Risk for Myocardial Infarction Following 5-Fluorouracil Treatment in Patients With Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Nationwide Registry-Based Study.

Background: Myocardial infarction is a cardiac adverse event associated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). There are limited data on the incidence, risk, and prognosis of 5-FU-associated myocardial infarction. Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the risk for myocardial infarction in patients with gastrointestinal (GI) cancer treated with 5-FU compared with age- and sex-matched population control subjects without cancer (1:2 ratio). Methods: Patients with GI cancer treated with 5-FU between 2004 and 2016 were identified within the Danish National Patient Registry. Prevalent ischemic heart disease in both groups was excluded. Cumulative incidences were calculated, and multivariable regression and competing risk analyses were performed. Results: A total of 30,870 patients were included in the final analysis, of whom 10,290 had GI cancer and were treated with 5-FU and 20,580 were population control subjects without cancer. Differences in comorbid conditions and select antianginal medications were nonsignificant (P > 0.05 for all). The 6-month cumulative incidence of myocardial infarction was significantly higher for 5-FU patients at 0.7% (95% CI: 0.5%-0.9%) versus 0.3% (95% CI: 0.3%-0.4%) in population control subjects, with a competing risk for death of 12.1% versus 0.6%. The 1-year cumulative incidence of myocardial infarction for 5-FU patients was 0.9% (95% CI: 0.7%-1.0%) versus 0.6% (95% CI: 0.5%-0.7%) among population control subjects, with a competing risk for death of 26.5% versus 1.4%. When accounting for competing risks, the corresponding subdistribution hazard ratios suggested an increased risk for myocardial infarction in 5-FU patients, compared with control subjects, at both 6 months (hazard ratio: 2.10; 95% CI: 1.50-2.95; P < 0.001) and 12 months (hazard ratio: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.05-1.84; P = 0.022). Conclusions: Despite a statistically significantly higher 6- and 12-month risk for myocardial infarction among 5-FU patients compared with population control subjects, the absolute risk for myocardial infarction was low, and the clinical significance of these differences appears to be limited in the context of the significant competing risk for death in this population

Extracting Systemic Anticancer Treatment Lines from the Danish National Patient Registry for Solid Tumour Patients Treated in the North Denmark Region Between 2009 and 2019

Charles Vesteghem,1,2 Martin Bøgsted,1,2 Deirdre Cronin-Fenton,3 Laurids Østergaard Poulsen2,4 1Center for Clinical Data Science, Aalborg University and Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark; 2Clinical Cancer Research Centre, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark; 3Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University and Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; 4Department of Oncology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, DenmarkCorrespondence: Charles Vesteghem, Center for Clinical Data Science, Aalborg University and Aalborg University Hospital, Selma Lagerløfs Vej 249, Gistrup, 9260, Denmark, Email [email protected]: Reconstructing patient treatment trajectories is important to generate real-world evidence for epidemiological studies. The Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) contains information about drug prescriptions and could therefore be used to reconstruct treatment trajectories. We aimed to evaluate and enhance two existing methods to reconstruct systemic anticancer treatment trajectories.Methods: This study was based on data from 8738 consecutive patients with solid tumors treated in the North Denmark Region between 2009 and 2019. Two approaches found in the literature as well as two new approaches were applied to the DNPR data. All methods relied on time intervals between two consecutive drug administrations to determine if they belonged to the same treatment line. MedOnc, a local dataset from the Department of Oncology, Aalborg University Hospital was used as a reference. To evaluate the performance of each method, F1-scores were calculated after matching the lines identified in both datasets. We used three different matching strategies: stringent matching, loose matching, and matching based on line numbers, controlling for overfitting.Results: Overall, the two new approaches outperformed the simpler and best performing of the two existing methods, with F1-scores of 0.47 and 0.45 vs 0.44 for stringent matching and 0.84 and 0.83 vs 0.82 for loose matching. Nevertheless, only one of the new methods outperformed the existing simpler method when matching on the number of lines (0.73 vs 0.72). Large differences were seen by cancer site, especially for the stringent and line number matchings. Performances were relatively stable by calendar year.Conclusion: The high F1-scores for the new methods confirm that they should be generally preferred to reconstruct systemic anticancer treatment trajectories using the DNPR.Keywords: anticancer treatment, epidemiology, patient trajectory, Danish National Patient Register, treatment lin