首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Thoracic Disease >Illuminating anthracycline cardiotoxicity: the renaissance of evidence-based onco-cardiology
【24h】

Illuminating anthracycline cardiotoxicity: the renaissance of evidence-based onco-cardiology

机译:阐明蒽环类药物的心脏毒性:循证医学心内科的复兴

获取原文
           

摘要

Anthracyclines are potent anti-cancer agents known to cause cardiotoxicity and heart failure since the 1970s (1). For patients that have managed to survive cancer, heart failure from the chemotherapy that saved them can be a cruel and deadly irony. Despite decades of research, anthracycline cardiotoxicity remains an incompletely understood disease, with the most widely accepted concepts summarized as follows: it is dose dependent with doses less than 400-450 mg/m 2 thought to be generally safer (2); it can occur very early or very late after exposure (3); and it exemplifies Type 1 cardiotoxicity and is therefore irreversible (4). These notions, acquired over the past five and a half decades, have arisen from retrospective observational studies that have been either too small or too confounded to serve as solid evidence. In addition, many questions have remained unanswered because of the surprisingly complex nature of the disease, inconsistent definitions of cardiotoxicity, evolving technologies used to assess it, lack of large prospective studies, and an historic paucity of interaction between cardiologists and oncologists. As a result, the many published consensus and position statements from different societies are based on soft scientific evidence and thereby met with skepticism (5-7). Not surprisingly, there is great inconsistency in the care of these patients, by oncologists and cardiologists alike, and cardiotoxicity surveillance and practices vary widely among institutions.
机译:自1970年代以来,蒽环类是有效的抗癌药,已知会引起心脏毒性和心力衰竭(1)。对于已经成功存活下来的癌症患者来说,化学疗法挽救了他们的心力衰竭可能是残酷而致命的讽刺。尽管进行了数十年的研究,蒽环类药物的心脏毒性仍然是一种尚未完全了解的疾病,最广泛接受的概念总结如下:剂量依赖性,剂量小于400-450 mg / m 2通常被认为更安全(2);它可以在暴露后很早或很晚发生(3);它是1型心脏毒性的例证,因此是不可逆的(4)。在过去的五年半中,这些观念源于回顾性观察研究,这些研究太小或太混乱而无法提供可靠的证据。此外,由于该疾病的性质异常复杂,心脏毒性的定义不一致,用于评估该疾病的技术不断发展,缺乏大量的前瞻性研究以及心脏病医生和肿瘤科医生之间缺乏互动的历史性问题,许多问题仍未得到解答。结果,来自不同社会的许多公开的共识和立场声明都是基于软科学证据,因此遭到了怀疑(5-7)。毫不奇怪,肿瘤学家和心脏病专家对这些患者的护理存在极大的不一致,并且各机构之间的心脏毒性监测和实践差异很大。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号