Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
September 29, 2026 · via Europe PMC
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Facilitates Anti-Cancer Therapy Continuity and Improves Survival in Cancer Patients.
Zheng HJ, Zeng LL, Yan CJ, Xiao RH, Guo M, Yu SJ, Wei YN, Cheng W.
AI summary — for doctors, generated from the abstract only
In cancer patients with severe aortic stenosis, TAVR was linked to better continuity of cancer therapy and survival than SAVR.
What was studied
Weighted comparison of 183 cancer patients (101 TAVR, 82 SAVR) assessing anticancer therapy resumption and survival.
Key findings
- 90-day therapy resumption was 83.7% with TAVR versus 56.3% with SAVR (OR 3.51).
- TAVR was associated with fewer cardiac interruptions.
- A dose-dependent association between treatment delay and cancer mortality was observed.
Clinical relevance
TAVR may be preferred when timely cancer therapy matters.
Who should care
Limitations
Observational and small, requiring prospective validation as the authors state.
Consider TAVR when cancer treatment cannot be delayed.
This is an AI-generated summary of the published abstract, not a clinical recommendation. It may not reflect the full text or subsequent updates — verify against the original source before acting on it.
Abstract
Background
The impact of transcatheter (TAVR) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) on multi-dimensional anti‑cancer therapy continuity and survival in cancer patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) remains unknown.
Aims
To assess whether TAVR, compared with SAVR, is associated with superior anti-cancer therapy continuity and survival in cancer patients with severe AS.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective study of cancer patients undergoing TAVR or SAVR for severe AS from June 2018 to December 2024. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used. Endpoints included 90‑day therapy resumption (primary; Fine-Gray competing risk regression), 1‑year completion, cardiac‑related interruptions, and mortality. Sensitivity, landmark, and dose-response analyses were performed.
Results
Among 183 patients (TAVR: 101, SAVR: 82), IPTW achieved excellent balance. TAVR was associated with higher 90‑day resumption (83.7% vs. 56.3%; OR 3.51, p < 0.001) and shorter time to resumption (28 vs. 75 days; sHR 2.45, p < 0.001). A dose-response relationship was observed: each 30‑day delay increased cancer mortality by 15% (HR 1.15, p = 0.01). TAVR reduced non‑fatal cardiac‑related interruptions (6.9% vs. 17.1%; OR 0.28, p = 0.01). Therapy interruption independently predicted all‑cause mortality (HR 1.48, p = 0.001), even after excluding progression‑related interruptions (sensitivity HR 1.32, p = 0.02). Landmark analysis at 3 months showed better subsequent survival with early resumption (HR 0.61, p = 0.01). Benefits were most pronounced in neoadjuvant patients (interaction p = 0.04). Competing risk analysis showed lower 3‑year cardiovascular mortality with TAVR (4% vs. 12%; p = 0.04).
Conclusions
TAVR was associated with superior therapy continuity and fewer cardiac interruptions. A dose‑dependent association between treatment delay and cancer mortality was observed. These findings suggest that TAVR may be preferred in patients requiring timely neoadjuvant therapy, but prospective validation is needed.
DOI
10.1002/ccd.70924
PMID
42811475
Research metadata (titles, abstracts, authors, publication dates) is sourced from Europe PMC, which aggregates content from PubMed/MEDLINE, PubMed Central, and other providers under the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM/NCBI). NLM does not claim copyright on abstracts; the original journal publishers or authors may hold rights to the full articles. AI-generated summaries are derived only from the abstract, never the full text, and are always labeled as AI-generated.
Want more like this?
Browse more from the feed. A free account unlocks the full feed, saving and communities.
Back to the research feed