<p>Atrial fibrillation is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and is a major risk factor for ischemic stroke. Atrial fibrillation and ischemic stroke are major cardiovascular complications in cancer patients, who have a higher burden and worse outcomes than the general population. Clinical risk stratification scores for stroke and bleeding, commonly used in the general population to estimate thromboembolic and bleeding risk, respectively, are less well validated in cancer patients, who have historically been excluded in clinical trials. There is a lack of consensus opinion on how to effectively risk-stratify cancer patients based on the currently available tools and a need for cancer-specific scores that offer a tailored approach to each patient in order to more effectively stratify ischemic stroke and bleeding risk in this cohort of patients. Cancer-mediated physiologic changes and adverse effects of antineoplastic therapy have been implicated as etiologies of the increased risk for both atrial fibrillation and ischemic stroke. Risk stratifying scores such as CHA<sub>2</sub>DS<sub>2</sub>-VASc and HAS-BLED, commonly used in the general population, are less well validated in cancer patients. There is a need for cancer-specific scores that can more effectively stratify ischemic stroke and bleeding risk in cancer patients, although given the heterogeneity of cancers, whether a “one score fits all” is uncertain.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Atrial fibrillation and ischemic stroke in cancer: the latest scientific evidence, current management, and future directions

  • Lakshya Seth,
  • Nickolas Stabellini,
  • Shawn Doss,
  • Vraj Patel,
  • Viraj Shah,
  • Gregory Lip,
  • Susan Dent,
  • Michael G. Fradley,
  • Lars Køber,
  • Avirup Guha

摘要

Atrial fibrillation is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and is a major risk factor for ischemic stroke. Atrial fibrillation and ischemic stroke are major cardiovascular complications in cancer patients, who have a higher burden and worse outcomes than the general population. Clinical risk stratification scores for stroke and bleeding, commonly used in the general population to estimate thromboembolic and bleeding risk, respectively, are less well validated in cancer patients, who have historically been excluded in clinical trials. There is a lack of consensus opinion on how to effectively risk-stratify cancer patients based on the currently available tools and a need for cancer-specific scores that offer a tailored approach to each patient in order to more effectively stratify ischemic stroke and bleeding risk in this cohort of patients. Cancer-mediated physiologic changes and adverse effects of antineoplastic therapy have been implicated as etiologies of the increased risk for both atrial fibrillation and ischemic stroke. Risk stratifying scores such as CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED, commonly used in the general population, are less well validated in cancer patients. There is a need for cancer-specific scores that can more effectively stratify ischemic stroke and bleeding risk in cancer patients, although given the heterogeneity of cancers, whether a “one score fits all” is uncertain.