- •We explored the pancoronary plaque characteristics in ACS patients with cancer history by OCT.
- •The prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and coronary artery disease in cancer patients is increased and is associated with higher mortality.
- •Cancer patients are excluded from ACS trials. The characteristics of coronary high-risk plaque of ACS and its evidence-based treatment are unknown.
- •ACS patients with cancer history have more high-risk plaque features in culprit and nonculprit lesions, compared with ACS patients without cancer history.
- •Our data provides important clinical value for the management and treatment of ACS patients with cancer history.
Background and aims
The prevalence of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with cancer history is increasing and it is associated with higher mortality. However, there is limited evidence on the characteristics of coronary plaque in ACS patients with cancer history. This study explored the pancoronary plaque characteristics in ACS patients with cancer history by optical coherence tomography (OCT).
A total of 306 ACS patients treated by 3-vessel OCT at the time of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were included, retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of cancer history: one group with cancer history (n = 98) and a matched group without cancer history (n = 208).
A total of 314 culprit lesions and 514 nonculprit lesions were identified by OCT in this study. In culprit lesions, ACS patients with cancer history had higher incidence of thin cap fibroatheroma (TCFA) (p = 0.016), cholesterol crystals (p = 0.028), calcification (p = 0.001) and thrombus (p = 0.001), and had thinner fibrous cap thickness (FCT) (p = 0.011), greater maximum lipid arc (p = 0.042) and lipid index (p < 0.001), compared to matched ACS patients without cancer history. In nonculprit lesions, ACS patients with cancer history had higher prevalence of high-risk plaque (14.7% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.017), nonculprit rupture (14.7% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.003), and TCFA (52.2% vs. 28.3%, p < 0.001), and had higher incidence of calcification (p = 0.003), thrombus (p = 0.029), cholesterol crystals (p = 0.002) and microchannels (p = 0.029). These non-culprit lesions had longer lesion length (p = 0.001), thinner FCT (p < 0.001), greater maximum lipid arc (p = 0.016) and lipid index (p < 0.001).
ACS patients with cancer history showed more high-risk plaque features in culprit and nonculprit lesions, compared with ACS patients without cancer history. Therefore, ACS patients with cancer history may have greater pancoronary vulnerability. This may predict a poorer prognosis for ACS patients with cancer history.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to Atherosclerosis
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- Deaths: leading causes for 2018.Natl. Vital Stat. Rep. 2021; 70: 1-115https://doi.org/10.15620/cdc:104186
- Characteristics, management, and outcomes of acute coronary syndrome patients with cancer.J. Clin. Med. 2020; 9https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9113642
- Cardiovascular toxicities in pediatric cancer survivors.Cardiol. Clin. 2019; 37: 533-544https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccl.2019.07.002
- Cardiovascular disease mortality among breast cancer survivors.Epidemiology. 2016; 27: 6-13https://doi.org/10.1097/ede.0000000000000394
- Cardio-oncology: an update on cardiotoxicity of cancer-related treatment.Circ. Res. 2016; 118: 1008-1020https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.115.303633
- Treatment and outcomes of acute coronary syndrome in the cancer population.Clin. Cardiol. 2012; 35: 443-450https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.22007
- Common pathophysiology in cancer, atrial fibrillation, atherosclerosis, and thrombosis: JACC: CardioOncology state-of-the-art review.JACC CardioOncol. 2021; 3: 619-634https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccao.2021.08.011
- Challenges and management of acute coronary syndrome in cancer patients.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021; 8590016https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.590016
- Relationship between coronary plaque morphology of the left anterior descending artery and 12 months clinical outcome: the CLIMA study.Eur. Heart J. 2020; 41: 383-391https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz520
- Fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction (2018).J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2018; 72: 2231-2264https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2018.08.1038
- Consensus standards for acquisition, measurement, and reporting of intravascular optical coherence tomography studies: a report from the International Working Group for Intravascular Optical Coherence Tomography Standardization and Validation.J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2012; 59: 1058-1072https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.09.079
- Pancoronary plaque characteristics in STEMI caused by culprit plaque erosion versus rupture: 3-vessel OCT study.JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021; 14: 1235-1245https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2020.07.047
- Arterial thrombosis in patients with cancer.Curr. Treat. Options Cardiovasc. Med. 2018; 20https://doi.org/10.1007/s11936-018-0635-x
- Venous thromboembolism and cancer: risks and outcomes.Circulation. 2003; 107: I17-I21https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000078466.72504.AC
- Risk of arterial thromboembolism in patients with cancer.J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2017; 70: 926-938https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.06.047
- ESC Position Paper on cancer treatments and cardiovascular toxicity developed under the auspices of the ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines: the Task Force for cancer treatments and cardiovascular toxicity of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).Eur. Heart J. 2016; 37 (2016): 2768-2801https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehw211
- Vascular toxicities of cancer therapies: the old and the new--an evolving avenue.Circulation. 2016; 133: 1272-1289https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.018347
- Morphological plaque characteristics and clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome and a cancer history.J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2021; 10e020243https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.120.020243
- Coronary superficial and spotty calcium deposits in culprit coronary lesions of acute coronary syndrome as determined by optical coherence tomography.Am. J. Cardiol. 2013; 112: 34-40https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2013.02.048
- Intravascular ultrasound study of patterns of calcium in ruptured coronary plaques.Am. J. Cardiol. 2005; 96: 352-357https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.03.074
- Three-dimensional volumetric assessment of coronary artery calcification in patients with stable coronary artery disease by OCT.EuroIntervention. 2017; 13: 312-319https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-16-00139
- Impact of diabetes on coronary stenosis and coronary artery calcification detected by electron-beam computed tomography in symptomatic patients.Diabetes Care. 2002; 25: 696-701https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.25.4.696
- Prognostic value of coronary artery calcium screening in subjects with and without diabetes.J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2004; 43: 1663-1669https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2003.09.068
- Radiation-related heart disease: current knowledge and future prospects.Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2010; 76: 656-665https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.09.064
- Prospective study of bevacizumab plus temozolomide in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors.J. Clin. Oncol. 2012; 30: 2963-2968https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2011.40.3147
- Arterial events in cancer patients—the case of acute coronary thrombosis.J. Thorac. Dis. 2018; 10: S4367-S4385https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2018.12.79
- Primary percutaneous coronary intervention and intravascular ultrasound imaging for coronary thrombosis after cisplatin-based chemotherapy.Heart Ves. 2012; 27: 634-638https://doi.org/10.1007/s00380-011-0222-5
- Cisplatin triggers platelet activation.Thromb. Res. 2000; 99: 503-509https://doi.org/10.1016/s0049-3848(00)00294-2
Published online: April 19, 2023
Accepted: March 31, 2023
Received in revised form: March 13, 2023
Received: December 19, 2022
Publication stageIn Press Journal Pre-Proof
© 2023 Published by Elsevier B.V.