Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 321

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Screening Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer for Cardiomyopathy: Comparison of Echocardiography and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Open access
Armstrong, Gregory T., Plana, Juan Carlos, Zhang, Nan, Srivastava, Deokumar, Green, Daniel M., Ness, Kirsten K., Daniel Donovan, F., Metzger, Monika L., Arevalo, Alejandro, Durand, Jean-Bernard, Joshi, Vijaya, Hudson, Melissa M., Robison, Leslie L., Flamm, Scott D.·2012·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: To compare two-dimensional (2D) echocardiography, the current method of screening for treatment-related cardiomyopathy recommended by the Children's Oncology Group Guidelines, to cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging, the reference standard for left ventricular (LV) function. Patients and Methods: Cross-sectional, contemporaneous evaluation of LV structure and function by 2D and three-dimensional (3D) echocardiography and CMR imaging in 114 adult survivors of childhood cancer currently median age 39 years (range, 22 to 53 years) exposed to anthracycline chemotherapy and/or chest-directed radiation therapy. Results: In this survivor population, 14% (n = 16) had an ejection fraction (EF) less than 50% by CMR. Survivors previously undiagnosed with cardiotoxicity (n = 108) had a high prevalence of EF (32%) and cardiac mass (48%) that were more than two standard deviations below the mean of normative CMR data. 2D echocardiography overestimated the mean EF of this population by 5%. Compared with CMR, 2D echocardiography (biplane method) had a sensitivity of 25% and a false-negative rate of 75% for detection of EF less than 50%, although 3D echocardiography had 53% and 47%, respectively. Twelve survivors (11%) had an EF less than 50% by CMR but were misclassified as ≥ 50% (range, 50% to 68%) by 2D echocardiography (biplane method). Detection of cardiomyopathy was improved (sensitivity, 75%) by using a higher 2D echocardiography cutoff (EF < 60%) to detect an EF less than 50% by the reference standard CMR. Conclusion: CMR identified a high prevalence of cardiomyopathy among adult survivors previously undiagnosed with cardiac disease. 2D echocardiography demonstrated limited screening performance. In this high-risk population, survivors with an EF 50% to 59% by 2D echocardiography should be considered for comprehensive cardiac assessment, which may include CMR.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1200/jco.2011.40.3584

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 321

Metadata

Authors
Armstrong, G. T., Plana, J. C., Zhang, N., Srivastava, D., Green, D. M., Ness, K. K., Daniel Donovan, F., Metzger, M. L., Arevalo, A., Durand, J.-B., Joshi, V., Hudson, M. M., Robison, L. L., & Flamm, S. D.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2012-08-10
Volume
30
Issue
23
Pages
2876-2884
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2134838884
Cited by
321
References
3
FWCI
11.51
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: Screening Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer for Cardiomyopathy: Comparison of Echocardiography and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2011.40.3584
The paper
Armstrong, G. T., Plana, J. C., Zhang, N., Srivastava, D., Green, D. M., Ness, K. K., Daniel Donovan, F., Metzger, M. L., Arevalo, A., Durand, J.-B., Joshi, V., Hudson, M. M., Robison, L. L., & Flamm, S. D. (2012). Screening Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer for Cardiomyopathy: Comparison of Echocardiography and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2011.40.3584

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.