Fig. 2

Survival rate, clinical, echocardiographic, and post mortem data of the animals. The survival rate in the D-CON group was significantly worse compared to CON, while both the BB and ACEI treatments resulted in an apparent survival benefit compared to D-CON, which was statistically non-significant with this number of study animals. a The growth rate of the animals was significantly higher in the CON group compared to the DOX-receiving groups, irrespective of the applied cardiovascular pre-treatments. b Significantly decreased wet/dry ratios were found in the lung samples of the BB and ACEI receiving animals compared to those in the D-CON group. c DOX treatment significantly increased the systolic BP of the animals compared to CON. Systolic and diastolic BPs were significantly lower in the ACEI group compared to all other groups. d, e HR was significantly lower in the BB group compared to all other groups. f A significantly decreased ejection fraction could be observed in the D-CON and AA animals compared to CON, while this parameter remained preserved in the BB group. g The IVRT was increased in all DOX-treated animals compared to CON. h The change in diastolic strain rate was more pronounced in the D-CON group compared to the BB and ACEI groups. i The lines at bottom represent the duration of doxorubicin exposure (DOX). n = number of animals per group (5 measurements per animal in case of blood pressure and heart rate, 3 measurements per animal in case of echocardiographic parameters, except for single body weight and strain rate measurements); Statistics: Wilcoxon’s rank-sum tests except for survival (log-rank test); *p < 0.05 vs. CON; ⁺p < 0.05 vs. D-CON; ^§p < 0.05 vs. BB; ^p < 0.05 vs. ACEI; ˇp < 0.05 vs. AA. BL = baseline, DBP = diastolic blood pressure, FU = follow-up, HR = heart rate, IVRT = isovolumetric relaxation time, SBP = systolic blood pressure