Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28329315›Full record

Trial reportEuropean heart journal2017

SERAPHIN haemodynamic substudy: the effect of the dual endothelin receptor antagonist macitentan on haemodynamic parameters and NT-proBNP levels and their association with disease progression in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension.

Nazzareno Galiè, Pavel Jansa, Tomás Pulido, Richard N Channick, Marion Delcroix, Hossein-Ardeschir Ghofrani, Franck-Olivier Le Brun, Sanjay Mehta, Loïc Perchenet, Lewis J Rubin and 5 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European heart journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Dual ETFundamental & clinical pharmacology · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 11 institutions in 11 countries.

Nazzareno GalièDepartment of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine-DIMES, via Massarenti 9, Bologna 40138, Italy.
Pavel JansaClinical Department of Cardiology and Angiology, 1st Faculty of Medicine, 2nd Medical Department, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Tomás PulidoCardiopulmonary Department, Ignacio Chávez, National Heart Institute, Mexico City, Mexico.
Richard N ChannickPulmonary and Critical Care, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Marion DelcroixDepartment of Pneumology, Gasthuisberg University Hospital, Leuven, Belgium.
Hossein-Ardeschir GhofraniUniversity of Giessen and Marburg Lung Center (UGMLC), Giessen, Germany, Member of the German Center of Lung Research (DZL), and Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Franck-Olivier Le BrunActelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Allschwil, Switzerland.
Sanjay MehtaDivision of Respirology, Department of Medicine, London Health Sciences Centre, Victoria Hospital, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Loïc PerchenetActelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Allschwil, Switzerland.
Lewis J RubinDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of California, San Diego Medical School, San Diego, CA, USA.
B K S SastryDepartment of Cardiology, CARE Hospitals, Hyderabad, India.
Gérald SimonneauAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de Pneumologie, Hôpital Bicêtre, Université Paris-Sud, Laboratoire d'Excellence en Recherche sur le Médicament et Innovation Thérapeutique, and INSERM U-999, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France.
Olivier SitbonAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Service de Pneumologie, Hôpital Bicêtre, Université Paris-Sud, Laboratoire d'Excellence en Recherche sur le Médicament et Innovation Thérapeutique, and INSERM U-999, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France.
Rogério SouzaPulmonary Department, Heart Institute, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil.
Adam TorbickiDepartment of Pulmonary Circulation and Thromboembolic Diseases, Medical Center for Postgraduate Education, ECZ-Otwock, Poland.
Actelion (Switzerland) · CHInserm · FRCARE Hospitals · INCharles University · CZInstituto Nacional de Cardiología · MXMassachusetts General Hospital · USUniversidade de São Paulo · BRUniversitair Ziekenhuis Leuven · BEUniversities of Giessen and Marburg Lung Center · DEUniversity of California San Diego Medical Center · USVictoria Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims: The effect of macitentan on haemodynamic parameters and NT-proBNP levels was evaluated in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients in the SERAPHIN study. Association between these parameters and disease progression, assessed by the primary endpoint (time to first morbidity/mortality event), was explored. Methods and results: Of the 742 randomized patients, 187 with right heart catheterization at baseline and month 6 participated in a haemodynamic sub-study. Prespecified endpoints included change from baseline to month 6 in cardiac index (CI), right atrial pressure (RAP), mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP), pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR), mixed-venous oxygen saturation, and NT-proBNP. Exploratory analyses examined associations between CI, RAP, and NT-proBNP and disease progression using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression models. Macitentan improved CI, RAP, mPAP, PVR and NT-proBNP vs. placebo at month 6. Absolute levels of CI, RAP and NT-proBNP at baseline and month 6, but not their changes, were associated with morbidity/mortality events. Patients with CI > 2.5 L/min/m2, RAP < 8 mmHg, or NT-proBNP < 750 fmol/ml at month 6 had a lower risk of morbidity/mortality than those not meeting these thresholds (HR 0.49, 95% CL 0.28-0.86; HR 0.72, 95% CL 0.42-1.22; and HR 0.22, 95% CL 0.15-0.33, respectively). Conclusions: For all treatment groups, baseline and month 6 values of CI, RAP, and NT-proBNP, but not their changes, were associated with morbidity/mortality events, confirming their relevance in predicting disease progression in patients with PAH. By improving those parameters, macitentan increased the likelihood of reaching threshold values associated with lower risk of morbidity/mortality.

Indexed as

Cardiac CatheterizationDisease ProgressionDose-Response Relationship, DrugEndothelin Receptor AntagonistsFemaleHemodynamicsHumansHypertension, PulmonaryKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNatriuretic Peptide, BrainPeptide FragmentsPyrimidinesRisk FactorsSulfonamidesEndothelin Receptor AntagonistsmacitentanNatriuretic Peptide, BrainPeptide Fragmentspro-brain natriuretic peptide (1-76)PyrimidinesSulfonamidesHaemodynamicsMacitentanPrognosisPulmonary hypertensionRight ventricular function

Identifiers

PMID28329315
PMCPMC5400052
OpenAlexW2606984277

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.