ArticlePediatric radiology2023
Brand ferumoxytol vs. generic ferumoxytol comparison across two dosing regimens: a cardiac MRI image quality study.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Commentary: Ferumoxytol in pediatric cardiovascular imaging.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
- Ferumoxytol dose optimization for three-dimensional whole-heart magnetic resonance imaging in patients with congenital heart disease.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
- Abdominal vascular imaging with ferumoxytol - how we do it.Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- Repeatability and reproducibility of hemodynamic measurements by intracranial 4D Flow MRI: a multi‑vendor and multi‑software cross‑over comparison study.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Ferumoxytol-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging: applications and technical advances.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2025Review
- Safety and TJournal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic ResonanceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFerumoxytol is becoming more widely used as an off-label blood-pool contrast agent for MR angiography (MRA) and four-dimensional (4D) flow imaging in pediatric cardiovascular disease. Brand and generic versions of ferumoxytol are available with no information on relative efficacy as a contrast agent and safety profiles.
objectiveThis study evaluates patient safety and image quality of comparable dosages of generic ferumoxytol (GF) versus brand ferumoxytol (BF) with the following hypotheses: (1) Reducing the contrast dosage from 3 to 2 mg/kg will not affect imaging quality and diagnostic accuracy of MRA and four-dimensional 4D flow. (2) GF and BF have similar image quality. (3) GF and BF have similar patient safety profiles. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn an IRB-approved retrospective study, changes in vitals/clinical status between baseline, during infusion, and 30 min post-infusion were analyzed in 3 groups: group 1 (3 mg/kg BF, 216 patients, age: 19.29 ± 11.71 years ranging from 2 months to 62 years), group 2 (2 mg/kg BF, 47 patients, age: 15.35 ± 8.56 years ranging from 10 days to 41 years), and group 3 (2 mg/kg GF, 127 patients, age: 17.16 ± 12.18 years ranging from 6 days to 58 years). Both pediatric and adult patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) indications were included within the study. Adverse reactions were classified as mild, moderate, or severe. Quantitative analysis of MR image quality was performed with signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) on MRA and velocity-to-noise ratio (VNR) on 4D flow. Qualitative grading of imaging features was performed by 2 experienced observers. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and chi-square tests were used for comparison with a P value of ≤ 0.05 used for significance.
resultsNo statistical difference was found in clinical status and vital signs (P>0.05). No severe reactions were reported. 7.9% of GF patients experienced an adverse reaction compared to 2.3% with 3 mg/kg BF and 8.4% with 2 mg/kg BF. There was no statistical difference in SNR between the 3 groups (P>0.05). For 4D flow, 2 mg/kg GF demonstrated an increase in VNR compared to 2 mg/kg BF (P = 0.005). The qualitative scores for MRA and 4D flow were high (≥ 3) across all 3 groups.
conclusionsNo significant difference was identified between 2 mg/kg GF and BF in terms of safety profile and image quality. Given the small sample size of this study, further studies are required to confirm these results.
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.