Cancer patients and survivors have elevated cardiovascular risk when compared with noncancer patients. Cardio-oncology has emerged as a new subspecialty to comanage and address cardiovascular complications in cancer patients such as heart failure, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), valvular heart disease, pericardial disease, and arrhythmias. Cardiac computed tomography (CT) can be helpful in identifying both clinical and subclinical ASCVD in cancer patients and survivors. Radiation therapy treatment planning CT scans and cancer staging/re-staging imaging studies can quantify calcium scores which can identify pre-existing subclinical ASCVD. Cardiac CT can be helpful in the evaluation of cardiac tumors and pericardial diseases, especially in patients who cannot tolerate or have a contraindication to cardiac magnetic resonance. In this review, we describe the optimal utilization of cardiac CT in cancer patients, including risk assessment for ASCVD and identification of cancer treatment-related cardiovascular toxicity.

As the world becomes more connected through online and offline social networking, there has been much discussion of how the rapid rise of social media could be used in ways that can be productive and instructive in various healthcare specialties, such as Cardiology and its subspecialty areas. In this review, the role of social media in the field of Cardio-Oncology is discussed. With an estimated 17 million cancer survivors in the USA in 2019 and 22 million estimated by 2030, more education and awareness are needed. Networking and collaboration are also needed to meet the needs of our patients and healthcare professionals in this emerging field bridging two disciplines. Cardiovascular disease is second only to recurrence of the primary cancer or diagnosis with a secondary malignancy, as a leading cause of death in cancer survivors. A majority of these survivors are anticipated to be on social media seeking information, support, and ideas for optimizing health. Healthcare professionals in Cardio-Oncology are also online for networking, education, scholarship, career development, and advocacy in this field. Here, we describe the utilization and potential impact of social media in Cardio-Oncology, with inclusion of various hashtags frequently used in the Cardio-Oncology Twitter community.

The increased risk for cardiovascular events in aging cancer survivors and those undergoing certain chemotherapeutic treatments has raised concern for more rigorous screening and surveillance methods above that of the general population. At this time, there are limited guidelines for how to best manage this vulnerable cohort. Questions regarding timing of screening, choice of imaging modality and risk reduction strategies-especially in those patients with known atherosclerotic disease-remain to be elucidated. Over a decade of case series, retrospective studies and clinical trials have shed light on the evolving role of cardiac computed tomography (CT) in this population, of which there is a relative paucity of data regarding its potential utility in the specific cardio-oncology population. Focusing on ability of cardiac CT to evaluate multiple cardiac and vascular structures, provide diagnostic and prognostic information, as well as assist interventional and surgical colleagues in surgical/percutaneous valve replacement and revascularization strategies is the premise for this review.

Aging is associated with an increased prevalence of both cancer and heart disease. The progression of aortic valve calcification to aortic stenosis may be accelerated by both cardiovascular risk factors and cancer treatments, such as radiotherapy with mediastinal involvement. Symptomatic aortic stenosis is occasionally diagnosed in cancer patients undergoing cardiovascular evaluation; likewise, cancer is often recognized during assessment preceding aortic valve interventions. In these complex cases, physicians face difficult treatment decisions. Due to a myriad of clinical presentations of cancer and valve disease, specific guidelines for this patient population are not currently in place. Management is currently based on clinical judgment, on an individual basis.

Patients with cancer in remission or with a favorable prognosis should be treated according to current cardiovascular guidelines. In these patients, aortic valve replacement can be performed either by surgery or transcatheter. Significant challenges arise in patients with active cancer, especially those receiving anti-cancer treatment. Recent data suggests that these patients can be offered aortic valve replacement, with a trend of favoring the transcatheter route in order to minimize perioperative risk and complications associated with major surgery. Patients with advanced cancer and severe aortic stenosis should be offered palliative care and can benefit from aortic balloon valvuloplasty if indicated. Modern cancer treatments associated with improved long-term prognosis may allow the appropriate cure of aortic stenosis. We discuss the protocol, outcomes, and evolving recommendations of aortic valve replacement in cancer patients with aortic stenosis.

Recent data suggest that transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis (AS) is viable in cancer patients. TAVR may be preferred in cancer patients due to its minimally invasive nature and smaller impact on oncologic therapies compared to SAVR. Objectives We sought to determine if TAVR is an acceptable alternative to SAVR in cancer patients and whether TAVR allows for earlier initiation or resumption of anti-cancer therapies.

Cancer patients in a tertiary cancer center diagnosed with severe AS were retrospectively included. Patients accepted by the heart team underwent either TAVR or SAVR, while remaining patients received medical therapy alone. Time intervals to initiation of cancer treatment and the impact of cancer treatment on the replaced valves were recorded. Logistic regression was performed to determine the impact of treatment strategy on overall survival (OS) in all 3 subgroups.

One hundred and eighty-seven cancer patients diagnosed with severe AS were identified. AVR was associated with better OS compared to medical therapy alone (p < 0.0001). TAVR was associated with better OS at 72 months (HR = 0.468, p < 0.001) compared to medical therapy alone, with no difference in OS observed between SAVR and TAVR. Time intervals to initiation of cancer treatments were shorter in the TAVR group, with no valve deterioration or infection observed in all groups.

Cancer patients with severe AS benefit from AVR. TAVR is a viable alternative to SAVR in high-risk cancer patients to prolong survival and allow for earlier administration or resumption of anti-neoplastic therapies.