ArticleCardio-oncology (London, England)2026
Role of ivabradine for anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity: a meta-analysis.
Article in Cardio-oncology (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAnthracyclines are widely used anticancer agents but are limited by dose-dependent cardiotoxicity. Ivabradine selectively reduces heart rate without negative inotropy and may offer cardio protection in cancer patients, though its efficacy in anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity (AIC) remains unclear.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ivabradine versus placebo in adult patients receiving anthracycline therapy. PubMed, Cochrane Central, Embase, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus and ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists were searched through August 2025. Outcomes included left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), heart rate, blood pressure, NT-proBNP, and strain-based parameters. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane RoB 2 tool.
resultsThree RCTs (n = 210) met inclusion criteria. Ivabradine showed no significant effect on LVEF (MD 0.32%, 95% CI - 0.90 to 1.54; p = 0.61) or NT-proBNP. Heart rate reduction was directionally favorable but not statistically significant (MD - 4.11 bpm, 95% CI - 8.69 to 0.46; p = 0.08). Systolic and diastolic blood pressure were unchanged. Strain-based outcomes were inconsistently reported, precluding pooled analysis.
conclusionsGiven the limited sample size, heterogeneity, and variability in endpoint definitions, current evidence is insufficient to establish a definitive cardioprotective role for ivabradine in AIC. Larger, rigorously designed trials with standardized imaging and biomarker endpoints are needed to determine its role.
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.