Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26938118›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2016

Different dosage schedules for reducing cardiotoxicity in people with cancer receiving anthracycline chemotherapy.

Elvira C van Dalen, Helena J H van der Pal, Leontien C M Kremer

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
9.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

50 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 104 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Cardiovascular effects of Hodgkin's lymphoma: a review of literature.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2018
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elvira C van DalenDepartment of Paediatric Oncology, Emma Children's Hospital/Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660 (room TKsO-247), Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1100 DD.
Helena J H van der Pal
Leontien C M Kremer
Princess Máxima Center · NLEmma Kinderziekenhuis · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis review update has been managed by both the Childhood Cancer and Cochrane Gynaecological, Neuro-oncology and Orphan Cancer Groups.The use of anthracycline chemotherapy is limited by the occurrence of cardiotoxicity. To prevent this cardiotoxicity, different anthracycline dosage schedules have been studied.

objectivesTo determine the occurrence of cardiotoxicity with the use of different anthracycline dosage schedules (that is peak doses and infusion durations) in people with cancer. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the databases of the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, Issue 11, 2015), MEDLINE (1966 to December 2015), and EMBASE (1980 to December 2015). We also searched reference lists of relevant articles, conference proceedings, experts in the field, and ongoing trials databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which different anthracycline dosage schedules were compared in people with cancer (children and adults). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed the study selection, the 'Risk of bias' assessment, and data extraction. We performed analyses according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. MAIN

resultsWe identified 11 studies: 7 evaluated different infusion durations (803 participants), and 4 evaluated different peak doses (5280 participants). Seven studies were RCTs addressing different anthracycline infusion durations; we identified long-term follow-up data for one of the trials in this update. The meta-analysis showed a statistically significant lower rate of clinical heart failure with an infusion duration of six hours or longer as compared to a shorter infusion duration (risk ratio (RR) 0.27; 95% confidence interval 0.09 to 0.81; 5 studies; 557 participants). The majority of participants included in these studies were adults with different solid tumours. For different anthracycline peak doses, we identified two RCTs addressing a doxorubicin peak dose of less than 60 mg/m(2) versus 60 mg/m(2) or more, one RCT addressing a liposomal doxorubicin peak dose of 25 mg/m(2) versus 50 mg/m(2), and one RCT addressing an epirubicin peak dose of 83 mg/m(2) versus 110 mg/m(2). A significant difference in the occurrence of clinical heart failure was identified in none of the studies. The participants included in these studies were adults with different solid tumours. High or unclear 'Risk of bias' issues were present in all studies. AUTHORS'

conclusionsAn anthracycline infusion duration of six hours or longer reduces the risk of clinical heart failure, and it seems to reduce the risk of subclinical cardiac damage. Since there is only a small amount of data for children and data obtained in adults cannot be extrapolated to children, different anthracycline infusion durations should be evaluated further in children.We identified no significant difference in the occurrence of clinical heart failure in participants treated with a doxorubicin peak dose of less than 60 mg/m(2) or 60 mg/m(2) or more. Only one RCT was available for the other identified peak doses, so we can make no definitive conclusions about the occurrence of cardiotoxicity. More high-quality research is needed, both in children and adults and in leukaemias and solid tumours.

Indexed as

AdultAnthracyclinesAntibiotics, AntineoplasticCardiac Output, LowChildHeartHeart DiseasesHumansNeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnthracyclinesAntibiotics, Antineoplastic

Identifiers

PMID26938118
PMCPMC6457744
OpenAlexW2337000942

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.