ReviewArchives of toxicology2021
Improving cardiotoxicity prediction in cancer treatment: integration of conventional circulating biomarkers and novel exploratory tools.
Review in Archives of toxicology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multimodal fusion of EHR and ECG based on deep learning for predicting new-onset coronary heart disease in cancer patients.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and perioperative cardiotoxicity.Journal of anesthesia and translational medicine · 2024Review
- Induction Chemotherapy-Related Covert Cardiac Remodeling in Pre-Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Multiple Myeloma: A Retrospective Observational Study.Cancer medicine · 2024Observational
- Predicting oncology drug-induced cardiotoxicity with donor-specific iPSC-CMs-a proof-of-concept study with doxorubicin.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2024Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram to predict cardiac death after radiotherapy for esophageal cancer.Cancer innovation · 2023Article
- Recent Advances in Serum Biomarkers for Risk Stratification and Patient Management in Cardio-Oncology.Current cardiology reports · 2023Review
- Advances in Biomarkers for Detecting Early Cancer Treatment-Related Cardiac Dysfunction.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early detection strategies and improvements in cancer treatment have dramatically reduced the cancer mortality rate in the United States (US). However, cardiovascular (CV) side effects of cancer therapy are frequent among the 17 million cancer survivors in the US today, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) has become the second leading cause of morbidity and mortality among cancer survivors. Circulating biomarkers are ideal for detecting and monitoring CV side effects of cancer therapy. Here, we summarize the current state of clinical studies on conventional serum and plasma CVD biomarkers to detect and prevent cardiac injury during cancer treatment. We also review how novel exploratory tools such as genetic testing, human stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes, Omics technologies, and artificial intelligence can elucidate underlying molecular and genetic mechanisms of CV injury and to improve predicting cancer therapy-related cardiotoxicity (CTRC). Current regulatory requirements for biomarker qualifications are also addressed. We present generally applicable lessons learned from published studies, particularly on how to improve reproducibility. The combination of conventional circulating biomarkers and novel exploratory tools will pave the way for precision medicine and improve the clinical practice of prediction, detection, and management of CTRC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.