ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Utilization of dexrazoxane in patients treated with doxorubicin: a retrospective, propensity matched analysis of cardiac function and toxicity.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Insights into the Complexities of Pharmacotherapy Parameters in Artificial Intelligence Models for Drug Selection, Precision Personalised Medicine and Optimal Therapeutic Outcomes.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Evaluation of vinpocetine in an acute doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity model in rats.Scientific reports · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Dexrazoxane (DZR) has been used to prevent cardiotoxicity from doxorubicin (DOX), particularly in younger patients with cancer and those with pre-existing cardiac dysfunction. Herein, we sought to further define the role of DZR by evaluating its capacity to mitigate cardiotoxicity in patients actively receiving DOX, while also assessing concomitant toxicities. Materials and methods: We conducted a retrospective, propensity-matched cohort study at a single academic center, comparing outcomes between patients treated with DZR plus DOX and those who received DOX alone. Patients were matched by age, sex, and cumulative lifetime dose of DOX. Cardiotoxicity was assessed as the change in ejection fraction (EF) during and after treatment. To evaluate associations between DZR and other toxicities, we utilized the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, Version 5 (CTCAE). Results: A total of 152 patients were included across both groups. The DOX alone and DOX + DZR groups had median ages of 36 and 28 (ranges 18-68 and 18-69), with median cumulative DOX doses of 375 mg/m Discussion: The addition of DZR to DOX did not result in a statistically significant change in EF during the treatment window. Given the limitations of the dataset, this may suggest a lack of substantial immediate benefit from the co-administration of DZR with DOX. An increased rate of high-grade neutropenia and anemia was observed in patients receiving the combination, although this may be due to confounding factors. Further analysis is warranted, ideally through larger multi-institutional or prospective studies.
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.