Is there an association of anthracyclines with HFrEF and/or HFpEF in patients treated for breast cancer or lymphoma after 30 years of follow-up? Insights from the Rochester epidemiology project

Abstract Introduction Anthracyclines (ACs) have been identified as cardiotoxic drugs. They are associated with contractile dysfunction of the heart, which can manifest as heart failure. However, differentiating between HFrEF (left ventricular ejection fractions [LVEF] ≤40%) or HFpEF (LVEF >40%) has been overlooked. Purpose Using a retrospective cohort of patients with breast cancer (BC), Hodgkin (HL) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and controls from the Rochester Epidemiology Project, we evaluated the association of ACs use with risk of HFrEF and/or HFpEF. Methods 797 subjects with BC, HL or NHL diagnosed from 1988 to 2010 were identified, 658 treated with ACs (ACs group) and 139 not treated with ACs (no-ACs group). Controls (n=1526) were subjects without cancer. The median (Q1, Q3) follow up was 11.5 years (7.4, 16.7). Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compare the risk of HFpEF and HFrEF in the three cohorts, adjustment for sex, CV comorbidities (type 2 diabetes [T2D], hypertension [HTN] and dyslipidemia), radiotherapy (RT), and ACs cumulative dose was performed. Results Baseline characteristics are shown in table 1. HFpEF occurred in 29/1526 subjects in the control group, 3/139 in the no-ACs group and in 14/658 in the ACs group. Compared to the control group, there was not an increased risk of developing HFpEF in the no-ACs group (HR 1.67, CI 95%: 0.5 – 5.53, p = 0.39) or in the ACs group (HR 1.83, CI 95%: 0.95 – 3.52, p = 0.06) (Figure 1). Compared with no-ACs group, the ACs group had a similar risk of developing HFpEF (HR 1.09, CI 95%: 0.3 – 3.87, p = 0.88). RT was associated with a lower risk of HFpEF (HR 0.21, CI 95%: 0.06 – 0.75, p = 0.01). In the multivariable analysis, T2D (HR 6.91, CI 95%: 3.07-15.56, p = <0.0001) was associated with higher risk of HFpEF. A cumulative dose of ACs > 250 mg/m2 was not associated with increased risk of HFpEF. HFrEF occurred in 25/1526 subjects in the control group, in 4/139 in the no-ACs group and in 31/658 in the ACs group. Compared to the control group, the ACs group had a significant increase in the risk of HFrEF (HR 4.77, CI 95%: 2.76 – 8.22, p < 0.0001), the no-ACs group did not (HR 2.81, CI 95%: 0.97 – 8.12, p = 0.055) (figure 2). RT was associated with lower risk of HFrEF (HR 0.29, CI 95%: 0.13 – 0.65, p = 0.002). In the multivariable analysis, ACs (HR 4.23, CI 95%: 2.4-7.47, p = < 0.0001) being male (HR 2.45, CI 95%: 1.43 – 4.15, p < 0.0001), smoking history (HR 2, CI 95%: 1.16 – 3.44, p < 0.01), and HTN (HR 3.23, CI 95%: 1.9 – 5.61, p < 0.0001), were associated with higher risk of HFrEF. A cumulative dose of ACs > 250 mg/m2 was not associated with increased risk of HFrEF. Conclusion To our knowledge this is the first study to differentiate between HFpEF and HFrEF in this cohort. ACs were not associated with increased risk of HFpEF. However, ACs were associated with increased risk of HFrEF, but not with a specific dose. These results should be validated in other population cohorts.