Comparison of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICI) Myocarditis and Non-ICI Myocarditis Using Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance: A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study

<b>Background</b>: Differentiating between immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) myocarditis and non-ICI myocarditis is clinically important. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is a well-established method for diagnosing acute myocarditis. The value of CMR for distinguishing ICI myocarditis from non-ICI myocarditis remains unclear, which this study sought to determine. <b>Methods</b>: A total of 54 patients (<i>n</i> = 26 ICI myocarditis; <i>n</i> = 28 non-ICI myocarditis) underwent clinical CMR for the assessment of cardiac function (cines), myocardial fibrosis (native T1-mapping, extracellular volume [ECV] fraction, late gadolinium enhancement [LGE]) and myocardial oedema (native T2-mapping). <b>Results</b>: ICI myocarditis patients were older than non-ICI myocarditis patients (75 years [71-78] vs. 39 years [30-64]; <i>p</i> < 0.001). Both groups had similar left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (58 ± 11% vs. 58 ± 6%; <i>p</i> = 0.970). ICI myocarditis and non-ICI myocarditis patients also had similar native myocardial T1 values (1041 ± 84 ms vs. 1063 ± 60 ms; <i>p</i> = 0.281), native myocardial T2 values (59 ± 6 ms vs. 59 ± 6 ms; <i>p</i> = 0.943) and ECV (0.32 ± 0.07 vs. 0.31 ± 0.04; <i>p</i> = 0.403). Native myocardial T1 values (Rho = -0.553) and ECV (Rho = -0.502) were significantly associated with LVEF in non-ICI myocarditis patients (both <i>p</i> < 0.05). There was no significant association between myocardial T1 values, T2 values or ECV, with LVEF, in ICI myocarditis patients (all <i>p</i> < 0.05). Non-ICI myocarditis patients had a greater frequency of LGE in the LV compared to ICI myocarditis patients (89% vs. 52% <i>p</i> = 0.005). However, the pattern of LGE was similar between the two patient groups (mostly subepicardial and/or mid-wall). <b>Conclusions</b>: In this single centre retrospective cohort, the findings suggest that quantitative parametric mapping methods by CMR may not differentiate between ICI vs. non-ICI myocarditis. Further work is needed to assess the value of CMR for diagnosing standalone ICI myocarditis.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14217809
Primary Topic
Viral Infections and Immunology Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICI) Myocarditis and Non-ICI Myocarditis Using Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance: A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study

Elizabeth R. Jacobs, Susan Ellery, Alexander Liu, Victoria Parish et al.
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Viral Infections and Immunology Research
article

Comparison of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICI) Myocarditis and Non-ICI Myocarditis Using Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance: A Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study

Elizabeth R. Jacobs, Susan Ellery, Alexander Liu, Victoria Parish, Anthony Yip, Anna Claire Olsson-Brown, Donna McLean, Joon Lee, Andrew Hodge
article en

Abstract

<b>Background</b>: Differentiating between immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) myocarditis and non-ICI myocarditis is clinically important. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is a well-established method for diagnosing acute myocarditis. The value of CMR for distinguishing ICI myocarditis from non-ICI myocarditis remains unclear, which this study sought to determine. <b>Methods</b>: A total of 54 patients (<i>n</i> = 26 ICI myocarditis; <i>n</i> = 28 non-ICI myocarditis) underwent clinical CMR for the assessment of cardiac function (cines), myocardial fibrosis (native T1-mapping, extracellular volume [ECV] fraction, late gadolinium enhancement [LGE]) and myocardial oedema (native T2-mapping). <b>Results</b>: ICI myocarditis patients were older than non-ICI myocarditis patients (75 years [71-78] vs. 39 years [30-64]; <i>p</i> < 0.001). Both groups had similar left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (58 ± 11% vs. 58 ± 6%; <i>p</i> = 0.970). ICI myocarditis and non-ICI myocarditis patients also had similar native myocardial T1 values (1041 ± 84 ms vs. 1063 ± 60 ms; <i>p</i> = 0.281), native myocardial T2 values (59 ± 6 ms vs. 59 ± 6 ms; <i>p</i> = 0.943) and ECV (0.32 ± 0.07 vs. 0.31 ± 0.04; <i>p</i> = 0.403). Native myocardial T1 values (Rho = -0.553) and ECV (Rho = -0.502) were significantly associated with LVEF in non-ICI myocarditis patients (both <i>p</i> < 0.05). There was no significant association between myocardial T1 values, T2 values or ECV, with LVEF, in ICI myocarditis patients (all <i>p</i> < 0.05). Non-ICI myocarditis patients had a greater frequency of LGE in the LV compared to ICI myocarditis patients (89% vs. 52% <i>p</i> = 0.005). However, the pattern of LGE was similar between the two patient groups (mostly subepicardial and/or mid-wall). <b>Conclusions</b>: In this single centre retrospective cohort, the findings suggest that quantitative parametric mapping methods by CMR may not differentiate between ICI vs. non-ICI myocarditis. Further work is needed to assess the value of CMR for diagnosing standalone ICI myocarditis.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 14(21)
Royal Sussex County Hospital (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 50%
Viral Infections and Immunology Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.