Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17470331›Full record

ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2007

Nesiritide for acute decompensated heart failure: does the benefit justify the risk?

Jonathan Sackner-Bernstein, Keith D Aaronson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current cardiology reports, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jonathan Sackner-BernsteinClinilabs, Inc., 423 West 55th Street, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10019, USA. jsb@clinilabs.com
Keith D Aaronson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nesiritide is US Food and Drug Administration-approved for the treatment of patients with acutely decompensated heart failure who suffer from symptoms at rest or with minimal exertion. Its approval was based on a clinical development program that focused on surrogates and short-term effects on symptoms rather than clinical outcomes. The association between its use and subsequent risk of death raises the question of whether the endpoints assessed in the clinical development program were adequate, and provides the opportunity to evaluate the process of weighing risks with benefits. We conclude that with nesiritide, the risks of therapy outweigh the benefits demonstrated to date.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseAnimalsBiomarkersClinical Trials as TopicHeart FailureHumansNatriuretic AgentsNatriuretic Peptide, BrainRenal InsufficiencyRisk FactorsBiomarkersNatriuretic AgentsNatriuretic Peptide, Brain

Identifiers

PMID17470331

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.