks observed in females, particularly those treated for , and in elderly patients over 65 years. Pre-existing further elevates vulnerability, as evidenced by studies from the showing synergistic effects with therapies like in older adults. For instance, in a cohort of elderly patients with , use increased congestive risk by 29%, compounded by age and prior cardiac conditions. Major risk factors include cumulative dose thresholds for , where doses exceeding 300 mg/m² are associated with substantially increased risk of . Genetic predispositions, such as the HER2 Ile655Val polymorphism, also heighten susceptibility to trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity in HER2-positive patients. Comorbidities like and mellitus independently amplify this risk, with showing a hazard ratio of 1.8 when combined with . Emerging trends indicate a growing incidence of cardiotoxicity beyond , driven by environmental exposures such as , which independently increases cardiovascular risk in cancer patients. Data from registries like the CARDIOTOX registry reveal a 37.5% cardiotoxicity rate during follow-up in high-risk cohorts, emphasizing the need for ongoing surveillance amid these shifts.

Pathophysiology

Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms

Cardiotoxicity arises from multiple interconnected cellular and molecular pathways that impair cardiomyocyte function and survival, primarily triggered by chemotherapeutic agents such as . These mechanisms encompass , altered calcium , mitochondrial impairment, and inflammatory signaling, each contributing to progressive cardiac damage through distinct yet overlapping processes. Oxidative stress represents a central pathway in cardiotoxicity, where toxic agents like generate (ROS) via redox cycling involving NAD(P)H oxidoreductases, leading to of cell membranes, protein oxidation, and DNA strand breaks in cardiomyocytes. In specifically, inhibition of IIβ (TOP2β) by drugs such as forms a drug-enzyme-DNA cleavage complex, resulting in persistent double-strand DNA breaks, particularly in , which amplifies ROS production and promotes cardiomyocyte death independent of canonical iron-mediated ROS pathways. Disruption of calcium handling further exacerbates cardiotoxicity by interfering with excitation-contraction coupling in cardiomyocytes. inhibit the Ca²⁺-ATPase (), reducing Ca²⁺ reuptake into the and prolonging cytosolic Ca²⁺ elevation, while also promoting leakiness to increase spontaneous Ca²⁺ release. This leads to [Ca²⁺]ᵢ dysregulation, often through direct inhibition of the Na⁺/Ca²⁺ exchanger (NCX) by or their metabolites, impairing Ca²⁺ extrusion and leading to cytosolic overload. The calcium flux imbalance can be conceptualized as: Δ[\ceCa2+]i=J\ceL−type+J\ceRyR−J\ce[SERCA](/page/SERCA)−J\ceNCX(forward)\Delta [\ce{Ca^{2+}}]_i = J_{\ce{L-type}} + J_{\ce{RyR}} - J_{\ce{[SERCA](/page/SERCA)}} - J_{\ce{NCX (forward)}} where J\ceNCX(forward)J_{\ce{NCX (forward)}} diminishes under inhibition, thereby sustaining elevated [Ca²⁺]ᵢ and predisposing to arrhythmias. Mitochondrial dysfunction is a key downstream consequence, with ROS and direct effects inhibiting complexes (particularly complexes I and III), causing electron leakage, reduced proton gradient, and ATP depletion in cardiomyocytes. This impairment triggers the opening, facilitating release into the , which activates the intrinsic pathway via and executioner caspases, culminating in . Inflammatory cascades amplify these damages by activating the NF-κB pathway in cardiomyocytes and cardiac fibroblasts, translocating to the nucleus to upregulate proinflammatory genes, including those encoding cytokines such as TNF-α. Elevated TNF-α promotes further ROS generation, , and extracellular matrix remodeling, driving through fibroblast activation and collagen deposition. Mechanisms vary by agent, highlighting direct versus off-target effects; for instance, primarily induce ROS-dependent and TOP2β-mediated damage, whereas exerts cardiotoxicity through HER2 blockade, disrupting neuregulin-1/ signaling to impair mitochondrial and induce release without substantial ROS involvement.

Types of Cardiac Damage

Cardiotoxicity manifests in various forms of structural and functional cardiac injury, broadly classified by the affected cardiac components and the nature of the damage. These injuries range from myocardial dysfunction to rhythm disturbances and vascular complications, often detected through clinical, , and assessments. Systolic dysfunction represents a primary type of cardiotoxic injury, characterized by reduced left ventricular , typically below 50%, which can progress to overt if untreated. This form often arises from direct myocyte damage, leading to impaired contractility; early stages may be reversible with intervention, but advanced cases result in chronic remodeling and . Subtypes include type I systolic dysfunction, which is dose-dependent and irreversible, involving histological changes such as myofibrillar loss and cytoplasmic in cardiomyocytes, and type II, which is non-dose-dependent and generally reversible upon discontinuation of the offending agent. Arrhythmias constitute another critical category of cardiac damage, encompassing both bradyarrhythmias and tachyarrhythmias that disrupt normal electrical conduction. Bradyarrhythmias, such as or , often stem from beta-adrenergic blockade or enhanced , while tachyarrhythmias include , , and accelerated idioventricular rhythms triggered by ion channel perturbations. A particularly dangerous subtype involves prolongation, which predisposes to and , reflecting abnormalities. Vascular toxicity from cardiotoxic exposures primarily involves and hemodynamic alterations, leading to conditions like , , or . Endothelial damage promotes and , which can cause acute ischemia or chronic vascular remodeling; for instance, inhibition of pathways may induce and increase thrombotic risk. , in turn, results in myocardial ischemia mimicking acute coronary syndromes. Other forms of cardiac damage include pericardial , valvular abnormalities, and , each presenting distinct histological and functional impairments. Pericardial involvement often features or due to inflammatory or hemorrhagic processes, while valvular disease manifests as thickening and regurgitation from changes. arises from interstitial , limiting diastolic filling; common histological findings across these include contraction band and myocardial lesions, indicating myocyte injury. The progression of cardiotoxic damage follows acute or chronic timelines, with acute effects emerging within days of exposure—such as arrhythmias or transient ischemia—and chronic manifestations developing over months to years, including progressive systolic dysfunction or . Biomarkers like elevated cardiac levels signal early myocyte injury in both phases, enabling timely detection before overt symptoms arise; for example, elevation often precedes decline in systolic damage, where contribute to initial cellular stress.

Etiology

Chemotherapeutic Agents

Chemotherapeutic agents, particularly those used in , are a leading cause of cardiotoxicity due to their direct impact on cardiac cells through mechanisms such as . These drugs, including , tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and monoclonal antibodies, can induce a spectrum of cardiac injuries ranging from left ventricular dysfunction to overt , often in a dose-dependent manner. The risk is heightened in combination regimens, necessitating careful dosing and surveillance to balance anticancer efficacy with cardiac safety. , such as , are among the most notorious for inducing cardiotoxicity, primarily through cumulative dose-related . Clinical guidelines recommend limiting the cumulative dose of to 450-550 mg/m² to minimize severe cardiac events. The risk of significantly increases above 250 mg/m², with myocardial changes evident on in over 90% of patients exceeding 240 mg/m². Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), exemplified by , frequently cause cardiovascular adverse effects including and QT prolongation. occurs in approximately 20-30% of patients treated with , driven by receptor inhibition leading to . QT prolongation, observed in up to 4.4% of cases with receptor TKIs, arises from disruptions, increasing risk. Monoclonal antibodies like target HER2 but carry substantial cardiotoxicity risks, especially in combination with . The incidence of reaches up to 27% when is combined with such as , due to synergistic impairment of cardiac repair pathways. In the NSABP B-31 trial, cardiac events occurred in 4.0% of patients receiving after and , compared to 1.3% in the control arm without . Other chemotherapeutic classes also contribute to cardiotoxicity, though less commonly. can cause acute hemorrhagic myocarditis, particularly at high doses used in conditioning regimens, with endothelial damage leading to myocardial hemorrhage and high mortality if untreated. Taxanes, such as , are associated with bradyarrhythmias, including asymptomatic in up to 30% of patients without pre-existing cardiac risk factors, resulting from interference. Monitoring guidelines emphasize baseline and serial to detect early left ventricular declines in patients receiving these agents. For - and trastuzumab-based therapies, assessments are recommended before treatment initiation, every 3 months during therapy, and periodically post-treatment, as supported by trial data like NSABP B-31 showing sustained cardiac risks years later.

Non-Chemotherapeutic Medications

Non-chemotherapeutic medications encompass a broad range of prescription drugs used in everyday clinical practice, such as cardiovascular agents, antimicrobials, immunosuppressants, and others, which can induce cardiotoxicity through mechanisms including arrhythmias, , QT prolongation, and exacerbation of . These toxicities often arise from direct effects on cardiac channels, vascular , or secondary consequences like imbalances and fluid retention, posing risks particularly in patients with preexisting cardiovascular conditions. Cardiovascular drugs like , a used for and , carry a high risk of due to its narrow of 0.5-2 ng/mL, beyond which it can cause life-threatening arrhythmias such as or fibrillation by increasing myocardial excitability and delaying . Similarly, beta-agonists like isoproterenol, employed in acute or as a diagnostic tool, stimulate beta-1 and beta-2 adrenergic receptors, leading to and increased myocardial oxygen demand, which may precipitate ischemia or arrhythmias in susceptible individuals. Among antimicrobials, , an antifungal agent, primarily causes through renal and tubular damage, resulting in electrolyte disturbances such as that secondarily strain the heart by promoting arrhythmias or worsening fluid overload in patients with compromised cardiac function. Fluoroquinolones, such as levofloxacin used for bacterial infections, have been associated with an increased risk of or , with FDA analysis indicating approximately a twofold higher incidence compared to other antibiotics, particularly in patients with risk factors like or advanced age. Immunosuppressants like cyclosporine, commonly prescribed post-transplant to prevent rejection, induce in up to 50% or more of renal transplant patients through enhanced endothelin-1 production, which promotes and sodium retention, thereby elevating cardiac and risk of left ventricular hypertrophy. Other classes include antipsychotics such as , which prolongs the —especially at intravenous doses exceeding 35 mg/day—potentially leading to and sudden cardiac death by blocking channels. Nonsteroidal drugs (NSAIDs), widely used for and , cause sodium and fluid retention by inhibiting prostaglandin-mediated renal , exacerbating symptoms and increasing hospitalization risk in affected patients. Risk stratification for these toxicities involves assessing drug interactions, such as those between statins and certain non-chemotherapeutic agents (e.g., antifungals or ), which can elevate levels via inhibition, heightening risk with secondary cardiac implications; FDA Adverse Event Reporting System data underscores these interactions as frequent contributors to reported cardiotoxic events. Monitoring serum levels, electrolytes, and ECGs, alongside avoiding in high-risk groups, is essential to mitigate these effects.

Environmental Toxins and Exposures

Environmental toxins encompass a range of non-pharmacological substances from industrial, occupational, and natural sources that can induce cardiotoxicity through mechanisms such as , , and direct myocardial damage. These exposures often occur involuntarily, leading to chronic or acute cardiovascular effects including , arrhythmias, and . Heavy metals like lead and mercury are prominent cardiotoxicants, particularly in occupational settings. Chronic lead exposure is linked to and , with blood lead levels exceeding 10 μg/dL associated with increased cardiovascular risk through and impaired signaling. Mercury exposure promotes arrhythmias via autonomic dysfunction and reduced , contributing to coronary heart disease and . Industrial chemicals pose significant risks through poisoning or prolonged contact. causes hypoxia-induced by binding to with high affinity, reducing oxygen delivery and directly impairing myocardial function. exposure, common in manufacturing, leads to , which secondarily affects the heart through anemia-related ischemia and potential direct cardiac abnormalities like arrhythmias. Air pollution, especially fine particulate matter (PM2.5), exacerbates cardiotoxicity via and . Long-term exposure to PM2.5 in urban areas increases risk by 10-20%, as evidenced by cohort studies showing associations with and . Natural toxins from biological sources can directly damage cardiac tissue. Snake venoms, such as that of , induce myocardial through cardiotoxic components like phospholipases, leading to acute infarction-like presentations. Aflatoxins, mycotoxins contaminating in humid regions, cause cardiac and oxidative damage, contributing to in exposed populations. Occupational exposures heighten risks, particularly in where heavy metal or occurs frequently. Workers in such environments face elevated cardiotoxicity from cumulative lead and mercury burdens, with long-term studies like extensions of the linking environmental pollutants to increased cardiovascular events.

Recreational and Abused Substances

Recreational and abused substances pose substantial risks to cardiovascular health, primarily through acute hemodynamic alterations and chronic structural damage. These effects are particularly pronounced in young adults engaging in , where illicit drugs like , amphetamines, and opioids contribute to a growing burden of cardiac emergencies. Cocaine, a potent , induces acute cardiotoxicity via , mediated by alpha-adrenergic stimulation and increased endothelin-1 release, which reduces myocardial oxygen supply and precipitates (ACS). This mechanism elevates the risk of up to sevenfold, even in individuals with normal , as evidenced by studies showing 6% of cases linked to recent use resulting in . Chronically, repeated exposure leads to myocardial from catecholamine toxicity and , contributing to ; among long-term users, up to 71% exhibit , including reduced and . Cocaine-related cardiomyopathy is often reversible with cessation of use, though some cases result in permanent damage or death. Acute cases can show rapid improvement (e.g., ejection fraction rising from 22% to 44% within 4 days with treatment and abstinence). Significant functional recovery (e.g., improved left ventricular ejection fraction) often occurs over 5–9 months with abstinence and therapies like beta-blockers (e.g., carvedilol). Relapse reverses gains. No universal timeline exists; outcomes depend on severity, duration of use, abstinence, individual factors, and prompt cessation. Amphetamines and methamphetamines similarly exert cardiotoxic effects through excessive catecholamine release, causing acute and via and increased myocardial demand. These changes heighten the risk of arrhythmias, such as and QT prolongation, which account for a 27% increased incidence of sudden cardiac death among users. Chronic methamphetamine use is associated with and accelerated , with mechanisms involving production and mitochondrial dysfunction; globally, amphetamine-type stimulants affect over 51 million users aged 15-64, amplifying population-level risks. Opioid abuse, particularly in overdose scenarios, results in and due to mu-receptor agonism, compounded by respiratory depression that induces hypoxia and secondary cardiac stress. This can precipitate acute events like or arrest, with synthetic opioids further risking QT prolongation and . While direct myocardial toxicity is less common than with stimulants, hemodynamic instability during withdrawal or intoxication contributes to , including from injection practices. Other substances, such as anabolic-androgenic steroids (AAS), promote through activation and fluid retention, leading to systolic and diastolic dysfunction; users display elevated left ventricular mass (111±61 g/m² versus 89±18 g/m² in non-users) and increased coronary plaque volume, correlating with lifetime use duration. (ecstasy) induces serotonin-mediated and , potentially causing rhythm disturbances, , and sudden death, with findings revealing pathological myocardial changes in fatal cases. Epidemiological data highlight rising cardiac complications from these substances, particularly among young adults; for instance, drug-related visits involving illicit stimulants and opioids have surged, with cardiovascular manifestations like ACS and arrhythmias comprising a notable fraction—historical Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) reports from 2011 indicated over 1.5 million annual drug-related visits, 22% requiring admission, and subsequent analyses showing 4-17% of cocaine-associated admissions involving ventricular arrhythmias or . Recent trends underscore increased presentations in this demographic, driven by polysubstance abuse and the .

Clinical Presentation

Symptoms and Signs

Cardiotoxicity manifests through a spectrum of acute and chronic symptoms and signs, often reflecting underlying cardiac stress from various etiologies such as chemotherapeutic agents. Acute symptoms typically include , dyspnea, and , which may arise shortly after exposure to cardiotoxic substances. Observable signs in these cases frequently involve or , signaling immediate hemodynamic instability. Chronic manifestations of cardiotoxicity often present as progressive symptoms, including fatigue, , and , which can develop months to years following initial exposure. Many cases remain , particularly in early stages, with silent myocardial ischemia occurring in approximately 15% of patients receiving 5-fluorouracil, underscoring the importance of clinical vigilance. Arrhythmia-specific presentations in cardiotoxicity may include syncope due to or other life-threatening rhythms, alongside electrocardiographic changes such as ST-segment elevation or depression. and irregular heart rhythms are common patient-reported experiences in these scenarios. The nature of symptoms can vary by subtype of cardiotoxicity; reversible forms, often linked to transient myocardial dysfunction, exhibit short-lived symptoms that resolve upon discontinuation of the offending agent, whereas irreversible damage leads to persistent or progressive decline in cardiac function. For instance, systolic dysfunction from may contribute to dyspnea in symptomatic patients. Patient functional status in cardiotoxicity-related is commonly assessed using the New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification, ranging from Class I (no limitation in physical activity) to Class IV (symptoms at rest with inability to carry out any physical activity). Symptomatic cardiotoxicity is often defined by the presence of NYHA Class III or IV symptoms alongside clinical signs of .

Diagnostic Evaluation

Diagnostic evaluation of cardiotoxicity involves a multimodal approach to detect and quantify cardiac injury, primarily through , biomarkers, , and select advanced tests, guided by established protocols for baseline assessment and serial monitoring. Echocardiography serves as the gold standard for assessing left ventricular (LVEF), enabling early detection of systolic dysfunction with serial measurements recommended every 3 months in high-risk patients undergoing cardiotoxic therapies. Cardiac (MRI) complements echocardiography by providing detailed evaluation of myocardial through late gadolinium enhancement, which is particularly useful for identifying subclinical structural changes not visible on standard imaging. Biomarker analysis plays a key role in risk stratification and early identification of cardiotoxicity, with elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels exceeding 300 pg/mL indicating potential and warranting further investigation. Cardiac elevation signals acute myocardial injury, often preceding overt functional decline and serving as a sensitive marker for ongoing cardiotoxic effects. Electrocardiography, including Holter monitoring, is employed to detect arrhythmias such as those prompted by symptoms like , providing ambulatory rhythm assessment over 24-48 hours to capture intermittent events associated with cardiotoxic agents. Speckle-tracking enhances detection of subclinical dysfunction by measuring global longitudinal strain, which exhibits high sensitivity (up to 80%) for early cardiotoxicity changes before LVEF reduction. Advanced diagnostic tests are reserved for complex cases; endomyocardial biopsy offers definitive histological confirmation of cardiotoxicity through direct myocardial sampling, though it is rarely performed due to its invasiveness and procedural risks. Genetic testing identifies susceptibility variants, such as those in pathways, to predict individual risk of cardiotoxicity from therapies like , though it is not yet routine in clinical practice. Guidelines from the (ASCO) and (ESC) emphasize baseline cardiovascular evaluation prior to initiating potentially cardiotoxic treatments, followed by protocol-driven follow-up using and biomarkers to monitor for declines in LVEF or strain, with specificity for early detection approaching 70-90% in validated cohorts.

Management and Prevention

Acute Treatment Approaches

Acute treatment of cardiotoxicity focuses on rapid stabilization to mitigate life-threatening complications such as , arrhythmias, and hemodynamic instability. Initial interventions prioritize supportive measures to address acute cardiac , including to maintain saturation above 92% in hypoxemic patients and diuretics such as for fluid overload manifesting as . In cases of acute with reduced (HFrEF), inotropes like are administered intravenously at doses of 2-20 mcg/kg/min to enhance contractility and improve , particularly when low indicates severe systolic dysfunction. These supportive strategies align with broader acute guidelines adapted for contexts. Agent-specific antidotes are employed when applicable to counteract direct toxic effects. For anthracycline extravasation, dexrazoxane serves as a chelating agent that binds intracellular iron, thereby reducing reactive oxygen species formation and preventing severe tissue damage; it is administered intravenously at 1000 mg/m² within 6 hours of extravasation, followed by additional doses on subsequent days. In digitalis toxicity, digoxin immune Fab (digoxin-specific antibody fragments) is the first-line antidote, neutralizing free digoxin and reversing life-threatening arrhythmias or hyperkalemia; indications include serum digoxin levels ≥10 ng/mL or severe manifestations like ventricular tachycardia, with rapid administration yielding 50-90% clinical improvement within 45 minutes. Arrhythmia management in acute cardiotoxicity requires prompt intervention to prevent hemodynamic collapse. For , is a preferred antiarrhythmic, administered as a 150 mg IV bolus followed by infusion, due to its efficacy in suppressing tachyarrhythmias without exacerbating underlying . protocols follow guidelines for unstable rhythms, with immediate correction of electrolytes such as and magnesium to mitigate associated with QT prolongation from cardiotoxic agents. Temporary pacing may be indicated for bradycardias refractory to atropine. Discontinuation of the offending agent is a cornerstone of acute management, with immediate cessation recommended upon confirmation of moderate to severe cardiotoxicity, such as an absolute decrease in left ventricular of >10% from baseline to below 50%. Admission to the is warranted for patients exhibiting hemodynamic instability, , or <30%, where invasive monitoring and mechanical support may be required. Outcomes of acute interventions vary by toxicity type, with type II cardiotoxicity (e.g., from trastuzumab) demonstrating high reversibility; approximately 84% of cases show left ventricular ejection fraction recovery within 1.5 months following discontinuation and heart failure therapy initiation, as evidenced in clinical cohorts. Randomized trials, such as the PRADA study, support early pharmacologic intervention with ACE inhibitors and beta-blockers, achieving reversal in a majority of subclinical cases without compromising oncologic efficacy.

Long-Term Management and Monitoring

Long-term management of cardiotoxicity emphasizes preventing cardiac remodeling and optimizing heart function through targeted pharmacotherapy. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, such as , and beta-blockers, like , are cornerstone therapies for patients with established left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). Enalapril is typically initiated at 2.5 mg twice daily and titrated every 3–6 days to a target dose of 10 mg twice daily (20 mg total daily), provided systolic blood pressure remains above 90 mm Hg and renal function is stable (creatinine <2.5 mg/dL). Similarly, carvedilol starts at 6.25 mg twice daily, with titration every 3–6 days to a target of 25 mg twice daily (50 mg total), avoiding bradycardia below 60 beats per minute or atrioventricular block. These agents, when combined, have demonstrated efficacy in halting LV remodeling and improving ejection fraction in chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity, with mean achieved doses of approximately 17 mg/day for enalapril and 25 mg/day for carvedilol in clinical trials. Device therapy plays a critical role in managing high-risk complications in patients with persistent LVSD. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are recommended for individuals at elevated risk of life-threatening arrhythmias, such as sustained ventricular tachycardia, particularly when left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is below 35–40% despite optimal medical therapy. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is indicated for those with dyssynchrony, evidenced by prolonged QRS duration (>150 ms) and LVEF <35%, to improve ventricular synchrony and reduce hospitalizations. Device implantation should be considered only in patients with a life expectancy exceeding 1 year, balancing cancer prognosis with cardiac benefits. Ongoing surveillance is essential to detect subclinical progression and guide adjustments in care. Annual to assess LVEF and global longitudinal strain, combined with monitoring (e.g., high-sensitivity and B-type ), is advised for long-term survivors, with more frequent evaluations (every 3–6 months) for high-risk cases. modifications, including supervised exercise rehabilitation programs, are integrated to enhance cardiac fitness; these typically involve aerobic (e.g., 30–45 minutes, 3–5 sessions weekly) and resistance exercises, improving functional capacity and attenuating LVEF decline without increasing adverse events. A multidisciplinary approach in specialized cardio-oncology clinics facilitates coordinated care, involving oncologists, cardiologists, and rehabilitation specialists to monitor tolerance and modify cancer treatments as needed, such as switching to less cardiotoxic agents (e.g., from to non-anthracycline regimens). improves significantly with early intervention; studies indicate better survival among patients receiving timely and compared to untreated cases, as evidenced by follow-up data from adjuvant breast cancer trials.

Prevention Strategies

Prevention of cardiotoxicity begins with comprehensive prior to initiating potentially cardiotoxic therapies. Pre-treatment cardiac evaluation typically includes a thorough history and to identify preexisting cardiovascular conditions, along with baseline assessments such as (ECG), echocardiography for left ventricular (LVEF), and biomarkers like cardiac and B-type (BNP) to establish a reference for monitoring. These evaluations help stratify patients into low-, medium-, or high-risk categories based on factors like age, cumulative dose exposure, and comorbidities, guiding personalized treatment plans. Genetic screening for polymorphisms, such as those in the 2D6 () gene, is emerging as a tool to predict susceptibility to cardiotoxicity from agents like , with poor metabolizers showing higher rates of toxicity in initial studies. Prophylactic agents play a key role in mitigating cardiotoxicity during treatment. , an iron-chelating agent, is co-administered with to reduce and has been shown to decrease the incidence of clinical by approximately 50% in high-risk patients, without compromising antitumor . Statins, such as , provide vascular protection through , anti-inflammatory, and anti-apoptotic mechanisms, with meta-analyses indicating a significant reduction in cardiotoxicity risk (relative risk 0.46) when used prophylactically in patients receiving or . Dose optimization strategies further minimize exposure to cardiotoxic peaks. Liposomal formulations, like pegylated liposomal , encapsulate the drug to reduce systemic peak concentrations and myocardial uptake, allowing cumulative doses exceeding 400 mg/m² with minimal clinically evident cardiotoxicity compared to conventional . Interval adjustments, such as biweekly dosing at reduced amounts (e.g., 40 mg/m² instead of 50 mg/m² every 4 weeks), can further lower toxicity while maintaining efficacy, particularly in relapsed settings. Lifestyle interventions complement pharmacological approaches by addressing modifiable risk factors. Smoking cessation is recommended to reduce oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction, which exacerbate cardiotoxicity, while blood pressure control through diet and medication prevents hypertensive strain on the heart during therapy. Supervised aerobic exercise programs, tailored for at-risk patients, improve cardiovascular reserve and have been associated with lower rates of LVEF decline in those undergoing cardiotoxic treatments. Regulatory policies and clinical guidelines enforce standardized prevention practices. The U.S. (FDA) issues black-box warnings for agents like and HER2-targeted therapies, highlighting risks and mandating cardiac monitoring to limit cumulative doses. International consensus, such as the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) recommendations, outlines monitoring schedules including baseline and periodic LVEF assessments, risk stratification, and multidisciplinary cardio-oncology consultation to optimize prevention across the cancer care continuum.

References

  1. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7974548/
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3749765/
  3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9051244/
  4. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/17/17/2838
  5. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6074618/
  6. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.119.005910
  7. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11520218/
  8. https://ashpublications.org/blood/article/144/Supplement_1/6485/527495/Cardiotoxicity-Among-Lymphoma-Patients-Undergoing
  9. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11144837/
  10. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11024952/
  11. https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2009.02.050
  12. https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2007.14.1242
  13. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26049584/
  14. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/cardiovascular-medicine/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2021.736854/full
  15. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666087324001479
  16. https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/41/18/1720/5721502
  17. https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.2919
  18. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0914508722000016
  19. https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jaccao.2023.12.009
  20. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3730535/
  21. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4666974/
  22. https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2004.08.066
  23. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circresaha.110.226928
  24. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5643772/
  25. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6033155/
  26. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/cardiovascular-medicine/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2022.847012/full
  27. https://www.escardio.org/Journals/E-Journal-of-Cardiology-Practice/Volume-14/Chemotherapy-induced-dysfunction
  28. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.123.029574
  29. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1277047/
  30. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3322439/
  31. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5346598/
  32. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5718359/
  33. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK599501/
  34. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7093379/
  35. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10392782/
  36. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9936099/
  37. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5696221/
  38. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8789882/
  39. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4528786/
  40. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7912518/
  41. https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2016.70.5400
  42. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10710781/
  43. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK482327/
  44. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK556025/
  45. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK526042/
  46. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4054472/
  47. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-warns-about-increased-risk-ruptures-or-tears-aorta-blood-vessel-fluoroquinolone-antibiotics
  48. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1498282/
  49. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16008590/
  50. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2814118
  51. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0953620515002976
  52. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/cir.0000000000000456
  53. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-drug-safety-communication-important-safety-label-changes-cholesterol-lowering-statin-drugs
  54. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5129872/
  55. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3168898/
  56. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2519216/
  57. https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp.9785
  58. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5295325/
  59. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8108748/
  60. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5363978/
  61. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4261349/
  62. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12273905/
  63. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK591289/
  64. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10585625/
  65. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6250783/
  66. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3605354/
  67. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10663918/
  68. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10691507/
  69. https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/152535-overview
  70. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6719721/
  71. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11212164/
  72. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4602327/
  73. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9226336/
  74. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7930422/
  75. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8895550/
  76. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12028728/
  77. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11132334/
  78. https://www.escardio.org/Councils/Council-for-Cardiology-Practice-%28CCP%29/Cardiopractice/monitoring-and-treatment-of-cardiovascular-complications-during-cancer-therapies
  79. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7932955/
  80. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circimaging.113.000899
  81. https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2018.11.046
  82. https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jaccao.2024.07.017
  83. https://spc.pt/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/ESC-Guidelines-Cardio-Oncologia-2022_compressed.pdf
  84. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10950440/
  85. https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article-abstract/40/Supplement_1/ehz748.0328/5597634
  86. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1244726/
  87. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0735675725002451
  88. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27910996/
  89. https://bmccancer.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12885-018-4935-z
  90. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S073510971401660X
  91. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/endomyocardial-biopsy
  92. https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2811%2965199-9/fulltext
  93. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9107514/
  94. https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jaccao.2023.02.003
  95. https://translational-medicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12967-024-05537-5
  96. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10316349/
  97. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470431/
  98. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK560559/
  99. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK556101/
  100. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000986
  101. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8446380/
  102. https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JCO.2005.13.300
  103. https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/37/21/1671/2192886
  104. https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.02.072
  105. https://www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923-7534(19)36080-6/fulltext
  106. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0146280623006461
  107. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000679
  108. https://ijcva.org/articles/cardiac-toxicity-of-cancer-therapies-mechanisms-surveillance-and-clinical-implications/ijca.2025.39358
  109. https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/OP.20.00924
  110. https://www.escardio.org/Councils/Council-for-Cardiology-Practice-%28CCP%29/Cardiopractice/strategies-for-risk-stratification-and-cardiovascular-toxicity-prevention-in-pat
  111. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8019326/
  112. https://jhoponline.com/issue-archive/2025-issues/march-2025-vol-15-special-feature/role-of-cyp2d6-phenotypes-in-doxorubicin-related-cardiotoxicity
  113. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6059999/
  114. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11480194/
  115. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8541988/
  116. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5223430/
  117. https://bmjoncology.bmj.com/content/4/1/e000573
  118. https://www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923-7534%2819%2943580-1/fulltext
  119. https://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/EDBK_286019
  120. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circulationaha.117.024671
  121. https://www.healio.com/news/hematology-oncology/20211029/cardiovascular-warnings-common-but-slower-to-be-issued-for-fdaapproved-cancer-drugs
  122. https://www.esmo.org/guidelines/esmo-consensus-recommendations-management-of-cardiac-disease
  123. https://www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923-7534%2819%2936080-6/fulltext
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.