ReviewNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2024
Comparison of bolus administration and short-term infusion versus long-term infusion of doxorubicin in terms of cardiotoxicity and efficacy.
Review in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk Management in First-in-Human Trials of Intravenous Drugs: Current Practices and Future Perspectives.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2026Review
- Evolving Cardioprotective Strategies in Cardio-Oncology: A Narrative Review.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- Cardio-Oncology Considerations for Breast Cancer: Risk Stratification, Monitoring, and Treatment.Oncology (Williston Park, N.Y.) · 2025Review
- Cardiotoxicity of CPX-351 in children and adolescents with relapsed AML: a Children's Oncology Group report.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiotoxicity caused by anthracyclines chemotherapy is one of the leading causes of mortality and morbidity in cancer survivors. Continuous infusion (CI) instead of bolus (BOL) injection is one of the methods that seem to be effective in reducing doxorubicin (DOX) cardiotoxicity. Due to the variety of results, we decided to compare these two approaches regarding toxicity and efficacy and report the final results for different cancers. We included 21 studies (four preclinical and seventeen clinical trials) up to May 15, 2023. In children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and adults with chronic lymphoblastic leukemia (CLL) and gastric cancer, results were in favor of BOL injection, without increase in cardiotoxicity. On the other hand, CI showed to be better option in patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) and breast cancer. Various results were also observed in adult patients with sarcoma. Overall, it can be concluded that the benefits of CI, especially in adults, outweigh its disadvantages. However, due to the variety of results and heterogeneity of studies, further clinical trials with a larger sample size and a longer duration of follow-up are needed to make a more accurate comparison between CI and BOL injection.
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.