The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The NHLBI-Sponsored Consortium for preclinicAl assESsment of cARdioprotective Therapies (CAESAR): A New Paradigm for Rigorous, Accurate, and Reproducible Evaluation of Putative Infarct-Sparing Interventions in Mice, Rabbits, and Pigs
Open accessAbstract
Rationale: Despite 4 decades of intense effort and substantial financial investment, the cardioprotection field has failed to deliver a single drug that effectively reduces myocardial infarct size in patients. A major reason is insufficient rigor and reproducibility in preclinical studies. Objective: To develop a multicenter, randomized, controlled, clinical trial-like infrastructure to conduct rigorous and reproducible preclinical evaluation of cardioprotective therapies. Methods and Results: With support from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, we established the Consortium for preclinicAl assESsment of cARdioprotective therapies (CAESAR), based on the principles of randomization, investigator blinding, a priori sample size determination and exclusion criteria, appropriate statistical analyses, and assessment of reproducibility. To validate CAESAR, we tested the ability of ischemic preconditioning to reduce infarct size in 3 species (at 2 sites/species): mice (n=22–25 per group), rabbits (n=11–12 per group), and pigs (n=13 per group). During this validation phase, (1) we established protocols that gave similar results between centers and confirmed that ischemic preconditioning significantly reduced infarct size in all species and (2) we successfully established a multicenter structure to support CAESAR’s operations, including 2 surgical centers for each species, a Pathology Core (to assess infarct size), a Biomarker Core (to measure plasma cardiac troponin levels), and a Data Coordinating Center—all with the oversight of an external Protocol Review and Monitoring Committee. Conclusions: CAESAR is operational, generates reproducible results, can detect cardioprotection, and provides a mechanism for assessing potential infarct-sparing therapies with a level of rigor analogous to multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trials. This is a revolutionary new approach to cardioprotection. Importantly, we provide state-of-the-art, detailed protocols (“CAESAR protocols”) for measuring infarct size in mice, rabbits, and pigs in a manner that is rigorous, accurate, and reproducible.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2012 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Writing Group Members, Roger, V. L., Go, A. S., Lloyd-Jones, D. M., Benjamin, E. J., Berry, J. D., Borden, W. B., Bravata, D. M., Dai, S., Ford, E. S., et al. (2012) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e31823ac046 · Cited by 7,333
Policy: NIH plans to enhance reproducibility
Collins, F. S., & Tabak, L. A. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/505612a · Cited by 1,247
Myocardial Protection at a Crossroads: The Need for Translation Into Clinical Therapy
Bolli, R., Becker, L., Gross, G., Mentzer, R., Balshaw, D., & Lathrop, D. A. (2004) · Circulation Research · doi:10.1161/01.res.0000137171.97172.d7 · Cited by 428
Self-citation
Cited by
Myocardial ischaemia–reperfusion injury and cardioprotection in perspective
Heusch, G. (2020) · Nature Reviews Cardiology · doi:10.1038/s41569-020-0403-y · Cited by 1,234
Evolving Therapies for Myocardial Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury
Ibáñez, B., Heusch, G., Ovize, M., & Van de Werf, F. (2015) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.02.032 · Cited by 1,009
Kalogeris, T., Baines, C. P., Krenz, M., & Korthuis, R. J. (2016) · Comprehensive Physiology · doi:10.1002/cphy.c160006 · Cited by 718
Guidelines for experimental models of myocardial ischemia and infarction
Lindsey, M. L., Bolli, R., Canty, J. M., Du, X.-J., Frangogiannis, N. G., Frantz, S., Gourdie, R. G., Holmes, J. W., Jones, S. P., Kloner, R. A., et al. (2018) · American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology · doi:10.1152/ajpheart.00335.2017 · Cited by 526
Self-citationBøtker, H. E., Hausenloy, D., Andreadou, I., Antonucci, S., Boengler, K., Davidson, S. M., Deshwal, S., Devaux, Y., Di Lisa, F., Di Sante, M., et al. (2018) · Basic Research in Cardiology · doi:10.1007/s00395-018-0696-8 · Cited by 423
Metadata
- Authors
- Jones, S. P., Tang, X.-L., Guo, Y., Steenbergen, C., Lefer, D. J., Kukreja, R. C., Kong, M., Li, Q., Bhushan, S., Zhu, X., Du, J., Nong, Y., Stowers, H. L., Kondo, K., Hunt, G. N., Goodchild, T. T., Orr, A., Chang, C. C., Ockaili, R., Salloum, F. N., & Bolli, R.
- Venue
- Circulation Research
- Published
- 2015-02-13
- Volume
- 116
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 572-586
- ISSN
- 0009-7330 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4571
- OpenAlex
- W2152662651
- Cited by
- 186
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 12.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The NHLBI-Sponsored Consortium for preclinicAl assESsment of cARdioprotective Therapies (CAESAR): A New Paradigm for Rigorous, Accurate, and Reproducible Evaluation of Putative Infarct-Sparing Interventions in Mice, Rabbits, and Pigs. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circresaha.116.305462
- The paper
- Jones, S. P., Tang, X.-L., Guo, Y., Steenbergen, C., Lefer, D. J., Kukreja, R. C., Kong, M., Li, Q., Bhushan, S., Zhu, X., Du, J., Nong, Y., Stowers, H. L., Kondo, K., Hunt, G. N., Goodchild, T. T., Orr, A., Chang, C. C., Ockaili, R., . . . Bolli, R. (2015). The NHLBI-Sponsored Consortium for preclinicAl assESsment of cARdioprotective Therapies (CAESAR): A New Paradigm for Rigorous, Accurate, and Reproducible Evaluation of Putative Infarct-Sparing Interventions in Mice, Rabbits, and Pigs. Circulation Research. https://doi.org/10.1161/circresaha.116.305462
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.