ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2026
Regulatory challenges and current policy for cardiotoxicity detection in oncology drug development.
Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid evolution of oncology therapeutics, particularly targeted agents, antibody-drug conjugates, and immunotherapies has outpaced existing regulatory frameworks for detecting and managing cardiotoxicity. Current gaps include inconsistent cardiac safety requirements across development phases, limited incorporation of Cardio-Oncology endpoints within expedited approval pathways, and inadequate harmonization of post-marketing signal detection. These deficiencies underscore the need for a modernized, system-level approach that integrates regulatory science with real-world cardiovascular risk. This review examines approval processes of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA), including expedited pathways such as Breakthrough Therapy, Accelerated Approval, PRIority Medicines (PRIME), and upstream activities in pivotal trials. It highlights their strengths in pre-approval drug dose safety and reducing time-to-therapy while critically evaluating limitations in pre-approval cardiac phenotyping, reliance on surrogate endpoints for cardiotoxicity assessment, and constrained post-market surveillance infrastructures that delay informed, patient-centered understanding of safety and efficacy following drug approval.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42213338What 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.