ReviewJACC. CardioOncology2025
IGHG Recommendations for Anthracycline and Anthraquinone Cardiac Dysfunction Equivalence Ratios After Childhood Cancer: JACC: CardioOncology Expert Panel.
Review in JACC. CardioOncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Left ventricular function and its longitudinal change in Swiss childhood cancer survivors - results from the CardioOnco study.Cardio-oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular and Oncologic Considerations in Adult Hodgkin Lymphoma: JACC: CardioOncology State-of the-Art Review.JACC. CardioOncology · 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
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anthracycline and anthraquinone agents are major contributors to cancer therapy-related cardiac dysfunction in childhood cancer. However, evidence-based equivalence ratios for estimating individual risk have not been incorporated into international surveillance guidelines. The International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group systematically reviewed the literature on equivalence ratios for doxorubicin, daunorubicin, epirubicin, idarubicin, and mitoxantrone. Based on available evidence, benefit-harm considerations, and expert consensus, the panel concluded that the risk of cardiac dysfunction is lower with daunorubicin and higher with mitoxantrone compared with doxorubicin (moderate-quality evidence; strong recommendation). The panel recommends using an approximate ratio of 0.6 to convert daunorubicin to a doxorubicin-equivalent dose and a ratio of 10.5 for mitoxantrone (low-quality evidence; moderate recommendation). No recommendation was made for epirubicin or idarubicin due to inconclusive evidence.
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.