TAVR and cancer: machine learning-augmented propensity score mortality and cost analysis in over 30 million patients
IntroductionCardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer are the top mortality causes globally, yet little is known about how the diagnosis of cancer affects treatment options in patients with hemodynamically compromising aortic stenosis (AS). Patients with cancer often are excluded from aortic valve replacement (AVR) trials including trials with transcatheter AVR (TAVR) and surgical AVR (SAVR). This study looks at how cancer may influence treatment options and assesses the outcome of patients with cancer who undergo SAVR or TAVR intervention. Additionally, we sought to quantitate and compare both clinical and cost outcomes for patients with and without cancer.MethodsThis population-based case-control study uses the most recent year available National Inpatient Sample (NIS (2016) from the United States Department of Health and Human Services’ Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Machine learning augmented propensity score adjusted multivariable regression was conducted based on the likelihood of undergoing TAVR versus medical management (MM) and TAVR versus SAVR with model optimization supported by backward propagation neural network machine learning.ResultsOf the 30,195,722 total hospital admissions, 39,254 (0.13%) TAVRs were performed, with significantly fewer performed in patients with versus without cancer even in those of comparable age and mortality risk (23.82% versus 76.18%, p < 0.001) despite having similar hospital and procedural mortality. Multivariable regression in patients with cancer demonstrated that mortality was similar for TAVR, MM, and SAVR, though LOS and cost was significantly lower for TAVR versus MM and comparable for TAVR versus SAVR. Patients with prostate cancer constituted the largest primary cancer among TAVR patients including those with metastatic disease. There were no significant race or geographic disparities for TAVR mortality.DiscussionComparison of aortic valve intervention in patients with and without cancer suggests that interventions are underutilized in the cancer population. This study suggests that patients with cancer including those with metastasis have similar inpatient outcomes to patients without cancer. Further, patients who have symptomatic AS and those with higher risk aortic valve disease should be offered the benefit of intervention. Modern techniques have reduced intervention-related adverse events, provided improved quality of life, and appear to be cost effective; these advantages should not necessarily be denied to patients with co-existing cancer.
Highlights
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer are the top mortality causes globally, yet little is known about how the diagnosis of cancer affects treatment options in patients with hemodynamically compromising aortic stenosis (AS)
Of the 30,195,722 total hospital admissions, 39,254 (0.13%) transcatheter AVR (TAVR) were performed, with significantly fewer performed in patients with versus without cancer even in those of comparable age and mortality risk (23.82% versus 76.18%, p < 0.001) despite having similar hospital and procedural mortality
Multivariable regression in patients with cancer demonstrated that mortality was similar for TAVR, MM, and surgical AVR (SAVR), though length of stay (LOS) and cost was significantly lower for TAVR versus MM and comparable for TAVR versus SAVR
Summary
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer are the top mortality causes globally, yet little is known about how the diagnosis of cancer affects treatment options in patients with hemodynamically compromising aortic stenosis (AS). Though its age-adjusted mortality overall has fallen recently with the rise of transcatheter aortic valve repair (TAVR) for patients with historically high surgical risk (which increases with age as does AS incidence) [2], AS mortality has remained stable for black, Hispanic, and rural patients. This is concerning for racial and socioeconomic disparities in access to life-saving TAVR treatment. Patients with cancer are often excluded from aortic valve replacement (AVR) trials, making direct outcome comparisons problematic [3]
- # Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
- # Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement
- # Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Intervention
- # Agency For Healthcare Research And Quality
- # Cost Outcomes For Patients
- # Aortic Valve Replacement
- # Medical Management
- # Total Hospital Admissions
- # Aortic Stenosis
- # Aortic Valve
10
- 10.1177/0003134820973720
- Dec 24, 2020
- The American surgeon
231
- 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.09.018
- Nov 1, 2012
- Journal of the American College of Cardiology
26
- 10.1002/ccd.28052
- Dec 14, 2018
- Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
53
- 10.1111/joic.12458
- Nov 22, 2017
- Journal of Interventional Cardiology
52
- 10.1155/2018/5051289
- Jan 1, 2018
- BioMed Research International
65
- 10.1001/jama.2019.6292
- Jun 11, 2019
- JAMA
5903
- 10.1161/cir.0000000000000558
- Jan 31, 2018
- Circulation
1
- 10.23736/s0021-9509.18.10321-1
- Feb 8, 2018
- The Journal of cardiovascular surgery
3044
- 10.1056/nejmoa1816885
- May 2, 2019
- The New England journal of medicine
- Research Article
17
- 10.1007/s40264-022-01155-6
- May 1, 2022
- Drug safety
Monitoring adverse drug events or pharmacovigilance has been promoted by the World Health Organization to assure the safety of medicines through a timely and reliable information exchange regarding drug safety issues. We aim to discuss the application of machine learning methods as well as causal inference paradigms in pharmacovigilance. We first reviewed data sources for pharmacovigilance. Then, we examined traditional causal inference paradigms, their applications in pharmacovigilance, and how machine learning methods and causal inference paradigms were integrated to enhance the performance of traditional causal inference paradigms. Finally, we summarized issues with currently mainstream correlation-based machine learning models and how the machine learning community has tried to address these issues by incorporating causal inference paradigms. Our literature search revealed that most existing data sources and tasks for pharmacovigilance were not designed for causal inference. Additionally, pharmacovigilance was lagging in adopting machine learning-causal inference integrated models. We highlight several currently trending directions or gaps to integrate causal inference with machine learning in pharmacovigilance research. Finally, our literature search revealed that the adoption of causal paradigms can mitigate known issues with machine learning models. We foresee that the pharmacovigilance domain can benefit from the progress in the machine learning field.
- Front Matter
6
- 10.1016/j.repc.2023.04.013
- Jul 22, 2023
- Revista Portuguesa de Cardiologia
Interventional cardiology in cancer patients: A position paper from the Portuguese Cardiovascular Intervention Association and the Portuguese Cardio-Oncology Study Group of the Portuguese Society of Cardiology
- Research Article
18
- 10.3390/medicina58081039
- Aug 3, 2022
- Medicina
Background and objectives: Little is known about outcome improvements and disparities in cardiac arrest and active cancer. We performed the first known AI and propensity score (PS)-augmented clinical, cost-effectiveness, and computational ethical analysis of cardio-oncology cardiac arrests including left heart catheterization (LHC)-related mortality reduction and related disparities. Materials and methods: A nationally representative cohort analysis was performed for mortality and cost by active cancer using the largest United States all-payer inpatient dataset, the National Inpatient Sample, from 2016 to 2018, using deep learning and machine learning augmented propensity score-adjusted (ML-PS) multivariable regression which informed cost-effectiveness and ethical analyses. The Cardiac Arrest Cardio-Oncology Score (CACOS) was then created for the above population and validated. The results informed the computational ethical analysis to determine ethical and related policy recommendations. Results: Of the 101,521,656 hospitalizations, 6,656,883 (6.56%) suffered cardiac arrest of whom 61,300 (0.92%) had active cancer. Patients with versus without active cancer were significantly less likely to receive an inpatient LHC (7.42% versus 20.79%, p < 0.001). In ML-PS regression in active cancer, post-arrest LHC significantly reduced mortality (OR 0.18, 95%CI 0.14–0.24, p < 0.001) which PS matching confirmed by up to 42.87% (95%CI 35.56–50.18, p < 0.001). The CACOS model included the predictors of no inpatient LHC, PEA initial rhythm, metastatic malignancy, and high-risk malignancy (leukemia, pancreas, liver, biliary, and lung). Cost-benefit analysis indicated 292 racial minorities and $2.16 billion could be saved annually by reducing racial disparities in LHC. Ethical analysis indicated the convergent consensus across diverse belief systems that such disparities should be eliminated to optimize just and equitable outcomes. Conclusions: This AI-guided empirical and ethical analysis provides a novel demonstration of LHC mortality reductions in cardio-oncology cardiac arrest and related disparities, along with an innovative predictive model that can be integrated within the digital ecosystem of modern healthcare systems to improve equitable clinical and public health outcomes.
- Research Article
5
- 10.3389/fcvm.2022.1071138
- Feb 8, 2023
- Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
Carcinoid heart disease is increasingly recognized and challenging to manage due to limited outcomes data. This is the largest known cohort study of valvular pathology, treatment (including pulmonary and tricuspid valve replacements [PVR and TVR]), dispairties, mortality, and cost in patients with malignant carcinoid tumor (MCT). Machine learning-augmented propensity score-adjusted multivariable regression was conducted for clincal outcomes in the 2016-2018 U.S. National Inpatient Sample (NIS). Regression models were weighted by the complex survey design and adjusted for known confounders and the likelihood of undergoing valvular procedures. Among 101,521,656 hospitalizations, 55,910 (0.06%) had MCT. Patients with MCT vs. those without had significantly higher inpatient mortality (2.93 vs. 2.04%, p = 0.002), longer mean length of stay (12.20 vs. 4.62, p < 0.001), and increased mean total cost of stay ($70,252.18 vs. 51,092.01, p < 0.001). There was a step-wise increased rate of TVR and PVR with each subsequent year, with significantly more TV (0.16% vs. 0.01, p < 0.001) and PV (0.03 vs. 0.00, p = 0.040) diagnosed with vs. without MCT for 2016, with comparable trends in 2017 and 2018. There were no significant procedural disparities among patients with MCT for sex, race, income, urban density, or geographic region, except in 2017, when the highest prevalence of PV procedures were performed in the Western North at 50.00% (p = 0.034). In machine learning and propensity score augmented multivariable regression, MCT did not significantly increase the likelihood of TVR or PVR. In sub-group analysis restricted to MCT, neither TVR nor PVR significantly increased mortality, though it did increase cost (respectively, $141,082.30, p = 0.015; $355,356.40, p = 0.012). This analysis reflects a favorable trend in recognizing the need for TVR and PVR in patients with MCT, with associated increased cost but not mortality. Our study also suggests that pulmonic valve pathology is increasingly recognized in MCT as reflected by the upward trend in PVRs. Further research and updated societal guidelines may need to focus on the "forgotten pulmonic valve" to improve outcomes and disparities in this understudied patient population.
- Research Article
3
- 10.3390/medicina58070859
- Jun 28, 2022
- Medicina
Background and Objectives: There are no nationally representative studies of mortality and cost effectiveness for fractional flow reserve (FFR) guided percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in patients with cancer. Our study aims to show how this patient population may benefit from FFR-guided PCI. Materials and Methods: Propensity score matched analysis and backward propagation neural network machine learning supported multivariable regression was performed for inpatient mortality in this case-control study of the 2016 National Inpatient Sample (NIS). Regression results were adjusted for age, race, income, geographic region, metastases, mortality risk, and the likelihood of undergoing FFR versus non-FFR PCI. All analyses were adjusted for the complex survey design to produce nationally representative estimates. Results: Of the 30,195,722 hospitalized patients meeting criteria, 3.37% of the PCIs performed included FFR. In propensity score adjusted multivariable regression, FFR versus non-FFR PCI significantly reduced inpatient mortality (OR 0.47, 95%CI 0.35–0.63; p < 0.001) and length of stay (LOS) (in days; beta −0.23, 95%CI −0.37–−0.09; p = 0.001) while increasing cost (in USD; beta $5708.63, 95%CI, 3042.70–8374.57; p < 0.001), without significantly increasing complications overall. FFR versus non-FFR PCI did not specifically change cancer patients’ inpatient mortality, LOS, or cost. However, FFR versus non-FFR PCI significantly increased inpatient mortality for Hodgkin’s lymphoma (OR 52.48, 95%CI 7.16–384.53; p < 0.001) and rectal cancer (OR 24.38, 95%CI 2.24–265.73; p = 0.009). Conclusions: FFR-guided PCI may be safely utilized in patients with cancer as it does not significantly increase inpatient mortality, complications, and LOS. These findings support the need for an increased utilization of FFR-guided PCI and further studies to evaluate its long-term impact.
- Research Article
2
- 10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.04.023
- Apr 12, 2022
- International journal of cardiology
2021. The year in review. Structural heart interventions
- Research Article
- 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2022.07.032
- Aug 4, 2022
- Resuscitation
Post-cardiac arrest PCI is underutilized among cancer patients: Machine learning augmented nationally representative case-control study of 30 million hospitalizations
- Research Article
2
- 10.7759/cureus.54435
- Feb 19, 2024
- Cureus
This review provides an in-depth analysis of the effect of length of stay (LOS), comorbidities, and procedural complications on the cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in comparison to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). We found that the average LOS was shorter for patients undergoing TAVR, contributing to lower average costs associated with the procedure, although the LOS varied between patients due to the severity of illness and comorbidities present. TAVR has also been found to improve the quality of life for patients receiving aortic valve replacement compared to SAVR. Although TAVR has a lower rate of most post-operative complications caused by SAVR, such as bleeding and cardiac complications, TAVR shows an increased rate of permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation due to mechanical trauma on the heart's conduction system. In addition, our findings suggest that the cost-effectiveness of each procedure varies based on the types of valve, the patient history of other medical conditions, and the procedural methods. Our findings show that TAVR is preferred over SAVR in terms of cost-effectiveness across a variety of patients with other coexisting medical conditions, including cancer, advanced kidney disease, cirrhosis, diabetes mellitus, and bundle branch block. TAVR also appears to be superior to SAVR with fewer post-operative complications. However, TAVR appears to have a higher rate of PPM implantation rates as compared to SAVR. The comorbidities of the valve recipient must be considered when deciding whether to use TAVR or SAVR as cost-effectiveness varies with the patient background.
- Front Matter
50
- 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2020.10.078
- Nov 16, 2020
- The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Robotic aortic valve replacement
- Front Matter
- 10.1053/j.jvca.2021.11.034
- Nov 27, 2021
- Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia
Self-Expanding Versus Balloon-Expandable Valve: Are We at the Cusp of Delivering a Perfect Transcatheter Aortic Valve?
- Front Matter
- 10.1016/j.xjon.2022.01.023
- Feb 24, 2022
- JTCVS Open
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement valve-in-valve: Future implications for the surgeon
- Research Article
1
- 10.1161/circoutcomes.112.969766
- Nov 1, 2012
- Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes
The following are highlights from the new series, Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes Topic Reviews. This series will summarize the most important manuscripts, as selected by the Editor, which have been published in the Circulation portfolio. The objective of this new series is to provide our readership with a timely, comprehensive selection of important papers that are relevant to the quality and outcomes as well as general cardiology audience. The studies included in this article represent the most significant research in the area of valvular heart disease. ( Circ Cardiovasc Quality and Outcomes . 2012;5:-e103.) In recent years, no field of clinical cardiology has experienced a great influx of transformational therapeutic options as has the area of valvular heart disease. Treatment of severe aortic stenosis (AS) has been revolutionized by transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), which has been shown to improve life expectancy and functional outcomes in patients with inoperable AS1,2 and to have short-term outcomes comparable to surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients at high perioperative risk.3,4 Analogously, mitral valve disease has been amenable to percutaneous valve replacement,5,6 as well as clipping procedures7 that can substantively reduce severe mitral regurgitation (MR) and improve functional outcomes. Even right-sided heart disease involving valves in pulmonary8,9 and tricuspid10 positions has been treated successfully with endovascular techniques. Yet, even with this growing focus on percutaneous valvular interventions, open surgical techniques remain the dominant treatment strategies and standard of care for most advanced lesions. Surgical valve repair and replacement account for 10% to 20% of all cardiac surgical procedures,11–13 approximately two thirds of which are for AS.11–13 For patients undergoing surgery, there remains considerable debate about risk stratification,14 intraoperative technique,15 and postoperative …
- Front Matter
3
- 10.1053/j.jvca.2021.06.007
- Jun 11, 2021
- Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia
The Deployment of Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 (VARC-3): New Endpoints, Broader Definitions, and Plenty of Unanswered Questions
- Front Matter
- 10.1053/j.jvca.2023.01.021
- Jan 28, 2023
- Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia
Recommendations for Transesophageal Echocardiographic Screening in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights for the Cardiothoracic Anesthesiologist
- Research Article
- 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab724.2262
- Oct 12, 2021
- European Heart Journal
Changes in aortic valve hemodynamics and ventricular functional measurements in patients undergoing transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement: a head-to-head comparison
- Front Matter
- 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2019.02.038
- Mar 22, 2019
- The Annals of thoracic surgery
The Devoted Grandma: Is a Social Indication for TAVR Acceptable?
- Research Article
42
- 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.5742
- Jun 14, 2019
- JAMA Network Open
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been shown to be a valid alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients at high operative risk with severe aortic stenosis (AS). However, the evidence of the benefits and harms of TAVR in patients at low operative risk is still scarce. To compare the short-term and midterm outcomes after TAVR and SAVR in low-risk patients with AS. This retrospective comparative effectiveness cohort study used data from the Nationwide Finnish Registry of Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Valve Stenosis of patients at low operative risk who underwent TAVR or SAVR with a bioprosthesis for severe AS from January 1, 2008, to November 30, 2017. Low operative risk was defined as a Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score less than 3% without other comorbidities of clinical relevance. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to adjust for baseline covariates between the TAVR and SAVR cohorts. Primary TAVR or SAVR with a bioprosthesis for AS with or without associated coronary revascularization. The primary outcomes were 30-day and 3-year survival. Overall, 2841 patients (mean [SD] age, 74.0 [6.2] years; 1560 [54.9%] men) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis; TAVR was performed in 325 patients and SAVR in 2516 patients. Propensity score matching produced 304 pairs with similar baseline characteristics. Third-generation devices were used in 263 patients (86.5%) who underwent TAVR. Among these matched pairs, 30-day mortality was 1.3% after TAVR and 3.6% after SAVR (P = .12). Three-year survival was similar in the study cohorts (TAVR, 85.7%; SAVR, 87.7%; P = .45). Interaction tests found no differences in terms of 3-year survival between the study cohorts in patients younger than vs older than 80 years or in patients who received recent aortic valve prostheses vs those who did not. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement using mostly third-generation devices achieved similar short- and mid-term survival compared with SAVR in low-risk patients. Further studies are needed to assess the long-term durability of TAVR prostheses before extending their use to low-risk patients.
- Discussion
- 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.02.049
- Jul 20, 2016
- The Annals of Thoracic Surgery
Invited Commentary
- Front Matter
- 10.1053/j.jvca.2021.11.023
- Nov 22, 2021
- Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Dissemination: The More the Merrier or Too Much of a Good Thing?
- Front Matter
- 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2021.05.004
- May 7, 2021
- The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Commentary: Our patients deserve our patience
- Front Matter
2
- 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.11.021
- Nov 27, 2019
- The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Commentary: Age is just an element of the quality of life puzzle following aortic valve replacement
- Discussion
3
- 10.1161/circinterventions.122.011827
- Feb 23, 2022
- Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions
Decreasing Prices but Increasing Demand for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.
- Research Article
- 10.1016/j.xjon.2024.05.006
- May 24, 2024
- JTCVS Open
Impact of frailty on outcomes and readmissions after transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement in a national cohort
- New
- Supplementary Content
- 10.1186/s40959-025-00386-7
- Nov 4, 2025
- Cardio-oncology
- New
- Research Article
- 10.1186/s40959-025-00396-5
- Nov 3, 2025
- Cardio-oncology
- Supplementary Content
- 10.1186/s40959-025-00393-8
- Oct 30, 2025
- Cardio-oncology
- Research Article
- 10.1186/s40959-025-00365-y
- Oct 30, 2025
- Cardio-oncology
- Addendum
- 10.1186/s40959-025-00402-w
- Oct 28, 2025
- Cardio-oncology
- Research Article
- 10.1186/s40959-025-00387-6
- Oct 22, 2025
- Cardio-oncology
- Research Article
- 10.1186/s40959-025-00395-6
- Oct 21, 2025
- Cardio-oncology
- Research Article
- 10.1186/s40959-025-00385-8
- Oct 17, 2025
- Cardio-oncology
- Research Article
- 10.1186/s40959-025-00392-9
- Oct 15, 2025
- Cardio-oncology
- Research Article
- 10.1186/s40959-025-00375-w
- Oct 13, 2025
- Cardio-oncology
- Ask R Discovery
- Chat PDF
AI summaries and top papers from 250M+ research sources.