SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

Front. Pharmacol., 13 June 2023

Sec. Drugs Outcomes Research and Policies

Volume 14 - 2023 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2023.1137983

Identification of cardiotoxicity related to non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatments: A systematic review

  • 1. School of Life and Medical Sciences, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, United Kingdom

  • 2. IQVIA UK, London, United Kingdom

  • 3. PEPI Consultancy Limited, Southampton, United Kingdom

  • 4. University of Keele, Keele, United Kingdom

Abstract

Introduction: In the last few decades, there has been a rapid development in cancer therapies and improved detection strategies, hence the death rates caused by cancer have decreased. However, it has been reported that cardiovascular disease has become the second leading cause of long-term morbidity and fatality among cancer survivors. Cardiotoxicity from anticancer drugs affects the heart’s function and structure and can occur during any stage of the cancer treatments, which leads to the development of cardiovascular disease.

Objectives: To investigate the association between anticancer drugs for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and cardiotoxicity as to whether: different classes of anticancer drugs demonstrate different cardiotoxicity potentials; different dosages of the same drug in initial treatment affect the degree of cardiotoxicity; and accumulated dosage and/or duration of treatments affect the degree of cardiotoxicity.

Methods: This systematic review included studies involving patients over 18 years old with NSCLC and excluded studies in which patients’ treatments involve radiotherapy only. Electronic databases and registers including Cochrane Library, National Cancer Institute (NCI) Database, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and the European Union Clinical Trials Register were systematically searched from the earliest available date up until November 2020. A full version protocol of this systematic review (CRD42020191760) had been published on PROSPERO.

Results: A total of 1785 records were identified using specific search terms through the databases and registers; 74 eligible studies were included for data extraction. Based on data extracted from the included studies, anticancer drugs for NSCLC that are associated with cardiovascular events include bevacizumab, carboplatin, cisplatin, crizotinib, docetaxel, erlotinib, gemcitabine and paclitaxel. Hypertension was the most reported cardiotoxicity as 30 studies documented this cardiovascular adverse event. Other reported treatment-related cardiotoxicities include arrhythmias, atrial fibrillation, bradycardia, cardiac arrest, cardiac failure, coronary artery disease, heart failure, ischemia, left ventricular dysfunction, myocardial infarction, palpitations, and tachycardia.

Conclusion: The findings of this systematic review have provided a better understanding of the possible association between cardiotoxicities and anticancer drugs for NSCLC. Whilst variation is observed across different drug classes, the lack of information available on cardiac monitoring can result in underestimation of this association.

Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020191760, identifier PROSPERO CRD42020191760.

1 Introduction

The WHO’s Global Health Estimates reported that lung cancer and heart diseases are two of the major causes of death in the world (World Health Organization, 2020). Due to drug development in cancer therapies and early detection strategies, death rates from cancer have decreased over the last 30 years (Jemal et al., 2010; 2005; Howlader et al., 2010). However, even though survival rates have improved, cardiovascular (CV) disease has become the second leading cause of long-term morbidity and fatality among cancer survivors (; ). Therefore, the risk of cardiotoxicity is one of the major limitations of oncology drug development, due to drug-induced cardiotoxic complications ().

According to the GLOBOCAN 2020 database released by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), it was estimated that there were 19.3 million new cancer cases and 10 million cancer deaths worldwide in 2020 alone (). In recent years, there has been a breakthrough in the development of novel targeted oncology drugs. According to the Global Oncology Trends 2021, 17 new oncology therapeutic drugs were launched in 2020 alone for 22 different applications with capmatinib being the first therapy approved for targeting metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) exon 14 skipping while both pralsetinib and selpercatinib approved for rearranged during transfection (RET)-altered NSCLC (IQVIA, 2021).

Cardio-oncology is a field that focuses on the CV diseases in cancer patients and addresses the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of cardiotoxicity brought about by oncology drugs or radiotherapy. Chemotherapy aims to destroy the maximum number of tumour cells with minimal damage to other healthy tissues. However, this can be difficult to achieve due to the non-selectivity of chemotherapeutics (). Cardiotoxicity can occur during any stage of the cancer treatments and it includes, but is not limited to, subclinical myocardial toxicity, ischemia, hypertension, supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias, systolic and diastolic cardiac dysfunction, coronary artery disease and heart failure (Hahn et al., 2014; ; ). Cardiotoxicity was first observed in 1967 in treating leukaemia patients with daunomycin (a type of anthracycline) (Tan et al., 1967). More reports on cardiotoxicity induced by anthracycline emerged in the early 1970s. Thereafter, there has been an increasing number of reports of cardiotoxicity induced by different oncology drugs, e.g., trastuzumab, cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide (Gollerkeri et al., 2001; Moslehi, 2016).

Cardiotoxicity can be generally defined in two ways, according to time of onset or mechanisms. Based on the time cardiotoxicity occurs after receiving chemotherapy, it can be divided into acute (during and up to 2 weeks after chemotherapy), subacute (2–4 weeks after chemotherapy) and chronic (more than 4 weeks after the completion of course) (). Chronic cardiotoxicity can be further divided into two types: early onset (cardiotoxicity developing within the first year after chemotherapy); and late onset (cardiotoxicity developing years after the completion of chemotherapy). Initially, there are two types of cardiotoxicity when categorised by mechanisms—Type I is often caused by anthracyclines and chemotherapeutics, of irreversible cardiac cells death and is related to cumulative dosage; while Type II is usually caused by biological or target therapy, of reversible cells dysfunction and is not dose related (). Although Type I versus Type II cardiotoxicity was originally described, increasingly more nuanced mechanisms and types of cardiotoxicity have been identified (Tocchetti et al., 2019).

Existing studies suggested that different oncology drugs, even within the same class of drugs, demonstrate different cardiotoxicity potential (Kerkelä et al., 2006; Santoni et al., 2017; Shah et al., 2018). For instance, by blocking the activity of tyrosine kinase, nintedanib prevents the formation of collagen and other extracellular matrix components in the heart, which can lead to cardiotoxicity. In addition, nintedanib may also act directly on the heart, leading to cardiotoxicity. It is believed that the drug can increase the activity of the Na+/K+-ATPase enzyme, which can lead to a decrease in cardiac output. This decrease in cardiac output can lead to arrhythmias, myocardial infarction, decreased contractility, and even heart failure (). Both sunitinib and sorafenib are in the same class as nintedanib, but they are believed to induce vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFR) inhibition, which lead to a decreased production of the vasorelaxant nitric oxide by endothelial cells, thus resulting in hypertension (Wu et al., 2008; León-Mateos et al., 2015).

There are many studies on complications, including cardiotoxicity, relating to thoracic surgery and radiotherapy complications, however there is much less research on the clinical and prognostic impact of toxicity of systemic therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (Zaborowska-Szmit et al., 2020). Therefore, this systematic review aimed to investigate associations between oncology drugs used in the treatment of NSCLC and cardiotoxicity. It also investigated whether different classes of drugs, e.g., anthracyclines, alkylating agents, angiogenesis inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), and monoclonal antibodies, demonstrate different cardiotoxicity potential. In addition, it aimed to examine whether different dosages of the same drug in initial treatment affect the degree of cardiotoxicities and whether accumulated dosage and/or duration of treatments affect the degree of cardiotoxicities.

2 Methods

This systematic review followed the guideline recommended in the ‘Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis’ 2020 statement (Page et al., 2021a; Page et al., 2021b). A full version protocol of this systematic review has been published on PROSPERO (CRD42020191760) ().

2.1 Search strategy

Electronic databases including Cochrane Library, National Cancer Institute (NCI) Database, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science were searched for articles reporting clinical trials of cytotoxic drugs where cardiotoxicity was being observed in NSCLC patients. ClinicalTrials.gov and the European Union (EU) Clinical Trials Register were also used to search for recently completed trials. The reference lists of retrieved papers were also hand-searched. All databases and registers were searched from the earliest available date up until November 2020. This time frame was chosen given cardiotoxicity was first observed in 1967 with the use of daunomycin in leukaemia patients (Tan et al., 1967) and more reports on cardiotoxicity induced by anthracyclines emerged in the early 1970s. In addition, from 1997 onwards, there has been a rapid development in targeted treatments and immunotherapies.

Two reviewers (SHYC and YK) independently screened all the articles according to the eligibility criteria until the final list of articles to be reviewed was identified. SHYC and YK independently reviewed all final set of identified articles meeting the eligibility criteria. SHYC extracted all data using the agreed template. SS acted as an adjudicator when there was discrepancy between the two independent reviewers.

2.2 Eligibility criteria

This review included studies of patients of ≥18 years old with NSCLC and excluded studies of participants whose treatments involved multiple cancers or radiotherapy only. Only completed clinical trials including at least two arms were included. Other types of studies and reports, e.g., observational studies and conference abstracts were excluded. Observational studies were excluded as they are more prone to bias and confounding associated with their study design than that of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Participants and/or studies without dosage details and duration of treatments were also excluded. Only records reported in English were included.

2.3 Search term

(“non-small cell lung cancer”) AND (“chemotherapy” OR “targeted therapy” OR “immunotherapy” OR “cancer treatment” OR “systemic anticancer therapy” OR “anticancer”) AND (“cardiac adverse events” OR “cardiovascular events” OR “cardiotoxicity” OR “drug-related side effects and adverse reactions”).

2.4 Data extraction

The standardised data extraction tool from Cochrane Collaboration’s Tool was adopted for data extraction. Data items were collected under three main areas—setting, participants and outcome.

Setting—“Title of Paper”, “Name of Authors”, “Publication Year”, “Reporting Country”, “Aim of Study”, “Primary Objective”, “Secondary Objectives”, “Study Design”, “Unit of Allocation”, “Enrolment Start Date”, “Enrolment End Date”, “Follow-Up End Date”, “Ethics Approval”, “Clinical Trial Identifier/Registration Number”.

Participants—“Population Description”, “Inclusion Criteria”, “Exclusion Criteria’, “Informed Consent”, “Method of Recruitment”, “Total Number of Cluster Groups, “Total Number of Participants”, “Age”, “Sex”, “Severity of Illness”, “Co-Morbidities”, “Subgroups Measured”, “Name of NSCLC Drug”, “Mode of Administration”, “Dosage Details”, “Duration of Treatment”, “Frequency of Treatment” and “Delivery of Treatment”.

Outcome—“Overall Incidence of Cardiotoxicity”, “Type of Cardiotoxicity”, “Incidence of Each Type of Cardiotoxicity” and “Key Conclusion from Authors”.

Data items were repeatedly collected for each individual placebo or treatment arm where relevant. All data items were input into Microsoft Excel®, where each row represented one publication. If certain data items were not available within the publication, then the data and results listed under its corresponding clinical trial identifier were cross-checked to complete the data extraction.

2.5 Risk of bias in individual studies

The risk of bias assessment in individual studies was carried out according to the guideline listed in Chapter 8 of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Higgins et al., 2022).

The following criteria were assessed –

  • – Allocation bias: Allocation concealment

  • – Attrition bias: Incomplete outcome data

  • –Performance and detection bias: Blinding of participants, Blinding of outcome assessors

  • – Reporting bias: Selective reporting

  • – Selection bias: Random sequence generation

3 Results

3.1 Results of literature search

A total of 1785 records were identified from the seven databases and registers using the search term listed in ‘Methods’. This search time frame (earliest available date up until November 2020) was used in order to maximise the records identified as cardiotoxicity was first observed in 1967 in treating leukaemia patients with daunomycin and more reports on cardiotoxicity induced by anthracycline emerged in the early 1970s. A PRISMA 2020 flow diagram explaining the selection process for this systematic review is presented in Figure 1. A total number of 74 eligible studies were included for data extraction. A summary of the study design, patient population and NSCLC drugs used for all publication is listed in Table 1. Treatment details and patients’ characteristics of each eligible study are available in Supplementary Material S1. Table 2 demonstrates the types of cardiotoxicities and their corresponding number of occurrences reported per publication.

FIGURE 1

TABLE 1

References (publication year)Clinical trial identifierReporting countryStudy designTotal number of cluster groupsTotal number of patientsAge, median (range)Sex (M/F)Severity of Illness/NSCLC stageCo-morbiditiesSubgroups measuredDrugs involved
Mizugaki et al. (2015)NCT01617928JapanOpen-label, Phase I Study31267 (44–73 years old)10M 2FStage IIIIB, Stage IV, Postoperative recurrenceSmoker statusDoseCarboplatin, Paclitaxel, Veliparib
Huang et al. (2020)NCT03201146ChinaPhase I Study31253.4 (42.2–63.4 years old)7M
5F
Stage IVA,
Stage IVB
Smoker statusDoseApatinib, Carboplatin, Pemetrexed
Sebastian et al. (2019)N/AGermany & SwitzerlandProspective, multicenter, open-label, uncontrolled phase I/IIa trial44664.7 (SD: 10.2)29M
1 7F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVN/ADoseCV9201 (generated using proprietary RNActive® Technology)
Novello et al. (2014a)NCT01086254Italy, France, Germany, Spain, United KingdomPhase II, randomized, open-label, non-comparative study211958.7 (29–73 years old)90M 29FStage I,
Stage III,
Stage IV
Smoker statusN/ACisplatin, Iniparib, Gemcitabine
N/AItalyPhase II, randomized Study211772.5 (54–81 years old)98M 19FStage IIIB,
Stage IV
N/AInfusion DurationChemotherapy, Gemcitabine
Srinivasa et al. (2020)N/AIndiaRandomized prospective study23657 (45–65 years old)33M 3FStage IIIA, Stage IIIBN/AN/ACarboplatin, Cisplatin, Etoposide, Paclitaxel
Yoshioka et al. (2017)NCT01207011JapanRandomized, open-label, phase III trial219720–75 years old135M
62F
Stage IIIIB, Stage IV, Postoperative recurrenceSmoker statusN/AAmrubicin, Docetaxel
Johnson et al. (2013)NCT00257608United StatesRandomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase IIIB Trial274364 (23–88 years old)389M, 354FStage IIIB, Stage IV, RecurrentSmoker StatusN/ABevacizumab, Erlotinib
(Chemotherapy prior to trial)
MEK114653 (EU Clinicals Register)France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, South Korea, Spain, United StatesPhase II, Open-label, Multicenter, Randomized Study2134 (4 drop out)61.2 (18–64 years old)69M, 65FStage IIIB, Stage IVN/ACrossover PhaseDocetaxel, GSK1120212
Gridelli et al. (2001)N/AItalyPilot Single-Stage Phase II Study29874 (70–82 years old)83M,
15F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVN/AN/AGemcitabine, Vinorelbine
Martoni et al. (1991)N/AItalyPhase I Trial42460 (36–68 years old)24M,
0F
Stage IIIB,
Stage IV
N/ADose,
LVEF values
Epirubicin
Sequist et al. (2013),Wu et al. (2018)NCT00949650 (LL3)Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Peru, Philippines, Romania, Russia, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United StatesGlobal, randomized, open-label phase III study234560.3 (S.D. 10.1 years old)121M, 224FStage IIIB,
Stage IV
Smoker StatusN/AAfatinib,
Cisplatin, Pemetrexed
NCT01121393China, South Korea, ThailandRandomized, Open-label, Phase III Study236456.4 (SD: 10.9)126M, 238FStage IIIB,
Stage IV
Smoker StatusN/AAfatinib (BIBW2992), Cisplatin, Gemcitabine
NCT01466660Australia, Canada, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Ireland, Norway, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, United KingdomRandomised, Open-label Phase IIB Trial231962.4 (SD: 11.0)122M, 197FStage IIIB,
Stage IV
Smoker StatusN/AAfatinib, Gefitinib
Hida et al. (2017)JapicCTI-132316 (Japan Pharmaceutical Information Centre)JapanPhase III, Open-label, Multicenter, Randomised Trial220760.2 (25–85 years old)82M,
125F
Stage IIIIB, Stage IV, Postoperative recurrenceSmoker StatusN/AAlectinib, Crizotinib
NCT00622349Belgium, France, Greece, SpainPhase III Trial369358 (28–84 years old)523M,170FStage IIB, Stage IIIA, Stage IIIB, Stage IVN/AN/ACisplatin, Docetaxel, Gemcitabine, Ifosfamide
NCT01362296France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, South Korea, Spain, United StatesPhase II, Open-label, Multicenter, Randomised Trial213461.2 (SD: 9.32)69M,
65F
Stage IVSmoker StatusN/ADocetaxel,
GSK1120212 (Trametinib)
Martoni et al. (1999)N/AItalyPilot Study221261 (42–72 years old)179M, 33FStage IIIA, Stage IIIB, Stage IV, RecurrenceN/AN/AEpirubicin, cisplatinum, vinorelbine
Reck et al. (2015)NCT00805194Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, India, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, Ukraine, United KingdomRandomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase III trial2131459.8955M,
359F
<Stage IIIB,
Stage IIIB,
Stage IV
Smoker StatusN/ADocetaxel, Nintedanib
Saito et al. (2003)N/AJapanParallel22561.8 (40–79 years old)16M,
9F
Stage III,
Stage IV
N/ALVEFCarboplatin, Docetaxel,
Paclitaxel
NCT02395172Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Mexico, Peru, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, United Kingdom, and United StatesOpen-label, multicentre, randomised Phase III trial279263.5 (57–69 years old)542M
250F
Stage IIIB,
Stage IV,
Recurrent
NSCLC with disease progression after previous platinum doublet treatment>
Smoker StatusN/AAvelumab, Docetaxel
NCT02737501Australia, Austria, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, South Korea, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, United Kingdom, United StatesOpen-label, multicenter, randomized, international, Phase III trial227559 (27–89 years old)125M
150F
Stage IIIB,
Stage IV
Smoker StatusN/ABrigatinib, Crizotinib
Wachters et al. (2004)N/ANetherlandsRandomised phase III trial26961 (43–76 years old)49M
20F
Stage IIIA,
Stage IIIB
Stage IV
N/ALVEFCisplatin, Epirubicin, Gemcitabine
Shaw et al. (2013)NCT00932893Australia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, China, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Poland, Russian Federation, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, United Kingdom, United StatesPhase 3, Randomized, Open-label Study234750 (22–85 years old)154M 193FAdvancedSmoker StatusN/ACrizotinib (PF-02341066), Docetaxel,
Pemetrexed
Solomon et al. (2014)NCT01154140Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Portugal, Russian Federation, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United StatesPhase 3, Randomized, Open-label Study234353 (19–78 years old)131M
212F
AdvancedSmoker StatusN/ACrizotinib, Carboplatin, Cisplatin, Pemetrexed
N/AUnited StatesA Phase III Study357461.8365M
209F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVN/ADoseCisplain,
Etoposide,
Paclitaxel
Zatloukal et al. (2004)N/ACzech RepublicProspective, randomized open, parallel group study210261.5 (42–75 years old)69M
33F
Stage IIIA,
Stage IIIB
N/AN/ACisplatin, Vinorelbine
Zarogoulidis et al. (2013)N/AGreeceFour-arm Phase III Trial422962.5187M
37F
Stage IIIB,
Stage IV
Smoker StatusN/ABevacizumab,
Carboplatin, Docetaxel, Erlotinib
Koch et al. (2011)NCT00300729SwedenDouble-blind, placebo-controlled multicentre Phase III Trial231665.5 (37–85 years old)160M
156F
Stage IIIB,
Stage IV
Smoker StatusN/ACelecoxib,
Chemotherapy (carboplatin/cisplatin/gemcitabine/vinorelbine)
NCT01503385ChinaA Phase II Randomized Clinical Trial2966073M
23F
Stage IIIA,
Stage IIIB
Smoker StatusN/ACelecoxib, Cisplatin,
Etoposide
Herbst et al. (2011)NCT0013072812 countries including United StatesDouble-blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomised Phase 3 trial263664.9341M
295F
N/ASmoker StatusN/ABevacizumab, Erlotinib
Kato et al. (2018); Seto et al. (2014)JapicCTI-111390 (Japan Pharmaceutical Information Centre)JapanOpen-label, randomised, multicentre, Phase II Study215267 (59–73 years old)56M
96F
Stage IIIB
Stage IV,
Postoperative recurrence
Smoker StatusN/ABevacizumab, Erlotinib
National Cancer Institute. (2019)NCT00126581United StatesA Phase II Randomized, Open label Study218159 (32–81 years old)74M
107F
Stage III,
Stage IV
Smoker StatusN/ACarboplatin,
Erlotinib, Paclitaxel
Stathopoulos et al. (2004)N/AGreeceMulticenter, randomized, phase III trial236065 (30–84 years old)312M
48F
Stage IIIA,
Stage IIIB, Stage IV
N/AN/ACarboplatin, Paclitaxel, Vinorelbine
Valdivieso et al. (1984)N/AUnited StatesProspective, randomised study210056.5 (33–78 years old)79M
21F
N/ABiopsyWeekly VS. once every 3 weeks doxorubicinCisplatin, Cyclo-phosphamide, Doxorubicin, Ftorafur
NCT00693992United StatesRandomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial221064.9 (25–89 years old)117M
93F
Stage IIIB,
Stage IV
Smoker StatusN/AChemotherapy, Sunitinib
Paz-Ares et al. (2015)NCT00863746Argentina, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Netherlands, Pakistan, Peru, Phillippines, Poland, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, United Kingdom, United StatesPhase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial2703≥18 years old395M
308F
N/ASmoker StatusN/ABest supportive care, Sorafenib
Novello et al. (2014b)NCT0046031732 countries including Italy, Germany, Romania, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United StatesPhase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, doubleblind study236060.8 (31–81 years old)295M
65F
Stage IIIB,
Stage IV
Smoker StatusN/ACarboplatin, Paclitaxel, Motesanib
NCT02151981Australia, Canada, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Hungary Italy, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, Russia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, United Kingdom, United StatesRandomized, open-label, phase III clinical trial241962.5 (20–90 years old)150M
269F
N/ASmoker StatusN/ACarboplatin, Cisplatin, Pemetrexed, Osimertinib
Kosmidis et al. (2008)N/AGreecePhase III Study245263 (36–83 years old)378M
74F
Stage IIIB,
Stage IV
N/AN/ACarboplatin, Paclitaxel,
Gemcitabine
Reinmuth et al. (2019)NCT02364999Australia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, Croatia, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Netherlands, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, United StatesMultinational, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study271961.5 (25–87 years old)467M
252F
Stage IIIB, Stage IV, RecurrentSmoker StatusN/ABevacizumab, Carboplatin, Paclitaxel,
PF-06439535
NCT00094835United StatesMulticenter, Open-label, Dose-finding, Phase IB study of motesanib34561.3 (32–79 years old)29M
16F
Stage IIIB,
Stage IV
Smoker StatusN/ACarboplatin, Paclitaxel,
Panitumumab, Motesanib
NCT00482014India, United StatesOpen-label, Randomised Trial29863.6 (43.7–85.2 years old)61M
37F
Stage IIIA,
Stage IIIB
N/AN/ACarboplatin,
Cisplatin
Pemetrexed
William et al. (2007)N/AUnited StatesOpen-label, Phase I, Dose-escalationStudy42152 (38–71 years old)13M
8F
Stage IVN/ADoseCisplatin, Docetaxel, Motexafin gadolinium
N/AUnited StatesPhase II Study310361.3 (31–85 years old)70M
33F
Stage IVN/AN/AMerbarone, Piroxantrone, Taxol
Kubota et al. (2017)JapicCTI-121887 (Japan Primary Registries Network)Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, TaiwanPhase III, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-blind Study240165 (Upper Quartile: 58; Lower Quartile: 70)288M
113F
Stage IV, RecurrentSmoker StatusN/ACarboplatin, Motesanib, Paclitaxel
Zinner et al. (2015)NCT00948675United StatesMulticenter, Randomized, Open-label, US-only Phase III Trial236165.6 (38.4–86.2 years old)209M
152F
Stage IVSmoker StatusN/ABevacizumab, Carboplatin, Paclitaxel Pemetrexed
Heigener et al. (2013)NCT00160069GermanyProspective, Multicenter, Phase II study31286383M
45F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVN/ADose, Duration of InfusionSagopilone
Jie Wang et al. (2018)N/AChinaRandomised Controlled Trial2128No mean/median (36–76 years old)96M
32F
N/AN/AN/ACisplatin, Endostar, Pemetrexed
NCT01469000China, Japan, South Korea, TaiwanMulticenter, Randomized, open-label, parallel-arm, phase II study219161.71 (S.D.: 9.38)68M
123F
Stage IVN/AN/AGefitinib, Pemetrexed
N/ABelgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, United StatesRandomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Phase II Feasibility Study27561.456M
19F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVN/AN/ABMS-275291, Carboplatin, Paclitaxel
N/ACanada, United StatesMulticenter, Open-label, Randomized Phase II study213166 (35–84 years old)58M
73F
Stage IIIB
Stage IV, Recurrent
N/AN/ACarboplatin, Cisplatin, Cetuximab, Gemcitabine
UMIN000008771 (University Hospital Medical Information Network)JapanRandomised Phase II Study24078 (75–83 years old)23M
17F
Stage IIIB,
Stage IV,
Postoperative recurrence
Smoker StatusN/ABevacizumab,
Pemetrexed
Passardi et al. (2008)N/AItalyRandomized Phase II Trial28163 (35–77 years old)65M
16F
Stage IVN/AN/ADocetaxel,
Gemcitabine
N/ACanada, Italy, Germany, Netherlands, United KingdomRandomized, Open-label, Phase II study210158.5 (35–76 years old)63M
38F
Stage IB,
Stage IIIB, Stage IV
N/AN/ACisplatin, Gemcitabine, Trastuzumab
Park et al. (2017)NCT01282151South KoreaOpen-label, Multicenter Prospective Phase III Study214863.3103M
45F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVSmoker StatusN/ACisplatin, Docetaxel, Pemetrexed
Movsas et al. (2005)N/ACanada, United StatesRandomised Trial2242≥18 years old150M
92F
Stage IIA, Stage IIB, Stage IIIA, Stage IIIBN/AN/AAmifostine, Carboplatin, Paclitaxel
Jänne et al. (2014)N/ACanada, Germany, Spain, United StatesRandomized, Double-Blind, Phase II Trial320061.4 (27.8–87.8 years old)127M
68F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVSmoker StatusDoseCisplatin, Gemcitabine, LY293111
Groen et al. (2011)N/ANetherlandsRandomized, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Study256161 (33–84 years old)355M
206F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVN/AN/ACarboplatin, Celecoxib, Docetaxel
NCT01395914Australia, Belarus, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Poland, Russia, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, UkraineDouble-blind, safety extension Phase III Study251362.0387M
126F
Stage IIIA,
Stage IIIB, Stage IV
N/AN/AAnamorelin, Placebo
Langer et al. (2017)NCT00789373Australia, Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, India, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Turkey, United KingdomPhase 3, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study293961.3 (24.4–83.0 years old)577M
362F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVSmoker StatusN/ACisplatin, Pemetrexed, Placebo
Kotsakis et al. (2015)NCT00620971GreeceA Multicenter, Randomized, Phase II study27759 (36–77 years old)57M
20F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVSmoker StatusN/ABevacizumab, Cisplatin, Docetaxel, Gemcitabine, Vinorelbine
NCT00112294United StatesA Phase III, Randomised, Open Label Study267664 (S.D.: 10.2)396M
280F
N/AN/AN/ACarboplatin, Cetuximab, Taxane (Paclitaxel/Docetaxel)
GlaxoSmithKline (2019)NCT01868022Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, Russia, Spain, United Kingdom, United StatesMulti-arm, Non-randomized, Open-Label Phase IB Study96566.52 (S.D.: 3.08)52M
13F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVN/ADoseCarboplatin, Cisplatin,
Docetaxel, GSK3052230, Paclitaxel, Pemetrexed
Lara et al. (2016)N/AUnited StatesRandomised, Phase II Selection Design Trial25973.1 (40.9–85.9 years old)24M
35F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVSmoker StatusN/ACarboplatin, Erlotinib, Paclitaxel
Wu et al. (2020)NCT01982955China, Italy, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea Spain, TaiwanOpen-label, randomized, Phase 1b/2 study588N/A36M
52F
AdvancedN/AN/ACarboplatin, Cisplatin, Gefitinib, Pemetrexed,
Tepotinib,
Umsawasdi et al. (1989)N/AN/ARandomised Study210256.5 (33–78 years old)71M
31F
Stage IIIN/AN/ACisplatin, Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin
NCT01763671FranceDouble-arm, Randomised, Open-label, Multicentre, Phase III Clinical Trial216659.7 (18.6–81.8 years old)120M
46F
Stage III, Stage IVSmoker StatusN/ABevacizumab, Docetaxel, Paclitaxel
NCT01933932Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Mexico, Netherlands, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United StatesA Phase III, Double-Blind, Randomised, Placebo-Controlled Study251061.4 (S.D.: 8.3)303M
207F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVN/AN/ADocetaxel, Selumetinib
Johnson et al. (2004)N/AUnited StatesRandomized Phase II Study399≥18 years old60M
39F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVN/ADoseBevacizumab, Carboplatin, Paclitaxel
NCT00981058Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Croatia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, South Korea, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Taiwan, Thailand, United Kingdom, United StatesMultinational, Randomized, Multicenter, Open-label, Phase III Study2109362 (32–86 years old)908M
185F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVSmoker StatusN/ACisplatin, Gemcitabine, Necitumumab
NCT00982111Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Croatia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, United Kingdom, United StatesMultinational, Randomized, Multicenter, Open-label Phase III Study263361 (26–88 years old)424M
209F
Stage IIIB, Stage IVSmoker StatusN/ACisplatin, Pemetrexed, Necitumumab
NCT01769391Germany, South Korea, Mexico, Poland, Russia, United StatesRandomized, Multicenter, Open-Label, Phase II Study216765.3131M
36F
Stage IVN/AN/ACarboplatin, Paclitaxel, Necitumumab

Summary of the study design, patient population and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) drug used for each publication.

TABLE 2

References (publication year)Drug combinationDose escalation studyArrhythmiaCardiac arrestCardiac failureCardiotoxicity (Grade 1–4)HypertensionHypotensionIschaemiaMyocardial infarctionPalpitationsPericardial effusionThromboembolic event (both arterial/venous)Other cardiovascular event
Arrhythmia (general)Atrial/Supra-ventricular arrhythmiaVentricular arrhythmia
Atrial fibrillationAtrial flutterBradycardiaTachycardiaQT prolongation
Mizugaki et al. (2015)Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, VeliparibV-40 mg0
V-80 mg2
V-120 mg0
Huang et al. (2020)Apatinib, Carboplatin, PemetrexedA-750 mg2
A-500 mg2
A-500 mg 2/1 (500 mg/day 2 weeks on 1 week off)1
Sebastian et al. (2019)CV9201CI - 400 μg0
CII - 800 μg0
CIII - 1600 μg0
Phase IIA - 1600 μg1
Novello et al. (2014a)Cisplatin, Iniparib, GemcitabineGC9
GCI12
Chemotherapy, GemcitabineStandard 50 mg/min16
Low 10 mg/min11
Srinivasa et al. (2020)Carboplatin, Cisplatin, Etoposide, PaclitaxelCis-Etop0
Car-Pac0
Yoshioka et al. (2017)Amrubicin, DocetaxelAmrubicin1121Ventricular extrasystole: 2
Cardiac tamponade: 1
Docetaxel0000
Johnson et al. (2013)Bevacizumab, Erlotinib (CT prior to trial)Bev-Plac3185
Bev-Erlo2988
Gridelli et al. (2001)Gemcitabine, VinorelbineGem0
Gem-Vin6
Martoni et al. (1991)Epirubicin120EpiLVEF value decrease
135Epi
150Epi
165Epi1
Sequist et al. (2013),Wu et al. (2018)Afatinib, Cisplatin, PemetrexedAfatinib0141011Mitral valve incompetence: 1
Pemetrexed/Cisplatin Chemotherapy1140102
Afatinib, Cisplatin, GemcitabineAfatinib00
Cisplatin, Gemcitabine Chemotherapy11
Afatinib, GefitinibAfatinib0021Acute coronary syndrome: 1
Angina pectoris: 1
Coronary heart disease: 1
Gefitinib1103Coronary heart disease: 1
Coronary artery occlusion: 1
Hida et al. (2017)Alectinib, CrizotinibAlectinib1
Crizotinib6
Cisplatin, Docetaxel, Gemcitabine, IfosfamideIG10
GIP8
DP20
; Docetaxel, GSK1120212 (Trametinib)Doc1
Tra13
Martoni et al. (1999)Epirubicin, Cisplatinum, VinorelbineHDEpi-Cis3>15% LVEF decrease: 9
Vin-Cis0>15% LVEF decrease: 3
Reck et al. (2015)Docetaxel, NintedanibDoc-Nin2322
Doc-Plac619
Saito et al. (2003)Carboplatin, Docetaxel, PaclitaxelCar-Doc4
Car-Pac2
Avelumab, DocetaxelAvelumab1Person with acute cardiac failure also suffered from autoimmune myocarditis
Docetaxel0Cardiovascular insufficiency: 1
Brigatinib, CrizotinibBrigatinib,7310
Crizotinib17108
Wachters et al. (2003)Cisplatin, Epirubicin, GemcitabineGem-Cis70
Gem-Epi211
Shaw et al. (2013)Crizotinib, Docetaxel, PemetrexedCriz190111Cardiac tamponade: 1
Coronary artery disease: 1
Syncope: 1
Doc-Pem001002Cardiac tamponade: 1
Solomon et al. (2014)Crizotinib, Carboplatin, Cisplatin, PemetrexedCriz133000Atrioventricular block: 1
Cardiac tamponade: 2
Pem-Car/Cis11111Pericarditis: 1
Syncope: 2
Cisplain, Etoposide, PaclitaxelCis-EtopFatal cardiac events: 1
Cis-250PacFatal cardiac events: 1
Cis-135PacFatal cardiac events: 4
*The six fatal Grade 5 cardiac events listed above were summarised overall instead of by treatment group - sudden death in 3 patients, myocardial infarction in 2 patients, and hypotension with acute pericarditis in 1 patient
Zatloukal et al. (2004)Cisplatin, VinorelbineCon1
Seq0
Zarogoulidis et al. (2013)Bevacizumab, Carboplatin, Docetaxel, ErlotinibCar-Doc2
Car-Doc-Erlo
Bev-Car-Doc3
Bev-Car-Doc-Erlo2
Koch et al. (2011)Celecoxib, Chemotherapy (carboplatin/cisplatin/gemcitabine/vinorelbine)Celecoxib217Cerebrovascular ischaemia: 4
Placebo112Cerebrovascular ischaemia: 1
Celecoxib, Cisplatin, EtoposideCE5
CE-Cele0
Herbst et al. (2011)Bevacizumab, ErlotinibErlo41
Erlo-Bev1512
Seto et al. (2014),Kato et al. (2018)Bevacizumab, ErlotinibErlo2113
Erlo-Bev1583
National Cancer Institute, (2019)Carboplatin, Erlotinib, PaclitaxelErlo11011800303
Erlo-Car-Pac101409612112
Stathopoulos et al. (2004)Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, VinorelbinePac-Car3
Pac-Vin6
Valdivieso et al. (1984)Cisplatin, Cyclo-phosphamide, Doxorubicin, FtorafurWeekly-Dox
Standard-Dox
* By an objective grading system of myocardial damage by endomyocardial biopsy, it was suggested that the weekly administration of doxorubicin was associated with lower cardiac toxicity than that of the standard/tri-weekly administration of doxorubicin
Chemotherapy, SunitinibCT-Placebo91
CT- Sunitinib270
Paz-Ares et al. (2015)Best supportive care, SorafenibBSC-Placebo16
BSC-Sorafenib68
Novello et al. (2014b)Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, MotesanibCar-Pac-Placebo152
Car-Pac-Mote473
Carboplatin, Cisplatin, Pemetrexed, OsimertinibOsim79
Plat (car/cis)-Pem10
Kosmidis et al. (2008)Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, GemcitabineGem-Pac2
Gem-Car1
Reinmuth et al. (2019)Bevacizumab, Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, PF-06439535Car-Pac-Bev33210Cardiac disorders: 12
Car-Pac-PF0643953513414Cardiac disorders: 10
Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, Panitumumab, MotesanibMote(E)-CP1010Conduction disorder: 1
Mote(E)-Pani116
Mote(125)-CP-Pani001
Carboplatin, Cisplatin, PemetrexedPem-Car2
Pem-Cis4
William et al. (2007)Cisplatin, Docetaxel, Motexafin gadoliniumMGd-2.500
MGd-511
MGd-1011
MGd-1520
Merbarone, Piroxantrone, TaxolMerba3
Piro1
Taxol4
Kubota et al. (2017)Carboplatin, Motesanib, PaclitaxelCar-Pac-Placebo29
Car-Pac-Mote86
Zinner et al. (2015)Bevacizumab, Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, PemetrexedCar-Pem00
Car-Bev-Pac414
Heigener et al. (2013)Chemotherapy, SagopiloneS-16,3 h0
S-22, 0.5 h1
S-22,3 h0
Jie Wang et al. (2018)Cisplatin, Endostar, PemetrexedCis-Pem40
Cis-Pem-Endostar54
Gefitinib, PemetrexedGef014010Angine pectoris: 0
Gef-Pem108111Angina pectoris: 1
BMS-275291, Carboplatin, PaclitaxelCar-Pac-Placebo0012
Car-Pac-BMS2752911101
Carboplatin, Cisplatin, Cetuximab, GemcitabineCar-Cis-Gem2
Car-Cis-Gem-Cet2
Bevacizumab, PemetrexedCT-Pem00
CT-Pem-Bev00
Passardi et al. (2008)Docetaxel, GemcitabineGem3,8-Doc10
Gem1,8-Doc81
Cisplatin, Gemcitabine, TrastuzumabCis-GemLVEF decrease >15%: 0
LVEF <30%: 0
Cis-Gem-TrasLVEF decrease >15%: 8
LVEF <30%: 0
Park et al. (2017)Cisplatin, Docetaxel, PemetrexedCis-Doc1
Cis-Pem2
Movsas et al. (2005)Amifostine, Carboplatin, PaclitaxelCar-Pac11
Car-Pac-Ami30
Jänne et al. (2014)Cisplatin, Gemcitabine, LY293111Cis-Gem-Placebo
Cis-Gem-200LYCardiorespiratory arrest: 1
Cis-Gem-600LY
Groen et al. (2011)Carboplatin, Celecoxib, DocetaxelCar-Doc0010Pulmonary embolism: 2
Car-Doc-Celeco1101Pulmonary embolism: 3
Anamorelin, PlaceboAnamorelin13Electrocardiogram:4
Ischemic Heart Disease: 4
Placebo4Electrocardiogram:7
Ischemic Heart Disease: 0
Langer et al. (2017)Cisplatin, Pemetrexed, PlaceboInduction: Cis-Pem11331233122Acute coronary syndrome: 1
Cardiac tamponade: 1
Cardio-respiratory arrest: 3
Diastolic dysfunction: 1
Pericarditis: 1
Maintenance: Pem10000001000Pericarditis: 2
Ventricular fibrillation: 1
Maintenance: Place00010000010
Kotsakis et al. (2015)Bevacizumab, Cisplatin, Docetaxel, Gemcitabine, VinorelbineVCB - > DGB0
DCB1
Carboplatin, Cetuximab, Taxane (Paclitaxel/Docetaxel)Tax-Car11173200215
Tax-Car-Cel160273391543Cardio-respiratory arrest: 2
GlaxoSmithKline (2019)Carboplatin, Cisplatin, Docetaxel, GSK3052230, Paclitaxel, Pemetrexed5GSK-Car-Pac000000000
10GSK-Car-Pac000000000
20GSK-Car-Pac001200001Cardiomegaly: 1
5GSK-Doc001001010Acute Coronary Syndrome: 1
Angina Pectoris: 1
10GSK-Doc000010000
20GSK-Doc100000000
10GSK-Cis-Pem010000100
15GSK-Cis-Pem000510100Conduction disorder: 1
20GSK-Cis-Pem001210000Conduction disorder: 1
Left ventricular hypertrophy: 1
Ventricular extrasystoles: 1
Lara et al. (2016)Carboplatin, Erlotinib, PaclitaxelErlo3
Erlo-Car-Pac3
Wu et al. (2020)Carboplatin, Cisplatin, Gefitinib, Pemetrexed, Tepotinib,1b-300Tep-Gef000
1b-500Tep-Gef111Cardiac discomfort: 1
2Neg-Tep-Gef000
2Neg-Pem-Car/Cis000
2Pos-Tep-Gef000Supraventricular extrasystoles: 1
Umsawasdi et al. (1989)Cisplatin, Cyclophosphamide, DoxorubicinWeekly-Dox
Triweekly-Dox
* Endomyocardial biopsies were done when a total cumulative doxorubicin dose of 300 or 480 mg/m2 was reached. Results showed an increase in cardiotoxicity with an increase dosage of doxorubicin, and that the weekly administration of doxorubicin was less toxic than that of the standard/tri-weekly administration of doxorubicin
Bevacizumab, Docetaxel, PaclitaxelBev-Pac22Ischaemic stroke leading to death: 1
Doc0
Docetaxel, SelumetinibDoc-Plac4010238054Cardiovascular insufficiency: 1
Cardiomegaly: 1
Doc-Selu5268 (1 is congestive)415107Bundle branch block left: 1
Coronary artery dissection: 1
Diastolic dysfunction: 1
Left Ventricular Dysfunction:1
Mitral valve imcopetence: 1
Pericarditis constrictive: 1
Johnson et al. (2004)Bevacizumab, Carboplatin, PaclitaxelCar-Pac13
Car-Pac-7.5Bev54
Car-Pac-15Bev66
Cisplatin, Gemcitabine, NecitumumabCis-Gem41004*01314Acute Coronary Syndrome: 1
Cardio-respiratory arrest: 1
Pericarditis: 1
* including 1 acute, 1 congestive
Cis-Gem-Nec30221*20409Cardiac Tamponade: 1
Cardio-respiratory arrest: 3
Coronary artery disease: 1
* including 1 congestive
Cisplatin, Pemetrexed, NecitumumabCis-Pem0201030122Angina pectoris: 1
Cardiomyopathy: 1
Cis-Pem-Nec1221217236Cardiac tamponade: 2
Cardio-respiratory arrest: 1
Cardiopulmonary failure: 1
Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, NecitumumabCar-Pac400701
Car-Pac-Nec411*1321* including 1 congestive

Types of cardiotoxicity and their corresponding number of frequencies reported per publication.

Remarks: All cardiovascular events with ≤3 studies reported are include in “others”.

Of the 74 eligible studies, 67 reported treatment emergent cardiovascular events, i.e., arrhythmias, atrial fibrillation, bradycardia, cardiac arrest, cardiac failure, coronary artery disease, heart failure, hypertension, ischemia, left ventricular dysfunction, myocardial infarction, palpitations, and tachycardia.

Based on data extracted from the included studies, anticancer drugs for NSCLC that are associated with cardiovascular events include bevacizumab, carboplatin, cisplatin, crizotinib, docetaxel, erlotinib, gemcitabine and paclitaxel.

3.2 Dose-related cardiotoxicity

As shown in Table 2, twelve studies reported the use of different or escalating dosages of anticancer drugs.

According to the study by Mizugaki et al., cardiotoxicity, i.e., hypertension, was observed only in the 80 mg veliparib cohort, but neither the 40 mg nor the 120 mg cohort, so it cannot be concluded that veliparib is associated with dose-related cardiotoxicity (Mizugaki et al., 2015).

In the study by Huang M, 2020, patients received oral apatinib combined with intravenous pemetrexed and intravenous carboplatin for 4 cycles. Pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) and carboplatin (AUC = 5) were given on day 1 of 21-day cycle. The incidence of hypertension of the cohort which received 500 mg of apatinib per day for 2 weeks and then 1 week off (16.7%) was lower than the other two cohorts which received 500 mg (66.7%) and 700 mg (66.7%) of apatinib per day for 3 weeks respectively (Huang et al., 2020). In the study by Huang M, 2020, patients received oral apatinib combined with intravenous pemetrexed and intravenous carboplatin for 4 cycles. Pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) and carboplatin (AUC = 5) were given on day 1 of 21-day cycle. The incidence of hypertension of the cohort which received 500 mg of apatinib per day for 2 weeks and then 1 week off (16.7%) was significantly lower than the other two cohorts which received 500 mg (66.7%) and 700 mg (66.7%) of apatinib per day for 3 weeks respectively.

For CV9201, no dose-limiting toxicity was found across the three cohorts (400 μg, 800 μg, 1600 µg) during the Phase I trial, so 1600 µg was chosen to be used for the Phase II trial. With a larger sample size (n = 37), it was reported that one patient suffered from atrial tachycardia, however this adverse event was considered unrelated to the treatment by the clinicians of this trial (Sebastian et al., 2019).

Although reported incidence of cardiotoxicity in Arm A (standard infusion duration 50 mg/min) and Arm B (low infusion duration 10 mg/min) were 28.5% and 18.1% respectively in the study by Cappuzzo et al., it was believed that only one event of cardiac stroke in Arm B was associated with gemcitabine ().

It was reported in Martoni et al. that 1 of the 3 patients in the cohort who initially received 165 mg/m2 dose and later continued the treatment at the reduced dose of 150 mg/m2, suffered from severe leukopenia, hypotension and fever after the third course. The patient later died 8 days after the epirubicin dose, which was believed to be caused by septic shock (Martoni et al., 1991). Besides, treatments were discontinued for 4 patients out of the total 24 patients as their left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) values dropped by 14%, 20%, 25% and 31% at the cumulative doses of 240 mg/m2 (120Epi), 560 mg/m2 (120Epi), 300 mg/m2 (150Epi) and 516 mg/m2 (150Epi) respectively. Despite the drop of LVEF values, no patients experienced any clinical signs of cardiotoxicity either at that time or subsequently. Also, no systematic pattern was observed in decrease of LVEF values across cohorts of different dosage and accumulated dosage, so it cannot be concluded that whether certain single and/or accumulated dosage of epirubicin had possibly caused a decrease in LVEF values (Martoni et al., 1991).

In Bonomi et al., fatal cardiac events were observed in 0.5% (Cis-Etop), 0.5% (Cis-Pac-250) and 2% (Cis-Pac-135) patients respectively. The frequency of cardiotoxicity was significantly higher when using higher dose (250 mg/m2) of paclitaxel (p = 0.026) whereas that of lower dose (135 mg/m2) of paclitaxel was insignificant (p = 0.143). Grade 5 cardiac events were also observed in 6 patients, including 3 sudden deaths, 2 myocardial infarction and 1 hypotension with acute pericarditis. However, this data needs to be considered carefully as four of the above-mentioned patients had a history of cardiovascular disease—two patients suffered from coronary artery disease, one patient had hypertension and the remaining was previously treated for cardiac arrhythmia ().

A study published by Valdivieso et al., in 1984 demonstrated that the administration of weekly 20 mg/m2 of doxorubicin was associated with a lower incidence of cardiotoxicity than that of the standard regimen (every 3 weeks at 60 mg/m2 of doxorubicin) (Valdivieso et al., 1984). Cardiotoxicity was determined by an objective grading system of myocardial damage by endomyocardial biopsy. This study’s results aligned with previous studies which also suggested that the weekly treatment schedule was less cardiotoxic (Weiss et al., 1976; Weiss and Manthel, 1977). Due to the reduced risk of cardiotoxicity in weekly schedule of doxorubicin, it was suggested that the cardiotoxicity of doxorubicin was associated with its peak plasma levels (Valdivieso et al., 1984).

Dose-limiting cardiotoxicities were observed in the 10 mg/kg (day 1 only) and 7.5 mg/kg (day 1 and/or day 2) motexafin gadolinium cohorts in William Jr. et al. Four patients suffered from hypertension and two patients suffered from myocardial ischemia within the first 24 hours administration of motexafin gadolinium (William et al., 2007). For the two patients who suffered from myocardial ischaemia—one experienced chest pain during the infusion of cycle 2 docetaxel, while the other patient experienced dyspnea 5 hours after completion of chemotherapy. Cardiac enzyme elevations were observed in both patients; T-wave inversion on the electrocardiogram and non-specific ST segment alterations in the electrocardiogram was observed in respective patient (William et al., 2007).

In Heigener DF et al., one patient, who was treated with 22 mg/m2 sagopilone at 0.5 hour infusion every 3 weeks, suffered from cardiac failure. However, it was considered that this was not a dose-limiting factor and also non-related to the drug as this was a single case and the cause of death for other cases were also miscellaneous events (Heigener et al., 2013).

In Jänne. et al., it was reported that there was a treatment-related death caused by cardiorespiratory arrest, which was treated with 200 mg LY293111 with gemcitabine and cisplatin. However, no treatment-related cardiotoxicity was reported in the 600 mg LY293111 cohort (Jänne et al., 2014).

In a non-randomised, 9-arm, open label Phase IB clinical trial which evaluated anticancer activity of GSK3052230, three different combinations of drugs were used—1) GSK3052230 with carboplatin and paclitaxel, 2) GSK3052230 with docetaxel and 3) GSK3052230 with cisplatin and pemetrexed. For each combination, there were three arms which consisted of different dosages of GSK3052230, i.e., 5 mg/kg, 10 mg/kg and 20 mg/kg of GSK3052230 (GlaxoSmithKline, 2019). Counts of cardiotoxicity reported for each individual arm were shown in Table 2. As there was no systematic pattern of cardiotoxicity across arms, so it cannot be concluded that if there was dose-related cardiotoxicity associated with GSK3052230 (GlaxoSmithKline, 2019).

In a clinical trial conducted by Johnson. et al., carboplatin and paclitaxel were used as a control arm, and 2 arms consisted of different dosages of bevacizumab with carboplatin and paclitaxel were investigated. It was reported that higher dosage (15 mg/kg) of bevacizumab experienced a higher incidences of cardiotoxicity than that of 7.5 mg/kg of bevacizumab (Johnson et al., 2004).

3.3 Risk of bias assessment

Risk of bias assessment is important as it can provide insight of possible bias for each study, thus aiding the transparency of results and findings in this systematic review. Table 3 includes a summary of the risk of bias assessment of each individual study. Light gray (+) indicates low risk; dark gray (−) indicates high risk and medium gray (?) means unclear as there is not enough information to make a clear judgement.

TABLE 3

References (publication year)Random sequence generation (selection bias)Allocation concealment (selection bias)Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)Selective reporting (reporting bias)Other bias
Mizugaki et al. (2015)?++?
Huang et al. (2020)????++?
Sebastian et al. (2019)????++?
Novello et al. (2014a)?+??++?
????+?
Srinivasa et al. (2020)????++?
Yoshioka et al. (2017)+++?
Johnson et al. (2013)+++++++
?+??++?
Gridelli et al. (2001)++??++?
Martoni et al. (1991)??++?
Sequist et al. (2013),Wu et al. (2018)++++?
++++?
++++?
Hida et al. (2017)+++?
++??++?
+++++++
Martoni et al. (1999)++++?
Reck et al. (2015)??+?++?
Saito et al. (2003)????++?
++?++?
+???++?
Wachters et al. (2004)+???++?
Shaw et al. (2013)++?
Solomon et al. (2014)++?
+???++?
Zatloukal et al. (2004)+?++?
Zarogoulidis et al. (2013)+???++?
Koch et al. (2011)+++++++
++++?
Herbst et al. (2011)+++++++
Seto et al. (2014)+++++?
(National Cancer Institute (NCI), 2019)+++++++
Kato et al. (2018)+++++?
Stathopoulos et al. (2004)+??++?
Valdivieso et al. (1984)+???++?
+??++?
Paz-Ares et al. (2015)++?++?
Novello et al. (2014b)+++?++?
++++?
Kosmidis et al. (2008)++?++?
Reinmuth et al. (2019)+++?++?
??++?
+?++?
William et al. (2007)??++?
+???++?
Kubota et al. (2017)+++++?
Zinner et al. (2015)+??++?
Heigener et al. (2013)+?++?
Jie Wang et al. (2018)+???++?
+++++++
+?+?++?
++++?
+??+??
Passardi et al. (2008)+???+??
+??+??
Park et al. (2017)+???+??
Movsas et al. (2005)+++++++
Jänne et al. (2014)+???++?
Groen et al. (2011)+???+??
+?+++??
Langer et al. (2017)+???+??
Kotsakis et al. (2015)+?+??
+++++++
GlaxoSmithKline (2019)++++++
Lara et al. (2016)+??+??
Wu et al. (2020)+++++??
Umsawasdi et al. (1989)+??+??
++?++?
+++++++
Johnson et al. (2004)+++++?
+++++++
+++++++
+++++++

A summary of the risk of bias assessment of all eligible studies.

It was observed that for most publications, the risk of blinding of outcome assessment were unclear. Hence, there should be a more comprehend guideline for developing and reporting clinical trials, so to ensure clinical trials are conducted in a manner with as little bias as possible.

4 Discussion

Cardiotoxicity is a type of cardiovascular side effect caused by anticancer drugs used to treat NSCLC. This type of toxicity occurs when the anticancer drugs damage the heart or its surrounding structures, leading to a range of symptoms including arrhythmias, congestive heart failure, and high blood pressure. While the risk of cardiotoxicity is low in patients with early-stage NSCLC, it is higher in those with advanced or metastatic cancer. There are several factors that can increase the risk of cardiotoxicity in those receiving NSCLC treatments, such as age, pre-existing heart conditions, and the specific drug(s) used. Certain NSCLC drugs are more likely to cause cardiotoxicity than others, and certain combinations of drugs may also increase the risk. For example, traditional chemotherapy agents including gemcitabine, cisplatin, and carboplatin are all known to cause cardiotoxicity in some patients. With the rapid development of targeted therapies and immunotherapies, it was observed among the included eligible studies that a lot of treatments were still used in combination with conventional treatments, such as cisplatin, carboplatin, docetaxel and paclitaxel. Similar findings was reported by other literature, in which cytotoxic chemotherapies are still being used in ∼30% of cancer regiments (McGowan et al., 2017). Table 4 categorised all NSCLC drugs included in this systematic review by their therapeutic class, according to ATC/DDD Index 2022 (WHOCC, 2022).

TABLE 4

ChemotherapyTargeted TherapyImmunotherapy
AnthracyclinePlatinum CompoundAnaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK) InhibitorAngiogenesis InhibitorEpidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) InhibitorProgrammed cell death protein 1/death ligand 1 (PD-1/PDL-1) InhibitorEpidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Inhibitor
Amrubicin (L01DB10)Carboplatin (L01XA02)Alectinib (L01ED03)Nintedanib (L01EX09)Erlotinib (L01EB02)Avelumab (L01FF04)Cetuximab (L01FE01)
Epirubicin (L01DB03)Cisplatin (L01XA01)Brigatinib (L01ED04)Sorafenib (L01EX02)Gefitinib (L01EB01)Necitumumab (L01FE03)
Crizotinib (L01ED01)Sunitinib (L01EX01)Osimertinib (L01EB04)Panitumumab (L01FE02)
Alkylating AgentAnti-metabolite AgentCyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) InhibitorMitogen-activated protein kinase (MEK) inhibitorsPoly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitorHuman Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) InhibitormRNA-based
Ifosfamide (L01AA06)Gemcitabine (L01BC05 - Pyrimidine analogues)Celecoxib (L01XX33)Selumetinib (L01EE04)Veliparib (L01XK05)Trastuzumab (L01FD01)CV9201
Pemetrexed (L01BA04 – folic acid analogues)GSK1120212/ Trametinib (L01EE01)
Plant AlkaloidVascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGFR) Inhibitor
Docetaxel (L01CD02)Bevacizumab (L01FG01)
Etoposide (L01CB01)
Paclitaxel (L01CD01)
Vinorelbine (L01CA04)

Anticancer drugs included in this systematic review, categorised by therapeutic class.

Hypertension was observed in over 30 studies, making it the most reported cardiotoxicity. Hypertension is mostly acute and self-limited and is known to be one of the common non-hematologic adverse events of antiangiogenic agents (Li et al., 2013). This systematic review also found that other drug classes such as anti-microtubule agents, alkylating agents were associated with treatment-induced hypertension which aligns with findings by Chung et al. (). Hypertension was also observed with the combination use of cisplatin, docetaxel and motexafin gadolinium; they were normally observed within the first 24 hours administration of motexafin gadolinium, and subsided after receiving oral clonidine (William et al., 2007).

As most studies reported cardiotoxicity at aggregate level, it is unclear whether certain patient experienced more than one type of cardiotoxicity, therefore it cannot be determined to what extent hypertension could have potentially contributed to other cardiovascular diseases, such as ischaemia in individual patients. Hence, the lack of information available may result in overestimation of the association between NSCLC drugs and cardiotoxicity.

Anthracyclines are effective anticancer treatments, however, their benefits are often limited by possible fatal dose-dependent cardiotoxicity (Smith et al., 2010). Anthracyclines, such as doxorubicin, are believed to cause direct damage to the heart by inducing oxidative stress and direct damage to the cardiomyocytes (Zhang et al., 2012). According to an included study by Valdivieso et al., higher dose of doxorubicin leads to a higher incidence of cardiotoxicity (Valdivieso et al., 1984). This finding was supported by Swain et al., which suggested the incidence of heart failure after doxorubicin treatment increased with cumulative dose (Swain et al., 2003). An included study by Wachters et al., suggested that epirubicin caused a much higher incidence of cardiotoxicity than that of cisplatin (Wachters et al., 2004). In a study by Martoni et al., it was discovered that a higher dose of epirubicin was linked to a higher decrease in LVEF values, but no systematic pattern was observed in decrease of LVEF values across cohorts of different dosage and accumulated dosage, so it cannot be concluded that whether certain single and/or accumulated dosage of epirubicin possibly caused a decrease in LVEF values (Martoni et al., 1991). But this assumption can be supported by other studies, which concluded that epirubicin was associated with cumulative-dose cardiotoxicity (Wils et al., 1990; ; Smit et al., 1992). Others, such as daunorubicin, are believed to cause indirect damage to the heart by interfering with calcium homeostasis. One of the potential mechanisms of anthracycline cardiotoxicity is the inhibition of topoisomerase, which causes mitochondrial dysfunction, leading to the activation of cell death pathways and generation of reactive oxygen species (). Additionally, different anthracyclines may have different levels of cardiotoxicity due to the presence of different metabolites or active forms of the drug, which could also contribute to the different onset of cardiotoxicity. For anti-microtubule agents, mechanisms of onset of cardiotoxicity include interfering with the normal function of the heart’s cells, such as the contractility of the cells and the electrical conduction pathways; blocking the formation of new microtubules, which is necessary for the heart’s cells to divide and multiply; and direct damage to the heart tissue, leading to arrhythmias, heart failure, and other cardiotoxic effects (Zhang et al., 2019).

Cisplatin is a type of alkylating agents and is also a commonly used drug to treat NSCLC (Table 4). As listed in Table 2, several studies demonstrated that cisplatin can cause cardiotoxicity, which ranged from arrhythmias, hypertension, myocardial infarction to chronic heart failure (; Wachters et al., 2004; ; ; ; Novello et al., 2014a; Jänne et al., 2014, p. 4; Park et al., 2017; Jie Wang et al., 2018; Srinivasa et al., 2020; ; ). The cisplatin-induced cardiotoxicities are possibly related to the imbalance of electrolytes (Miller et al., 2010; Oun and Rowan, 2017). Increased platelet reactivity by activation of arachidonic pathway is believed to be one of the mechanisms of cardiotoxicity caused by alkylating drugs. Oxidative stress and direct endothelial capillary damage with resultant extravasation of proteins, erythrocytes, and toxic metabolites, can then damage the myocardium, leading to cardiomyocyte degeneration and necrosis (Mudd et al., 2021).

For angiogenesis inhibitors that interfere with the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway, such as bevacizumab, can lead to hypertension, cardiac arrhythmias, and congestive heart failure. Bevacizumab is a targeted therapy that starves tumours by preventing new blood vessels from growing. It was observed among a number of eligible studies that there were higher incidence rates of hypertension with the addition of bevacizumab in anticancer treatments than those without. Several studies showed that with the addition of bevacizumab, there was an increased incidence of arterial thromboembolic events. This result was expected as arterial thromboembolism is a known adverse reaction to bevacizumab (Herbst et al., 2011; Johnson et al., 2013; Kato et al., 2018; Reinmuth et al., 2019). These adverse events were potentially caused by the VEGFR inhibition effects of bevacizumab, which negatively affected the coagulation system (Reck et al., 2015). Same as bevacizumab, sorafenib and sunitinib are also angiogenesis inhibitors, and more specifically VEGF receptor kinase inhibitor and multitargeted RTK inhibitors respectively. The mechanism of this class of drug is to inhibit neovascularization which will then inhibit the growth of tumour as new blood vessels are needed for tumours to grow. Sorafenib and sunitinib demonstrated similar cardiotoxicity potentials as only hypertension was observed in both of them (Paz-Ares et al., 2015; ). In contrast, inhibitors of the fibroblast growth factor (FGF) pathway can lead to cardiomyopathy and increased risk of ischemic events due to increased myocardial oxygen consumption. Other angiogenesis inhibitors can cause cardiomyopathy due to their direct effect on the myocardium, leading to decreased contractility (Maurea et al., 2016; ).

In Gatzemeier et al., it was reported that cardiotoxicity was associated with the use of trastuzumab (). This clinical finding differed from the safety profile of preclinical studies as there was no evidence of neither acute nor dose-related cardiotoxicity (Mellor et al., 2011). Inhibition of the NRG-1/ErbB2 signalling—a protective intracellular signalling pathway—is one of the proposed mechanisms that causes trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity (Perez and Rodeheffer, 2004). It was reported in Barlesi et al. that the patient in the avelumab group with acute cardiac failure also suffered from autoimmune myocarditis (). In Butts et al., it was demonstrated that the addition of cetuximab to platinum/gemcitabine treatment did not increase cardiotoxicity as both groups reported the same percentage of cardiovascular events ().

Through this systematic review, it is suggested that several NSCLC treatments are associated with cardiotoxicity, but the actual incidence of cardiotoxicity induced by NSCLC treatments is still undefined. This is because systematic cardiac monitoring was not carried out in most of the clinical trials, thus compromising the ability to detect cardiotoxicity during clinical trials. Moreover, all included clinical trials had different eligibility criteria, treatment regimens and reporting styles, therefore the lack of standardisation made it difficult to compare the safety data among different clinical trials.

In addition, most treatments reported were a combination of several anticancer drugs, hence it was difficult to identify exactly which drug contributes to cardiotoxicity or if a single drug has higher cardiotoxic potential.

This systematic review analysed data collected from clinical trials (i.e., aggregate data instead of individual patients’ data), hence it was difficult to tell whether one person suffered from more than one type of cardiotoxicities. Also, based on the eligibility criteria, some of the studies which did not match the required study design (i.e., single arm study) were excluded even though counts of cardiotoxicity were recorded, so this might have caused selection bias of studies. In addition, the authors of some included publications mentioned that the incidences of cardiotoxicity were believed to be unrelated to the anticancer treatments. Therefore, for this systematic review, we adopted their opinions and did not include those cardiotoxicities thought not to be associated with NSCLC treatments. Moreover, due to the limitations of the eligibility criteria, the drugs included in the eligible studies might not necessarily be the most commonly used first/second-line treatments of NSCLC. Another limitation was that differences in duration of follow-up period among studies may potentially result in inaccurate representation of the frequency of cardiotoxicity associated with corresponding anticancer drug. In some studies, only adverse events with an overall incidence of ≥10% were reported, thus might cause reporting bias. One of the limitations observed was that most cardiotoxicities reported were symptomatic cardiotoxicities, whereas some expected asymptomatic cardiotoxicities such as QT prolongation were not commonly reported, thus it is suggested that systematic cardiac monitoring should be carried out and corresponding data should be reported. Lastly, by restricting our literature search only to studies reported in English other relevant studies might have been missed.

5 Conclusion

In the last few decades, there has been a rapid development in cancer therapies and improved detection strategies, hence the death rates caused by cancer have decreased. However, it has been reported that cardiovascular disease has become the second leading cause of long-term morbidity and fatality among cancer survivors. The findings of this systematic review have provided a better understanding of the types of cardiotoxicities each anticancer drug is associated with. However, as systematic cardiac monitoring was not carried out in most of the clinical trials, the actual incidence of cardiotoxicity induced by NSCLC treatments remains undefined. Cardiotoxicity reported ranges from hypertension to heart failure with hypertension being the most common contributor. Although some cardiac adverse events are reversible, further research on identifying patients at risk for potentially serious cardiovascular events as well as implementation of early detection and screening strategies are needed to improve benefit-risk balance of treatments in cancer patients.

Statements

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author contributions

All authors contributed to the conceptualisation of the systematic review, development of the selection criteria, the risk of bias assessment and data extraction criteria. The draft of the manuscript was written by SHYC and all authors reviewed this manuscript.

Funding

This study is part of a programme funded by the Jenny Greenhorn Research Scholarship.

Conflict of interest

DL was employed by the company IQVIA UK and PEPI Consultancy Limited.

The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2023.1137983/full#supplementary-material

Supplementary Table S1

Summary of treatment details and patients’ characteristics of each publication.

References

  • 1

    AkamatsuH.KatakamiN.OkamotoI.KatoT.KimY. H.ImamuraF.et al (2018). Osimertinib in Japanese patients with EGFR T790M mutation-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: AURA3 trial. Cancer Sci.109, 19301938. 10.1111/cas.13623

  • 2

    AmeriP.TiniG.SpallarossaP.MercurioV.TocchettiC. G.PortoI. (2021). Cardiovascular safety of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor nintedanib. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol.87, 36903698. 10.1111/bcp.14793

  • 3

    AstraZeneca (2021). “A phase III, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study to assess the efficacy and safety of selumetinib (AZD6244; ARRY-142886) (Hyd-Sulfate) in combination with docetaxel,” in Patients receiving second line treatment for KRAS mutation-positive locally advanced or metastatic non small cell lung cancer (stage IIIB - IV) (SELECT 1) (clinical trial registration No. NCT01933932) (clinicaltrials.gov).

  • 4

    BaggstromM. Q.SocinskiM. A.WangX. F.GuL.StinchcombeT. E.EdelmanM. J.et al (2017a). Maintenance sunitinib following initial platinum-based combination chemotherapy in advanced-stage IIIB/IV non–small cell lung cancer: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study—CALGB 30607 (alliance). J. Thorac. Oncol.12, 843849. 10.1016/j.jtho.2017.01.022

  • 5

    BaggstromM. Q.SocinskiM. A.WangX. F.GuL.StinchcombeT. E.EdelmanM. J.et al (2017b). Maintenance sunitinib following initial platinum-based combination chemotherapy in advanced-stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study-CALGB 30607 (alliance). J. Thorac. Oncol. Off. Publ. Int. Assoc. Study Lung Cancer12, 843849. 10.1016/j.jtho.2017.01.022

  • 6

    BarlesiF.VansteenkisteJ.SpigelD.IshiiH.GarassinoM.de MarinisF.et al (2018). Avelumab versus docetaxel in patients with platinum-treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (JAVELIN lung 200): An open-label, randomised, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol.19, 14681479. 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30673-9

  • 7

    BerghmansT.LafitteJ.-J.ScherpereelA.PaesmansM.LecomteJ.MarcoV. G.et al (2013). An ELCWP phase III trial comparing ifosfamide and cisplatin regimens in advanced NSCLC. Anticancer Res.33, 54775482.

  • 8

    BiN.LiangJ.ZhouZ.ChenD.FuZ.YangX.et al (2019). Effect of concurrent chemoradiation with celecoxib vs concurrent chemoradiation alone on survival among patients with non–small cell lung cancer with and without cyclooxygenase 2 genetic variants: A phase 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw. Open2, e1918070. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.18070

  • 9

    BlumenscheinG. R.ReckampK.StephensonG. J.O’RourkeT.GladishG.McGreivyJ.et al (2010). Phase 1b study of motesanib, an oral angiogenesis inhibitor, in combination with carboplatin/paclitaxel and/or panitumumab for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Clin. Cancer Res.16, 279290. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-1675

  • 10

    BodaiB.TusoP. (2019). Breast cancer survivorship: A comprehensive review of long-term medical issues and lifestyle recommendations. Perm. J.19, 4879. 10.7812/TPP/14-241

  • 11

    Boehringer Ingelheim (2018a). A randomised, open-label, Phase III study of BIBW 2992 versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with stage IIIB or IV adenocarcinoma of the lung harbouring an EGFR activating mutation (clinical trial registration No. NCT00949650). clinicaltrials.gov.

  • 12

    Boehringer Ingelheim (2018b). LUX-lung 6: A randomized, open-label, Phase III study of BIBW 2992 versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with stage IIIB or IV adenocarcinoma of the lung harbouring an egfr activating mutation (clinical trial registration No. NCT01121393). clinicaltrials.gov.

  • 13

    Boehringer Ingelheim (2020). LUX-lung 7: A randomised, open-label Phase IIb trial of afatinib versus gefitinib as first-line treatment of patients with egfr mutation positive advanced adenocarcinoma of the lung (clinical trial registration No. NCT01466660). clinicaltrials.gov.

  • 14

    BonomiP.KimK.FaircloughD.CellaD.KuglerJ.RowinskyE.et al (2000). Comparison of survival and quality of life in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with two dose levels of paclitaxel combined with cisplatin versus etoposide with cisplatin: Results of an eastern cooperative oncology group trial. J. Clin. Oncol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol.18, 623631. 10.1200/JCO.2000.18.3.623

  • 15

    BursácD. (2018). Cardiotoxicity of first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. J. Biodivers. Endanger. Species9, 14. 10.4172/2329-9517.1000345

  • 16

    ButtsC. A.BodkinD.MiddlemanE. L.EnglundC. W.EllisonD.AlamY.et al (2007). Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine plus cisplatin or carboplatin [corrected], with or without cetuximab, as first-line therapy for patients with advanced or metastatic non small-cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Oncol.25, 57775784. 10.1200/JCO.2007.13.0856

  • 17

    CamidgeD. R.KimH. R.AhnM.-J.YangJ. C.-H.HanJ.-Y.LeeJ.-S.et al (2018). Brigatinib versus crizotinib in ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.379, 20272039. 10.1056/NEJMoa1810171

  • 18

    CappuzzoF.NovelloS.De MarinisF.SelvaggiG.ScagliottiG.BarbieriF.et al (2006). A randomized phase II trial evaluating standard (50 mg/min) versus low (10 mg/min) infusion duration of gemcitabine as first-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients who are not eligible for platinum-based chemotherapy. Lung Cancer Amst. Neth.52, 319325. 10.1016/j.lungcan.2006.03.004

  • 19

    CarrascoR.CastilloR. L.GormazJ. G.CarrilloM.ThavendiranathanP. (2021). Role of oxidative stress in the mechanisms of anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity: Effects of preventive strategies. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev.2021, 8863789. 10.1155/2021/8863789

  • 20

    ChanS. H. Y.KhatibY.WebleyS.LaytonD.SalekS. (2020). Identification of cardiotoxicity related to cancer treatments: A systematic review. PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020191760 Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020191760.

  • 21

    ChangA. Y.KimK.GlickJ.AndersonT.KarpD.JohnsonD. (1993). Phase II study of taxol, merbarone, and piroxantrone in stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer: The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Results. J. Natl. Cancer Inst.85, 388394. 10.1093/jnci/85.5.388

  • 22

    ChoyH.SchwartzbergL.DakhilS.GaronE.GerberD.ChoksiJ.et al (2013). Phase 2 study of pemetrexed plus carboplatin, or pemetrexed plus cisplatin with concurrent radiation therapy followed by pemetrexed consolidation in patients with favorable-prognosis inoperable stage IIIA/B non-small-cell lung cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol.8, 13081316. 10.1097/JTO.0b013e3182a02546

  • 23

    ChungR.TyeballyS.ChenD.KapilV.WalkerJ. M.AddisonD.et al (2020). Hypertensive cardiotoxicity in cancer treatment—systematic analysis of adjunct, conventional chemotherapy, and novel therapies—epidemiology, incidence, and pathophysiology. J. Clin. Med.9, 3346. 10.3390/jcm9103346

  • 24

    CortotA. B.Audigier-ValetteC.MolinierO.Le MoulecS.BarlesiF.ZalcmanG.et al (2020). Weekly paclitaxel plus bevacizumab versus docetaxel as second- or third-line treatment in advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer: Results of the IFCT-1103 ULTIMATE study. Eur. J. Cancer131, 2736. 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.02.022

  • 25

    CsapoM.LazarL. (2014). Chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity: Pathophysiology and prevention. Med. Pharm. Rep.87, 135142. 10.15386/cjmed-339

  • 26

    CuriglianoG.CardinaleD.DentS.CriscitielloC.AseyevO.LenihanD.et al (2016). Cardiotoxicity of anticancer treatments: Epidemiology, detection, and management. Ca. Cancer J. Clin.66, 309325. 10.3322/caac.21341

  • 27

    CurrowD.TemelJ. S.AbernethyA.MilanowskiJ.FriendJ.FearonK. C. (2017). Romana 3: A phase 3 safety extension study of anamorelin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with cachexia. Ann. Oncol.28, 19491956. 10.1093/annonc/mdx192

  • 28

    DeSantisC. E.LinC. C.MariottoA. B.SiegelR. L.SteinK. D.KramerJ. L.et al (2014). Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2014: Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2014. CA. Cancer J. Clin.64, 252271. 10.3322/caac.21235

  • 29

    DobbinS. J. H.PetrieM. C.MylesR. C.TouyzR. M.LangN. N. (2021). Cardiotoxic effects of angiogenesis inhibitors. Clin. Sci.135, 71100. 10.1042/CS20200305

  • 30

    DouillardJ.PeschelC.ShepherdF.Paz-AresL.ArnoldA.DavisM.et al (2004). Randomized phase II feasibility study of combining the matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor BMS-275291 with paclitaxel plus carboplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer46, 361368. 10.1016/j.lungcan.2004.05.009

  • 31

    Eli Lilly and Company (2019a). A randomised Phase 2 trial of pemetrexed and gefitinib versus gefitinib as first line treatment for patients with stage IV non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer with activating epidermal growth factor receptor mutations (clinical trial registration No. NCT01469000). clinicaltrials.gov.

  • 32

    Eli Lilly and Company (2015). A randomized multicenter Phase III study of taxane/carboplatin/cetuximab versus taxane/carboplatin as first-line treatment for patients with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (clinical trial registration No. NCT00112294). clinicaltrials.gov.

  • 33

    Eli Lilly and Company (2022). A randomized, multicenter, open-label Phase 3 study of gemcitabine-cisplatin chemotherapy plus necitumumab (IMC-11F8) versus gemcitabine-cisplatin chemotherapy alone in the first-line treatment of patients with stage IV squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (clinical trial registration No. NCT00981058). clinicaltrials.gov.

  • 34

    Eli Lilly and Company (2021). A randomized, multicenter, open-label Phase 3 study of pemetrexed-cisplatin chemotherapy plus necitumumab (IMC-11F8) versus pemetrexed-cisplatin chemotherapy alone in the first-line treatment of patients with stage IV nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (clinical trial registration No. NCT00982111). clinicaltrials.gov.

  • 35

    Eli Lilly and Company (2019b). A randomized, multicenter, open-label, Phase 2 study of paclitaxel-carboplatin chemotherapy plus necitumumab (IMC-11F8) versus paclitaxel-carboplatin chemotherapy alone in the first-line treatment of patients with stage IV squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (clinical trial registration No. NCT01769391). clinicaltrials.gov.

  • 36

    EU Clinical Trials Register (2011). EudraCT number 2011-000634-11 - clinical trial results - EU clinical trials register WWW document. Available at: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2011-000634-11/results.

  • 37

    EwerM. S.EwerS. M. (2015). Cardiotoxicity of anticancer treatments. Nat. Rev. Cardiol.12, 547558. 10.1038/nrcardio.2015.65

  • 38

    FeldR.WierzbickiR.WaldeP. L.ShepherdF. A.EvansW. K.GuptaS.et al (1992). Phase I-II study of high-dose epirubicin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol.10, 297303. 10.1200/JCO.1992.10.2.297

  • 39

    FerlayJ.ErvikM.LamF.ColombetM.MeryL.PiñerosM., (2020). Global cancer observatory: Cancer today. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer.

  • 40

    FukudaM.KitazakiT.OgawaraD.IchikiM.MukaeH.MaruyamaR.et al (2019). Randomized phase II study of pemetrexed or pemetrexed plus bevacizumab for elderly patients with previously untreated non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer: Results of the Lung Oncology Group in Kyushu (LOGIK1201). Lung Cancer132, 18. 10.1016/j.lungcan.2019.01.008

  • 41

    GatzemeierU.GrothG.ButtsC.Van ZandwijkN.ShepherdF.ArdizzoniA.et al (2004). Randomized phase II trial of gemcitabine–cisplatin with or without trastuzumab in HER2-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann. Oncol.15, 1927. 10.1093/annonc/mdh031

  • 42

    GlaxoSmithKline (2014). A Phase II, open-label, multicenter, randomized study to assess the efficacy and safety of GSK1120212 compared with docetaxel in 2nd line subjects with targeted mutations (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, MEK1) in locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC stage IV) (clinical trial registration No. NCT01362296). clinicaltrials.gov.

  • 43

    GlaxoSmithKline (2019). Multi-arm, non-randomized, open-label Phase IB study to evaluate GSK3052230 in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin, or docetaxel or as single agent in subjects with solid malignancies and deregulated FGF pathway signaling (clinical trial registration No. NCT01868022). clinicaltrials.gov.

  • 44

    GollerkeriA.HarroldL.RoseM.JainD.BurtnessB. A. (2001). Use of paclitaxel in patients with pre-existing cardiomyopathy: A review of our experience. Int. J. Cancer93, 139141. 10.1002/ijc.1295

  • 45

    GridelliC.CigolariS.GalloC.ManzioneL.IannielloG. P.FrontiniL.et al (2001). Activity and toxicity of gemcitabine and gemcitabine +vinorelbine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer elderly patients Phase II data from the Multicenter Italian Lung Cancer in the Elderly Study (MILES) randomized trial. Lung Cancer8.

  • 46

    GroenH. J. M.SietsmaH.VincentA.HochstenbagM. M. H.van PuttenJ. W. G.van den BergA.et al (2011). Randomized, placebo-controlled phase III study of docetaxel plus carboplatin with celecoxib and cyclooxygenase-2 expression as a biomarker for patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer: The NVALT-4 study. J. Clin. Oncol.29, 43204326. 10.1200/JCO.2011.35.5214

  • 47

    HahnV. S.LenihanD. J.KyB. (2014). Cancer therapy–induced cardiotoxicity: Basic mechanisms and potential cardioprotective therapies. J. Am. Heart Assoc.3, e000665. 10.1161/JAHA.113.000665

  • 48

    HeigenerD. F.von PawelJ.EschbachC.BruneA.SchmittelA.SchmelterT.et al (2013). Prospective, multicenter, randomized, independent-group, open-label phase II study to investigate the efficacy and safety of three regimens with two doses of sagopilone as second-line therapy in patients with stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer80, 319325. 10.1016/j.lungcan.2013.02.007

  • 49

    HerbstR. S.AnsariR.BustinF.FlynnP.HartL.OttersonG. A.et al (2011). Efficacy of bevacizumab plus erlotinib versus erlotinib alone in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer after failure of standard first-line chemotherapy (BeTa): A double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet377, 18461854. 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60545-X

  • 50

    HidaT.NokiharaH.KondoM.KimY. H.AzumaK.SetoT.et al (2017). Alectinib versus crizotinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (J-ALEX): An open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet lond. Engl.390, 2939. 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30565-2

  • 51

    HigginsJ.ThomasJ.ChandlerJ.CumpstonM.LiT.PageM.et al (2022). Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews of Interventions. Cochrane. (updated February 2022).

  • 52

    HowladerN.RiesL. A. G.MariottoA. B.ReichmanM. E.RuhlJ.CroninK. A. (2010). Improved Estimates of cancer-specific survival rates from population-based data. JNCI J. Natl. Cancer Inst.102, 15841598. 10.1093/jnci/djq366

  • 53

    HuangM.GongY.ZhuJ.QinY.PengF.RenL.et al (2020). A phase I dose-reduction study of apatinib combined with pemetrexed and carboplatin in untreated EGFR and ALK negative stage IV non-squamous NSCLC. Invest. New Drugs38, 478484. 10.1007/s10637-019-00811-6

  • 54

    IQVIA (2021). Global oncology Trends 2021.

  • 55

    JänneP. A.Paz-AresL.OhY.EschbachC.HirshV.EnasN.et al (2014). Randomized, double-blind, phase II trial comparing gemcitabine-cisplatin plus the LTB4 antagonist LY293111 versus gemcitabine-cisplatin plus placebo in first-line non–small-cell lung cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol.9, 126131. 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000037

  • 56

    JemalA.WardE.HaoY.ThunM. (2005). Trends in the leading causes of death in the United States, 1970-2002. JAMA294, 12551259. 10.1001/jama.294.10.1255

  • 57

    JemalA.WardE.ThunM. (2010). Declining death rates reflect progress against cancer. PLoS ONE5, e9584. 10.1371/journal.pone.0009584

  • 58

    Jie WangX.MiaoK.LuoY.LiR.ShouT.WangP.et al (2018). Randomized controlled trial of endostar combined with cisplatin/pemetrexed chemotherapy for elderly patients with advanced malignant pleural effusion of lung adenocarcinoma. J. BUON23, 9297.

  • 59

    JohnsonB. E.KabbinavarF.FehrenbacherL.HainsworthJ.KasubhaiS.KresselB.et al (2013). Atlas: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIIB trial comparing bevacizumab therapy with or without erlotinib, after completion of chemotherapy, with bevacizumab for first-line treatment of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Oncol.31, 39263934. 10.1200/JCO.2012.47.3983

  • 60

    JohnsonD. H.FehrenbacherL.NovotnyW. F.HerbstR. S.NemunaitisJ. J.JablonsD. M.et al (2004). Randomized phase II trial comparing bevacizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel with carboplatin and paclitaxel alone in previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Oncol.22, 21842191. 10.1200/JCO.2004.11.022

  • 61

    KatoT.SetoT.NishioM.GotoK.YamamotoN.OkamotoI.et al (2018). Erlotinib plus bevacizumab phase ll study in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (JO25567): Updated safety results. Drug Saf.41, 229237. 10.1007/s40264-017-0596-0

  • 62

    KerkeläR.GrazetteL.YacobiR.IliescuC.PattenR.BeahmC.et al (2006). Cardiotoxicity of the cancer therapeutic agent imatinib mesylate. Nat. Med.12, 908916. 10.1038/nm1446

  • 63

    KochA.BergmanB.HolmbergE.SederholmC.EkL.KosieradzkiJ.et al (2011). Effect of celecoxib on survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A double blind randomised clinical phase III trial (cyclus study) by the Swedish lung cancer study group. Eur. J. Cancer47, 15461555. 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.03.035

  • 64

    KosmidisP. A.KalofonosH. P.ChristodoulouC.SyrigosK.MakatsorisT.SkarlosD.et al (2008). Paclitaxel and gemcitabine versus carboplatin and gemcitabine in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. A phase III study of the Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group. Ann. Oncol.19, 115122. 10.1093/annonc/mdm430

  • 65

    KotsakisA.KentepozidisN.EmmanouilidisCh.PolyzosA.AgelidouA.VaslamatzisM.et al (2015). Sequential administration of vinorelbine plus cisplatin and bevacizumab followed by docetaxel plus gemcitabine and bevacizumab compared to docetaxel plus cisplatin and bevacizumab regimen as first-line therapy for advanced or metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer: A multicenter randomized phase II trial of the hellenic oncology research group (horg). Lung Cancer88, 5762. 10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.01.012

  • 66

    KubotaK.YoshiokaH.OshitaF.HidaT.YohK.HayashiH.et al (2017). Phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of motesanib (AMG-706) in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin in east asian patients with advanced nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Oncol.35, 36623670. 10.1200/JCO.2017.72.7297

  • 67

    LangerC. J.Paz-AresL. G.WozniakA. J.GridelliC.de MarinisF.PujolJ.-L.et al (2017). Safety analyses of pemetrexed-cisplatin and pemetrexed maintenance therapies in patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC: Retrospective analyses from 2 phase III studies. Clin. Lung Cancer18, 489496. 10.1016/j.cllc.2017.04.003

  • 68

    LaraP. N.MoonJ.HeskethP. J.RedmanM. W.WilliamsonS. K.AkerleyW. L.et al (2016). Swog S0709: Randomized phase II trial of erlotinib versus erlotinib plus carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with advanced non–small cell lung cancer and impaired performance status as selected by a serum proteomics assay. J. Thorac. Oncol.11, 420425. 10.1016/j.jtho.2015.11.003

  • 69

    León-MateosL.MosqueraJ.Antón AparicioL. (2015). Treatment of sunitinib-induced hypertension in solid tumor by nitric oxide donors. Redox Biol.6, 421425. 10.1016/j.redox.2015.09.007

  • 70

    LiJ.QinS.XuJ.GuoW.XiongJ.BaiY.et al (2013). Apatinib for chemotherapy-refractory advanced metastatic gastric cancer: Results from a randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-arm, phase II trial. J. Clin. Oncol.31, 32193225. 10.1200/JCO.2013.48.8585

  • 71

    MartoniA.GuaraldiM.PianaE. (1999). Anthracyclines in non-small-cell lung cancer: Do they have a therapeutic role?Ann. Oncol.10, S19S23. 10.1093/annonc/10.suppl_5.S19

  • 72

    MartoniA.MelottiB.GuaraldiM.PannutiF. (1991). Activity of high-dose epirubicin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Eur. J. Cancer27, 12311234. 10.1016/0277-5379(91)90087-T

  • 73

    MaureaN.CoppolaC.PiscopoG.GallettaF.RiccioG.EspositoE.et al (2016). Pathophysiology of cardiotoxicity from target therapy and angiogenesis inhibitors. J. Cardiovasc. Med.17, S19S26. 10.2459/JCM.0000000000000377

  • 74

    McGowanJ. V.ChungR.MaulikA.PiotrowskaI.WalkerJ. M.YellonD. M. (2017). Anthracycline chemotherapy and cardiotoxicity. Cardiovasc. Drugs Ther.31, 6375. 10.1007/s10557-016-6711-0

  • 75

    MellorH. R.BellA. R.ValentinJ.-P.RobertsR. R. A. (2011). Cardiotoxicity associated with targeting kinase pathways in cancer. Toxicol. Sci. Off. J. Soc. Toxicol.120, 1432. 10.1093/toxsci/kfq378

  • 76

    MillerR. P.TadagavadiR. K.RameshG.ReevesW. B. (2010). Mechanisms of cisplatin nephrotoxicity. Toxins2, 24902518. 10.3390/toxins2112490

  • 77

    MizugakiH.YamamotoN.NokiharaH.FujiwaraY.HorinouchiH.KandaS.et al (2015). A phase 1 study evaluating the pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy of veliparib (ABT-888) in combination with carboplatin/paclitaxel in Japanese subjects with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol.76, 10631072. 10.1007/s00280-015-2876-7

  • 78

    MoslehiJ. J. (2016). Cardiovascular toxic effects of targeted cancer therapies. N. Engl. J. Med.375, 14571467. 10.1056/NEJMra1100265

  • 79

    MovsasB.ScottC.LangerC.Werner-WasikM.NicolaouN.KomakiR.et al (2005). Randomized trial of amifostine in locally advanced non–small-cell lung cancer patients receiving chemotherapy and hyperfractionated radiation: Radiation therapy oncology group trial 98-01. J. Clin. Oncol.23, 21452154. 10.1200/JCO.2005.07.167

  • 80

    MuddT. W.KhalidM.GuddatiA. K. (2021). Cardiotoxicity of chemotherapy and targeted agents. Am. J. Cancer Res.11, 11321147.

  • 81

    National Cancer Institute (NCI) (2019). A Phase II randomized study of OSI-774 (erlotinib) (NSC #718781) with or without carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with previously untreated adenocarcinoma of the lung who never smoked or were former light smokers (clinical trial registration No. NCT00126581). clinicaltrials.gov.

  • 82

    NovelloS.ScagliottiG.SydorenkoO.VynnychenkoI.VolovatC.SchneiderC.-P.et al (2014b). Motesanib plus carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer results from the randomized controlled MONET1 study. J. Thorac. Oncol.9, 11541161. 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000227

  • 83

    NovelloS.BesseB.FelipE.BarlesiF.MazieresJ.ZalcmanG.et al (2014a). A phase II randomized study evaluating the addition of iniparib to gemcitabine plus cisplatin as first-line therapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann. Oncol. Off. J. Eur. Soc. Med. Oncol.25, 21562162. 10.1093/annonc/mdu384

  • 84

    OunR.RowanE. (2017). Cisplatin induced arrhythmia; electrolyte imbalance or disturbance of the SA node?Eur. J. Pharmacol.811, 125128. 10.1016/j.ejphar.2017.05.063

  • 85

    PageM. J.McKenzieJ. E.BossuytP. M.BoutronI.HoffmannT. C.MulrowC. D.et al (2021a). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJn71, n71. 10.1136/bmj.n71

  • 86

    PageM. J.MoherD.BossuytP. M.BoutronI.HoffmannT. C.MulrowC. D.et al (2021b). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJn160, n160. 10.1136/bmj.n160

  • 87

    ParkC.-K.OhI.-J.KimK.-S.ChoiY.-D.JangT.-W.KimY.-S.et al (2017). Randomized phase III study of docetaxel plus cisplatin versus pemetrexed plus cisplatin as first-line treatment of nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer: A trail trial. Clin. Lung Cancer18, e289e296. 10.1016/j.cllc.2017.01.002

  • 88

    PassardiA.CecconettoL.Dall’AgataM.DazziC.PasquiniE.OliverioG.et al (2008). Randomized phase II study with two gemcitabine- and docetaxel-based combinations as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. J. Transl. Med.6, 65. 10.1186/1479-5876-6-65

  • 89

    Paz-AresL.HirshV.ZhangL.de MarinisF.YangJ.WakeleeH.et al (2015). Monotherapy administration of sorafenib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (MISSION) trial: A phase III, multicenter, placebo-controlled trial of sorafenib in patients with relapsed or refractory predominantly nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer after 2 or 3 previous treatment regimens. J. Thorac. Oncol.10, 17451753. 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000693

  • 90

    PerezE. A.RodehefferR. (2004). Clinical cardiac tolerability of trastuzumab. J. Clin. Oncol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol.22, 322329. 10.1200/JCO.2004.01.120

  • 91

    ReckM.MellemgaardA.von PawelJ.GottfriedM.BondarenkoI.ChengY.et al (2015). Anti-angiogenic-specific adverse events in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with nintedanib and docetaxel. Lung Cancer90, 267273. 10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.08.003

  • 92

    ReinmuthN.BrylM.BondarenkoI.SyrigosK.VladimirovV.ZereuM.et al (2019). PF-06439535 (a bevacizumab biosimilar) compared with reference bevacizumab (Avastin®), both plus paclitaxel and carboplatin, as first-line treatment for advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer: A randomized, double-blind study. BioDrugs33, 555570. 10.1007/s40259-019-00363-4

  • 93

    SaitoK.TakedaK.Imanaka-YoshidaK.ImaiH.SekineT.KamikuraY. (2003). Assessment of fatty acid metabolism in taxan-induced myocardial damage with iodine-123 BMIPP SPECT: Comparative study with myocardial perfusion, left ventricular function, and histopathological findings. Ann. Nucl. Med.17, 481488. 10.1007/BF03006439

  • 94

    SantoniM.GuerraF.ContiA.LucarelliA.RinaldiS.BelvederesiL.et al (2017). Incidence and risk of cardiotoxicity in cancer patients treated with targeted therapies. Cancer Treat. Rev.59, 123131. 10.1016/j.ctrv.2017.07.006

  • 95

    SebastianM.SchröderA.ScheelB.HongH. S.MuthA.von BoehmerL.et al (2019). A phase I/IIa study of the mRNA-based cancer immunotherapy CV9201 in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. CII68, 799812. 10.1007/s00262-019-02315-x

  • 96

    SequistL. V.YangJ. C.-H.YamamotoN.O’ByrneK.HirshV.MokT.et al (2013). Phase III study of afatinib or cisplatin plus pemetrexed in patients with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations. J. Clin. Oncol.31, 33273334. 10.1200/JCO.2012.44.2806

  • 97

    SetoT.KatoT.NishioM.GotoK.AtagiS.HosomiY.et al (2014). Erlotinib alone or with bevacizumab as first-line therapy in patients with advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer harbouring EGFR mutations (JO25567): An open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol.15, 12361244. 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70381-X

  • 98

    ShahC.BishnoiR.JainA.BejjankiH.XiongS.WangY.et al (2018). Cardiotoxicity associated with carfilzomib: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Leuk. Lymphoma59, 25572569. 10.1080/10428194.2018.1437269

  • 99

    ShawA. T.KimD.-W.NakagawaK.SetoT.CrinóL.AhnM.-J.et al (2013). Crizotinib versus chemotherapy in advanced ALK -positive lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.368, 23852394. 10.1056/NEJMoa1214886

  • 100

    SmitE. F.BerendsenH. H.PiersD. A.SmeetsJ.RivaA.PostmusP. E. (1992). A phase II study of high dose epirubicin in unresectable non small cell lung cancer. Br. J. Cancer65, 405408. 10.1038/bjc.1992.82

  • 101

    SmithL. A.CorneliusV. R.PlummerC. J.LevittG.VerrillM.CanneyP.et al (2010). Cardiotoxicity of anthracycline agents for the treatment of cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMC Cancer10, 337. 10.1186/1471-2407-10-337

  • 102

    SolomonB. J.MokT.KimD.-W.WuY.-L.NakagawaK.MekhailT.et al (2014). First-line crizotinib versus chemotherapy in ALK -positive lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med.371, 21672177. 10.1056/NEJMoa1408440

  • 103

    SrinivasaG.GuptaM.SeamR.RanaS.VermaS.GuptaM. (2020). A randomized prospective study comparing concomitant chemoradiotherapy using paclitaxel-carboplatin with concomitant chemoradiotherapy using etoposide-cisplatin in inoperable or nonresectable locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Clin. Cancer Investig. J.9, 27. 10.4103/ccij.ccij_94_19

  • 104

    StathopoulosG. P.VeslemesM.GeorgatouN.AntoniouD.GiamboudakisP.KatisK.et al (2004). Front-line paclitaxel–vinorelbine versus paclitaxel–carboplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A randomized phase III trial. Ann. Oncol.15, 10481055. 10.1093/annonc/mdh260

  • 105

    SwainS. M.WhaleyF. S.EwerM. S. (2003). Congestive heart failure in patients treated with doxorubicin: A retrospective analysis of three trials. Cancer97, 28692879. 10.1002/cncr.11407

  • 106

    TanC.TasakaH.YuK.-P.MurphyM. L.KarnofskyD. A. (1967). Daunomycin, an antitumor antibiotic, in the treatment of neoplastic disease.Clinical evaluation with special reference to childhood leukemia. Cancer20, 333353. 10.1002/1097-0142(1967)20:3<333:AID-CNCR2820200302>3.0.CO;2-K

  • 107

    TocchettiC. G.CadedduC.Di LisiD.FemminòS.MadonnaR.MeleD.et al (2019). From molecular mechanisms to clinical management of antineoplastic drug-induced cardiovascular toxicity: A translational overview. Antioxid. Redox Signal.30, 21102153. 10.1089/ars.2016.6930

  • 108

    UmsawasdiT.ValdiviesoM.BooserD.BarkleyH.EwerM.MacKayB.et al (1989). Weekly doxorubicin versus doxorubicin every 3 weeks in cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer64, 19952000. 10.1002/1097-0142(19891115)64:10<1995:aid-cncr2820641004>3.0.co;2-l

  • 109

    ValdiviesoM.BurgessM. A.EwerM. S.MackayB.WallaceS.BenjaminR. S.et al (1984). Increased therapeutic index of weekly doxorubicin in the therapy of non-small cell lung cancer: A prospective, randomized study. J. Clin. Oncol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol.2, 207214. 10.1200/JCO.1984.2.3.207

  • 110

    WachtersF.ErjavecZ.Van PuttenJ.GroenH. (2003). Cardiotoxicity in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with gemcitabine and either epirubicin or cisplatin as first-line treatment. Proc. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol.659.

  • 111

    WachtersF. M.Van Der GraafW. T. A.GroenH. J. M. (2004). Cardiotoxicity in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with platinum and non-platinum based combinations as first-line treatment. Anticancer Res.24, 20792083.

  • 112

    WeissA. J.ManthelR. W. (1977). Experience with the use of adriamycin in combination with other anticancer agents using a weekly schedule, with particular reference to lack of cardiac toxicity. Cancer40, 20462052. 10.1002/1097-0142(197711)40:5<2046:aid-cncr2820400508>3.0.co;2-5-5

  • 113

    WeissA. J.MetterG. E.FletcherW. S.WilsonW. L.GrageT. B.RamirezG. (1976). Studies on adriamycin using a weekly regimen demonstrating its clinical effectiveness and lack of cardiac toxicity. Cancer Treat. Rep.60, 813822.

  • 114

    WHOCCATC/DDD Index [WWW Document] (2022). WHOCC. Available at: https://www.whocc.no/atc_ddd_index/.

  • 115

    WilliamW. N.ZinnerR. G.KarpD. D.OhY. W.GlissonB. S.PhanS.-C.et al (2007). Phase I trial of motexafin gadolinium in combination with docetaxel and cisplatin for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol.2, 745750. 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31811f4719

  • 116

    WilsJ.UtamaI.SalaL.SmeetsJ.RivaA. (1990). Phase II study of high-dose epirubicin in non-small cell lung cancer. Eur. J. Cancer Clin. Oncol.26, 11401141. 10.1016/0277-5379(90)90271-T

  • 117

    World Health Organization (2020). Global Health Estimates. WHO.

  • 118

    WuS.ChenJ. J.KudelkaA.LuJ.ZhuX. (2008). Incidence and risk of hypertension with sorafenib in patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol.9, 117123. 10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70003-2

  • 119

    WuY.-L.ChengY.ZhouJ.LuS.ZhangY.ZhaoJ.et al (2020). Tepotinib plus gefitinib in patients with EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer with MET overexpression or MET amplification and acquired resistance to previous EGFR inhibitor (INSIGHT study): An open-label, phase 1b/2, multicentre, randomised trial. Lancet Respir. Med.8, 11321143. 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30154-5

  • 120

    WuY.-L.SequistL. V.TanE.-H.GeaterS. L.OrlovS.ZhangL.et al (2018). Afatinib as first-line treatment of older patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: Subgroup analyses of the LUX-lung 3, LUX-lung 6, and LUX-lung 7 trials. Clin. Lung Cancer19, e465e479. 10.1016/j.cllc.2018.03.009

  • 121

    YoshiokaH.KatakamiN.OkamotoH.IwamotoY.SetoT.TakahashiT.et al (2017). A randomized, open-label, phase III trial comparing amrubicin versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann. Oncol. Off. J. Eur. Soc. Med. Oncol.28, 285291. 10.1093/annonc/mdw621

  • 122

    Zaborowska-SzmitM.KrzakowskiM.KowalskiD. M.SzmitS. (2020). Cardiovascular complications of systemic therapy in non-small-cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Med.9, 1268. 10.3390/jcm9051268

  • 123

    ZarogoulidisP.ZarogoulidisK.SakasD.Hohenforst-SchmidtW.TsakiridisK.PorpodisK.et al (2013). Docetaxel-carboplatin in combination with erlotinib and/or bevacizumab in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. OncoTargets Ther.125, 125134. 10.2147/OTT.S42245

  • 124

    ZatloukalP.PetruzelkaL.ZemanovaM.HavelL.JankuF.JudasL.et al (2004). Concurrent versus sequential chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin and vinorelbine in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A randomized study. Lung Cancer46, 8798. 10.1016/j.lungcan.2004.03.004

  • 125

    ZhangS.LiuX.Bawa-KhalfeT.LuL.-S.LyuY. L.LiuL. F.et al (2012). Identification of the molecular basis of doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity. Nat. Med.18, 16391642. 10.1038/nm.2919

  • 126

    ZhangX.ZhuY.DongS.ZhangA.LuY.LiY.et al (2019). Role of oxidative stress in cardiotoxicity of antineoplastic drugs. Life Sci.232, 116526. 10.1016/j.lfs.2019.06.001

  • 127

    ZinnerR. G.ObasajuC. K.SpigelD. R.WeaverR. W.BeckJ. T.WaterhouseD. M.et al (2015). Pronounce: Randomized, open-label, phase III study of first-line pemetrexed + carboplatin followed by maintenance pemetrexed versus paclitaxel + carboplatin + bevacizumab followed by maintenance bevacizumab in patients ith advanced nonsquamous non–small-cell lung cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol.10, 134142. 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000366

Summary

Keywords

anticancer drugs, cancer treatments, cardiotoxicity, cardiovascular events, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Citation

Chan SHY, Khatib Y, Webley S, Layton D and Salek S (2023) Identification of cardiotoxicity related to non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatments: A systematic review. Front. Pharmacol. 14:1137983. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1137983

Received

05 January 2023

Accepted

27 March 2023

Published

13 June 2023

Volume

14 - 2023

Edited by

Andrea Camerini, Ospedale Versilia, Azienda Usl Toscana nord ovest, Italy

Reviewed by

Melania Rivano, Binaghi Hospital, Italy

Sanjay Chandrasekhar, University of South Florida, United States

Updates

Copyright

*Correspondence: Stefanie Ho Yi Chan, ; Sam Salek,

ORCID: Stefanie Ho Yi Chan, orcid.org/0000-0002-1912-3081; Yasmin Khatib, orcid.org/0000-0002-9963-4622; Sam Salek, orcid.org/0000-0002-4612-5699

This article was submitted to Drugs Outcomes Research and Policies, a section of the journal Frontiers in Pharmacology

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Figures

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Article metrics