ReviewCureus2024
A Systematic Review of the Cardiotoxic Effects of Targeted Therapies in Oncology.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Temporal dynamics of cardiac biomarkers in therapy‑related cardiotoxicity: a prospective cardio‑oncology cohort study.Cardio-oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Recent Advances in Understanding the Mechanisms of Therapy-Related Cardiovascular Events in Pediatric Hematologic Malignancies.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Patient Education Strategies in Radiotherapy: A Narrative Review of Tools, Timing, and Therapist Roles.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
- Current strategies for prevention of cancer therapy-related cardiotoxicity: pharmacological, non-pharmacological and emerging approaches.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cancer therapy advancements have improved survival rates but also introduced significant cardiotoxic risks. Cardiotoxicity, a critical adverse effect of cancer treatments such as doxorubicin, trastuzumab, and radiotherapy, poses substantial challenges. This systematic review synthesizes findings from studies on cardiotoxicity induced by cancer therapies, focusing on detection and management. Key predictors of chemotherapy-induced myocardial toxicity (CIMT) include advanced age, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels. Regular echocardiographic assessments, particularly of the left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LVGLS) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), are essential for early detection. The CardTox-Score, incorporating these risk factors, shows high sensitivity and specificity in predicting CIMT. Advanced imaging techniques and biomarkers play crucial roles in identifying at-risk patients before functional decline. Early biomarkers and imaging techniques such as LVGLS and LVEF are effective in diagnosing and managing cardiotoxicity, allowing timely interventions. Cardiology involvement in patient care significantly enhances adherence to cardiac monitoring guidelines and reduces cardiotoxicity risks. Management strategies emphasize regular cardiac monitoring, patient education, and the use of cardioprotective agents. A collaborative approach between cardiologists and oncologists is vital to assess cardiovascular risks, minimize vascular toxicity, and manage long-term adverse effects, ensuring the safety and efficacy of cancer therapies. This review underscores the importance of early detection and proactive management of cardiotoxicity in cancer patients to optimize treatment outcomes and improve quality of life.
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.