While advances in cancer treatment have led to improved survival rates, cancer survivors are at a significant risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).This review examines the risk, diagnosis, and prevention of ASCVD in this population.Cancer survivors, especially those diagnosed with certain types, face a significantly higher risk of developing ASCVD than the general population. We introduce the “triad model” to explain this increased risk of ASCVD among cancer patients. This model includes three interconnected components: common catalysts, cancer influence, and treatment impact.The factors contributing to this model are the shared risk factors between cancer and ASCVD, such as smoking, obesity, and systemic inflammation; the direct effects of cancer on cardiovascular health through chronic systemic inflammation and endothelial damage;and the significant effects of anticancer treatments, including chemotherapy and radiation, which can worsen cardiovascular complications and hasten the progression of ASCVD.Furthermore, cancer survivors are at a higher risk of developing and dying from ASCVD, highlighting the necessity for tailored guidelines and strategies for ASCVD prevention and management in this population. The review explores the utility of diagnostic tools, such as coronary artery calcium scoring, in predicting and managing ASCVD risk. It also emphasizes the importance of prevention strategies that include regular cardiovascular monitoring and lifestyle modifications. Finally, the relationship between cancer survival and cardiovascular health highlights the importance of integrated and comprehensive care approaches.Continued research, the development of prediction models, and specific preventative strategies are essential to improve cancer survivors’ overall health outcomes.

While advances in cancer treatment have led to improved survival rates, cancer survivors are at a significant risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).This review examines the risk, diagnosis, and prevention of ASCVD in this population.Cancer survivors, especially those diagnosed with certain types, face a significantly higher risk of developing ASCVD than the general population. We introduce the “triad model” to explain this increased risk of ASCVD among cancer patients. This model includes three interconnected components: common catalysts, cancer influence, and treatment impact.The factors contributing to this model are the shared risk factors between cancer and ASCVD, such as smoking, obesity, and systemic inflammation; the direct effects of cancer on cardiovascular health through chronic systemic inflammation and endothelial damage;and the significant effects of anticancer treatments, including chemotherapy and radiation, which can worsen cardiovascular complications and hasten the progression of ASCVD.Furthermore, cancer survivors are at a higher risk of developing and dying from ASCVD, highlighting the necessity for tailored guidelines and strategies for ASCVD prevention and management in this population. The review explores the utility of diagnostic tools, such as coronary artery calcium scoring, in predicting and managing ASCVD risk. It also emphasizes the importance of prevention strategies that include regular cardiovascular monitoring and lifestyle modifications. Finally, the relationship between cancer survival and cardiovascular health highlights the importance of integrated and comprehensive care approaches.Continued research, the development of prediction models, and specific preventative strategies are essential to improve cancer survivors’ overall health outcomes.

While advances in cancer treatment have led to improved survival rates, cancer survivors are at a significant risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).This review examines the risk, diagnosis, and prevention of ASCVD in this population.Cancer survivors, especially those diagnosed with certain types, face a significantly higher risk of developing ASCVD than the general population. We introduce the “triad model” to explain this increased risk of ASCVD among cancer patients. This model includes three interconnected components: common catalysts, cancer influence, and treatment impact.The factors contributing to this model are the shared risk factors between cancer and ASCVD, such as smoking, obesity, and systemic inflammation; the direct effects of cancer on cardiovascular health through chronic systemic inflammation and endothelial damage;and the significant effects of anticancer treatments, including chemotherapy and radiation, which can worsen cardiovascular complications and hasten the progression of ASCVD.Furthermore, cancer survivors are at a higher risk of developing and dying from ASCVD, highlighting the necessity for tailored guidelines and strategies for ASCVD prevention and management in this population. The review explores the utility of diagnostic tools, such as coronary artery calcium scoring, in predicting and managing ASCVD risk. It also emphasizes the importance of prevention strategies that include regular cardiovascular monitoring and lifestyle modifications. Finally, the relationship between cancer survival and cardiovascular health highlights the importance of integrated and comprehensive care approaches.Continued research, the development of prediction models, and specific preventative strategies are essential to improve cancer survivors’ overall health outcomes.

While advances in cancer treatment have led to improved survival rates, cancer survivors are at a significant risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).This review examines the risk, diagnosis, and prevention of ASCVD in this population.Cancer survivors, especially those diagnosed with certain types, face a significantly higher risk of developing ASCVD than the general population. We introduce the “triad model” to explain this increased risk of ASCVD among cancer patients. This model includes three interconnected components: common catalysts, cancer influence, and treatment impact.The factors contributing to this model are the shared risk factors between cancer and ASCVD, such as smoking, obesity, and systemic inflammation; the direct effects of cancer on cardiovascular health through chronic systemic inflammation and endothelial damage;and the significant effects of anticancer treatments, including chemotherapy and radiation, which can worsen cardiovascular complications and hasten the progression of ASCVD.Furthermore, cancer survivors are at a higher risk of developing and dying from ASCVD, highlighting the necessity for tailored guidelines and strategies for ASCVD prevention and management in this population. The review explores the utility of diagnostic tools, such as coronary artery calcium scoring, in predicting and managing ASCVD risk. It also emphasizes the importance of prevention strategies that include regular cardiovascular monitoring and lifestyle modifications. Finally, the relationship between cancer survival and cardiovascular health highlights the importance of integrated and comprehensive care approaches.Continued research, the development of prediction models, and specific preventative strategies are essential to improve cancer survivors’ overall health outcomes.

Purpose: The number of patients presenting with vaccination-related cardiovascular symptoms after receiving mRNA vaccines (mRNA-VRCS) is increasing. We investigated the incidence of vaccine-related adverse events (VAEs), including myocarditis and pericarditis, in patients with mRNA-VRCS after receiving BNT162b2-Pfizer-BioNTech and mRNA-1273-Moderna vaccines. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected data on patients presenting with mRNA-VRCS who visited the outpatient clinic of two tertiary medical centers. Clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, echocardiographic findings, and electrocardiographic findings were evaluated. VAE was defined as myocarditis or pericarditis in patients after mRNA vaccination. Clinical outcomes during short-term follow-up, including emergency room (ER) visit, hospitalization, or death, were also assessed among the patients. Results: A total of 952 patients presenting with mRNA-VRCS were included in this study, with 89.7% receiving Pfizer-BioNTech and 10.3% receiving Moderna vaccines. The mean duration from vaccination to symptom was 5.6±7.5 days. VAEs, including acute myocarditis and acute pericarditis, were confirmed in 11 (1.2%) and 10 (1.1%) patients, respectively. The VAE group showed higher rates of dyspnea, echocardiography changes, and ST-T segment changes. During the short-term follow-up period of 3 months, the VAE group showed a higher hospitalization rate compared to the control group; there was no significant difference in ER visit (p=0.320) or mortality rates (p>0.999). Conclusion Amongst the patients who experienced mRNA-VRCS, the total incidence of VAEs, including acute myocarditis and pericarditis, was 2.2%. Patients with VAEs showed higher rates of dyspnea, echocardiographic changes, and ST-T segment changes compared to those without VAEs. With or without the cardiovascular events, the prognosis in patients with mRNA-VRCS was favorable.

Purpose: The number of patients presenting with vaccination-related cardiovascular symptoms after receiving mRNA vaccines (mRNA-VRCS) is increasing. We investigated the incidence of vaccine-related adverse events (VAEs), including myocarditis and pericarditis, in patients with mRNA-VRCS after receiving BNT162b2-Pfizer-BioNTech and mRNA-1273-Moderna vaccines. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected data on patients presenting with mRNA-VRCS who visited the outpatient clinic of two tertiary medical centers. Clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, echocardiographic findings, and electrocardiographic findings were evaluated. VAE was defined as myocarditis or pericarditis in patients after mRNA vaccination. Clinical outcomes during short-term follow-up, including emergency room (ER) visit, hospitalization, or death, were also assessed among the patients. Results: A total of 952 patients presenting with mRNA-VRCS were included in this study, with 89.7% receiving Pfizer-BioNTech and 10.3% receiving Moderna vaccines. The mean duration from vaccination to symptom was 5.6±7.5 days. VAEs, including acute myocarditis and acute pericarditis, were confirmed in 11 (1.2%) and 10 (1.1%) patients, respectively. The VAE group showed higher rates of dyspnea, echocardiography changes, and ST-T segment changes. During the short-term follow-up period of 3 months, the VAE group showed a higher hospitalization rate compared to the control group; there was no significant difference in ER visit (p=0.320) or mortality rates (p>0.999). Conclusion Amongst the patients who experienced mRNA-VRCS, the total incidence of VAEs, including acute myocarditis and pericarditis, was 2.2%. Patients with VAEs showed higher rates of dyspnea, echocardiographic changes, and ST-T segment changes compared to those without VAEs. With or without the cardiovascular events, the prognosis in patients with mRNA-VRCS was favorable.

Purpose: The number of patients presenting with vaccination-related cardiovascular symptoms after receiving mRNA vaccines (mRNA-VRCS) is increasing. We investigated the incidence of vaccine-related adverse events (VAEs), including myocarditis and pericarditis, in patients with mRNA-VRCS after receiving BNT162b2-Pfizer-BioNTech and mRNA-1273-Moderna vaccines. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected data on patients presenting with mRNA-VRCS who visited the outpatient clinic of two tertiary medical centers. Clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, echocardiographic findings, and electrocardiographic findings were evaluated. VAE was defined as myocarditis or pericarditis in patients after mRNA vaccination. Clinical outcomes during short-term follow-up, including emergency room (ER) visit, hospitalization, or death, were also assessed among the patients. Results: A total of 952 patients presenting with mRNA-VRCS were included in this study, with 89.7% receiving Pfizer-BioNTech and 10.3% receiving Moderna vaccines. The mean duration from vaccination to symptom was 5.6±7.5 days. VAEs, including acute myocarditis and acute pericarditis, were confirmed in 11 (1.2%) and 10 (1.1%) patients, respectively. The VAE group showed higher rates of dyspnea, echocardiography changes, and ST-T segment changes. During the short-term follow-up period of 3 months, the VAE group showed a higher hospitalization rate compared to the control group; there was no significant difference in ER visit (p=0.320) or mortality rates (p>0.999). Conclusion Amongst the patients who experienced mRNA-VRCS, the total incidence of VAEs, including acute myocarditis and pericarditis, was 2.2%. Patients with VAEs showed higher rates of dyspnea, echocardiographic changes, and ST-T segment changes compared to those without VAEs. With or without the cardiovascular events, the prognosis in patients with mRNA-VRCS was favorable.

Background: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) needs careful differentiation from other cardiomyopathies. Current guidelines recommend genetic testing, but genetic data on differential diagnoses and their relation with clinical outcomes in HCM are still lacking.This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of genetic variants and the proportion of other cardiomyopathies in patients with suspected HCM in Korea and compare the outcomes of HCM according to the presence of sarcomere gene mutation. Methods: We enrolled 1,554 patients with suspected HCM having left ventricular hypertrophy on transthoracic echocardiography between April 2012 and February 2023. Patients who declined genetic testing or who had pure apical HCM without a familial history were excluded. Genetic testing was performed using a next-generation sequencing panel or wholeexome sequencing for cardiomyopathies. We performed cardiovascular magnetic resonance if the diagnosis was inconclusive. Genotype-positive HCM was defined as sarcomere gene mutations of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants. Adverse clinical outcomes were defined as a composite of all-cause death, resuscitated cardiac arrest, heart failure-related admission, appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator shocks, and stroke. Results: Of 492 patients (mean age 49.6 ± 14.7 years, 29.4% women) who underwent genetic testing, 214 (43.5%) had disease-causing gene mutations. After combining gene tests, multi-imaging modality, and clinical information, 447 (90.9%) had HCM, and 27 (5.5%) had Fabry disease. Among the HCM patients, 182 (40.7%) were genotype-positive, and 265 (59.3%) were genotype-negative. Kaplan–Meier curve analysis showed that genotype-positive HCM patients experienced more composite outcomes (log-rank, P < 0.001). In multivariable Cox analysis, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17–3.12; P = 0.010), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% (HR, 5.50; 95% CI, 2.68–11.27; P < 0.001), LA reservoir strain (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93–0.99;P = 0.037), and positive sarcomere gene mutation (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.04–2.78; P = 0.034) were significantly association with composite outcomes. Sarcomere gene mutation had incremental value for predicting adverse outcomes added on NSVT and LVEF < 50%. Conclusion Genetic testing is helpful in diagnosing HCM, and sarcomere gene mutations in HCM are significantly associated with clinical outcomes.

Background: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) needs careful differentiation from other cardiomyopathies. Current guidelines recommend genetic testing, but genetic data on differential diagnoses and their relation with clinical outcomes in HCM are still lacking.This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of genetic variants and the proportion of other cardiomyopathies in patients with suspected HCM in Korea and compare the outcomes of HCM according to the presence of sarcomere gene mutation. Methods: We enrolled 1,554 patients with suspected HCM having left ventricular hypertrophy on transthoracic echocardiography between April 2012 and February 2023. Patients who declined genetic testing or who had pure apical HCM without a familial history were excluded. Genetic testing was performed using a next-generation sequencing panel or wholeexome sequencing for cardiomyopathies. We performed cardiovascular magnetic resonance if the diagnosis was inconclusive. Genotype-positive HCM was defined as sarcomere gene mutations of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants. Adverse clinical outcomes were defined as a composite of all-cause death, resuscitated cardiac arrest, heart failure-related admission, appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator shocks, and stroke. Results: Of 492 patients (mean age 49.6 ± 14.7 years, 29.4% women) who underwent genetic testing, 214 (43.5%) had disease-causing gene mutations. After combining gene tests, multi-imaging modality, and clinical information, 447 (90.9%) had HCM, and 27 (5.5%) had Fabry disease. Among the HCM patients, 182 (40.7%) were genotype-positive, and 265 (59.3%) were genotype-negative. Kaplan–Meier curve analysis showed that genotype-positive HCM patients experienced more composite outcomes (log-rank, P < 0.001). In multivariable Cox analysis, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17–3.12; P = 0.010), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% (HR, 5.50; 95% CI, 2.68–11.27; P < 0.001), LA reservoir strain (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93–0.99;P = 0.037), and positive sarcomere gene mutation (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.04–2.78; P = 0.034) were significantly association with composite outcomes. Sarcomere gene mutation had incremental value for predicting adverse outcomes added on NSVT and LVEF < 50%. Conclusion Genetic testing is helpful in diagnosing HCM, and sarcomere gene mutations in HCM are significantly associated with clinical outcomes.

Background: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) needs careful differentiation from other cardiomyopathies. Current guidelines recommend genetic testing, but genetic data on differential diagnoses and their relation with clinical outcomes in HCM are still lacking.This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of genetic variants and the proportion of other cardiomyopathies in patients with suspected HCM in Korea and compare the outcomes of HCM according to the presence of sarcomere gene mutation. Methods: We enrolled 1,554 patients with suspected HCM having left ventricular hypertrophy on transthoracic echocardiography between April 2012 and February 2023. Patients who declined genetic testing or who had pure apical HCM without a familial history were excluded. Genetic testing was performed using a next-generation sequencing panel or wholeexome sequencing for cardiomyopathies. We performed cardiovascular magnetic resonance if the diagnosis was inconclusive. Genotype-positive HCM was defined as sarcomere gene mutations of pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants. Adverse clinical outcomes were defined as a composite of all-cause death, resuscitated cardiac arrest, heart failure-related admission, appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator shocks, and stroke. Results: Of 492 patients (mean age 49.6 ± 14.7 years, 29.4% women) who underwent genetic testing, 214 (43.5%) had disease-causing gene mutations. After combining gene tests, multi-imaging modality, and clinical information, 447 (90.9%) had HCM, and 27 (5.5%) had Fabry disease. Among the HCM patients, 182 (40.7%) were genotype-positive, and 265 (59.3%) were genotype-negative. Kaplan–Meier curve analysis showed that genotype-positive HCM patients experienced more composite outcomes (log-rank, P < 0.001). In multivariable Cox analysis, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17–3.12; P = 0.010), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% (HR, 5.50; 95% CI, 2.68–11.27; P < 0.001), LA reservoir strain (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93–0.99;P = 0.037), and positive sarcomere gene mutation (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.04–2.78; P = 0.034) were significantly association with composite outcomes. Sarcomere gene mutation had incremental value for predicting adverse outcomes added on NSVT and LVEF < 50%. Conclusion Genetic testing is helpful in diagnosing HCM, and sarcomere gene mutations in HCM are significantly associated with clinical outcomes.