ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
Genetic Background in Patients with Cancer Therapy-Induced Cardiomyopathy.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2 changes during cardiotoxic cancer treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Genotype-Phenotype Discordance in Cardiomyopathies: Pathophysiology, Clinical Expression, and Therapeutic Considerations.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Mitochondrial dysfunction-driven PANoptosis in doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity: mechanistic insights and intervention strategies.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Heart failure induced by cancer therapies: focus on targeted agents, mechanisms, risk prediction, and clinical management.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Emerging Strategies for the Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Cardiotoxicity in Paediatric Cancer Patients: Advances and Future Perspectives.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emerging evidence indicates that specific genetic variants are associated with an increased risk of toxicity from anticancer treatments and cancer-related cardiovascular complications. These genetic factors influence drug metabolism, efficacy, and susceptibility to adverse effects. For cancer patients, the genetic background can have two major cardiovascular implications, namely therapy-related cardiotoxicity and cancer-related cardiovascular complications. Baseline risk stratification is essential to identify higher-risk individuals and ensure they receive appropriate preventive and therapeutic interventions and more frequent follow-up. Current guidelines recommend stratification based on cardiovascular risk factors, but these factors alone cannot accurately define individual risk. Genetic background has been shown to enhance risk stratification. Beyond rare genetic variants, recent genome-wide association studies have identified single nucleotide polymorphisms implicated in cancer therapy toxicity. Despite their current limitations, polygenic risk scores are expected to play a significant role in risk stratification. This review aims to summarize the current evidence on the role of the genetic background of patients with cancer treated with potentially cardiotoxic drugs who develop cardiotoxicity, aiming to provide insights to refine risk stratification further and tailor the management of these patients.
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.