Understanding the impact of heart failure treatment on cancer growth

C Civati,B Goovaerts,B Van Berlo,V Segers,G De Keulenaer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.3173

IF: 39.3

2024-10-30

European Heart Journal

Abstract:Background Heart failure (HF) is associated with systemic alterations that extend beyond the cardiovascular system. The dysregulation of physiological pathways induced by HF, encompassing inflammatory or neurohormonal pathways, may foster an environment conducive to cancer growth and the spead of metastases. It is unknown whether these alterations are attenuated when HF is treated, and whether certain therapies for HF may yield more significant effects than others. Purpose This study aims to investigate whether myocardial infarction (MI)-induced left ventricular (LV) dysfunction promotes breast cancer growth and triggers the development of lung metastases. Additionally, it compares the potential impact of different therapeutic strategies for LV dysfunction on cancer development. Methods Myocardial infarction (MI) was induced in 11-week-old female BALB/c mice by ligation of the left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery, leading to LV dysfunction and significant dilation within four weeks. Starting 2 weeks after surgery, mice with ejection fraction (EF) < 40% received daily oral gavage of vehicle or one of three drugs: carvedilol (10 mg/kg), enalapril (20 mg/kg), or empagliflozin (15 mg/kg). Four weeks post-surgery, 2x105 4T1 metastatic breast cancer cells were injected into the 4th mammary fat pad. Tumor volume was measured every two days, starting eight days after injection. Weekly echocardiographic assessments monitored cardiac function until the end of the experiment. Tumors were excised on day 22 after injection. Mice were euthanised on day 28 for post-mortem analysis. MCM2 proliferation staining was performed on lung tissue to quantify metastases. Results Among the HF treatments, only empagliflozin (n=11) induced a significant decrease in both left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volume (Fig. 1.A; p=0.0043; Fig. 1.B; p=0.0186) compared to the vehicle group (n=11). Tumor weight and volume (Fig. 1.C-D) were not different in the HF/vehicle group (n=15) and the sham-operated group (n=13). Carvedilol (n=14) led to a small reduction in tumor weight (Fig. 1.C; p=0.1264), while empagliflozin (n=11) exhibited a significant reduction in both tumor weight (Fig. 1.C; p=0.0306) and volume (Fig. 1.D; p=0.0268). In addition, carvedilol (n=13) significantly reduced lung metastases (Fig. 1.E; p=0.0347) compared to the HF/vehicle group (n=13). Enalapril (n=10) and empagliflozin (n=9) did not significantly impact the development of lung metastases. Conclusion Despite the absence of increased cancer growth post-MI, our findings indicate that specific treatments for HF—namely, carvedilol and empagliflozin—attenuate cancer growth post-MI. Furthermore, carvedilol demonstrated potential in reducing metastatic spread. Additional research is required to uncover the underlying mechanisms both in the presence and absence of HF, and to explore the molecular impact that HF treatments have on various stages of cancer progression.Figure 1

cardiac & cardiovascular systems