SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2017
Association of oral endothelin receptor antagonists with risks of cardiovascular events and mortality: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence synthesis in pulmonary arterial hypertension: a systematic review and critical appraisal.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2020Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs) are widely used in a variety of disorders, including pulmonary artery hypertension, systemic sclerosis, diabetic and kidney diseases, and several tumors. However, reported adverse events, especially increased risks of cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality, have cast doubt on their potential clinical application. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to confirm whether ERAs increased CVD risk and mortality.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed (1966-2015), EMBASE (1974-2015), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Register Database for randomized controlled trials published between Jan 1, 1990 and Mar 18, 2015. Inclusion criteria included a study duration of more than 3 weeks, the use of a randomized control group receiving an oral ERA or placebo, and the availability of outcome data for cardiovascular events and all-cause death.
resultsA total of 33 trials met the inclusion criteria. There were 8098 cases in the ERA group and 5074 cases in the placebo group. Compared with the control group, the risk ratio (RR) for all-cause death in the ERA group was 0.983 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.883 to 1.094, P = 0.754]. The summary RR for cardiovascular events was 1.651 in the ERA group (95% CI, 1.164 to 2.34, P = 0.005). The pooled results showed that ERAs treatment could lead to more edema, anemia, and abnormal transaminase levels. Also, there was an increased proportion of discontinued therapy in the ERA treatment because of side effects (RR = 1.322, 95% CI, 1.036 to 1.686, P = 0.025). There were no significant differences in the experienced episodes of headache and dyspnea between the active therapy and control groups.
conclusionsERAs therapy is not significantly associated with increased all-cause death, but there are more cardiovascular events and edema or fluid retention, anemia, and liver enzymes disorder. Large clinical randomized controlled studies are needed to further confirm the safety of the clinical application of ERAs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.