ArticleThe European respiratory journal2022
COMPERA 2.0: a refined four-stratum risk assessment model for pulmonary arterial hypertension.
Article in The European respiratory journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01347216 (Prospective Registry of Newly Initiated Therapies for Pulmonary Hypertension), which is not on this map. Cited by 192 papers, 9 of them syntheses 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.
Prospective Registry of Newly Initiated Therapies for Pulmonary Hypertension
Who cites it
192 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Management of inflammatory cardiopulmonary manifestations in systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review.Advances in rheumatology (London, England) · 2026Pooled it
- Brazilian guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of pulmonary hypertension. Official document of the Brazilian Thoracic Society based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology.Respiratory research & clinical practice · 2026Guideline
- Insights from 3D echocardiography: unveiling the prognostic value of RV function in pulmonary hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2025Pooled it
- Survival, morbidity, and quality of life in pulmonary arterial hypertension patients: a systematic review of outcomes reported by population-based observational studies.Respiratory research · 2024Pooled it
- Prognostic Value of Serial Risk Stratification in Adult and Pediatric Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: A Systematic Review.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Pooled it
- Prognostic value of right ventricular free-wall longitudinal strain in patients with pulmonary hypertension: systematic review and meta-analyses.Open heart · 2024Pooled it
- Is low-risk status a surrogate outcome in pulmonary arterial hypertension? An analysis of three randomised trials.The Lancet. Respiratory medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Heterogeneity of treatment effects by risk in pulmonary arterial hypertension.The European respiratory journal · 2023Pooled it
- Risk stratification in adult and pediatric pulmonary arterial hypertension: A systematic review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Initial combination therapy with macitentan and tadalafil in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension, with and without cardiac comorbidities.European journal of heart failure · 2024Trial
- Evolving profile and outcomes of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension undergoing lung transplantation.JHLT open · 2026Article
- Identifying a Cardio-Hepatic Phenotype by Integrating the Albumin-Bilirubin Score Into Risk Assessment in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension.Pulmonary circulation · 2026Article
- Development of a population pharmacokinetic model using combined paediatric and adult data for four pulmonary arterial hypertension drugs.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- Quantitative Inferior T-Wave Inversion as a Marker of High Pulmonary Vascular Resistance and All-Cause Mortality in Patients Evaluated for Pulmonary Hypertension.Pulmonary circulation · 2026Article
- Review
- Beyond the Heart-Lung Axis: A Review of the Crosstalk Between the Hemodynamic, Neurohormonal, and Immune Systems in Pulmonary Hypertension.Comprehensive physiology · 2026Review
- CORE-PH: A 3-Component Score for Long-Term Mortality Risk in a Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Cohort.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Exercise testing for evaluating right ventricular (RV) function in pulmonary hypertension - A review.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society · 2026Article
- Outcomes of transition from selexipag to parenteral prostacyclin analogues in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension.ERJ open research · 2026Article
- Long-Term Survival in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension with Different Etiologies: A Single-Center Experience.Acta Cardiologica Sinica · 2026Article
132 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
33 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRisk stratification plays an essential role in the management of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). The current European guidelines propose a three-stratum model to categorise risk as low, intermediate or high, based on the expected 1-year mortality. However, with this model, most patients are categorised as intermediate risk. We investigated a modified approach based on four risk categories, with intermediate risk subdivided into intermediate-low and intermediate-high risk.
methodsWe analysed data from the Comparative, Prospective Registry of Newly Initiated Therapies for Pulmonary Hypertension (COMPERA), a European pulmonary hypertension registry, and calculated risk at diagnosis and first follow-up based on World Health Organization functional class, 6-min walk distance (6MWD) and serum levels of brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) or N-terminal pro-BNP (NT-proBNP), using refined cut-off values. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analyses, log-rank testing and Cox proportional hazards models.
resultsData from 1655 patients with PAH were analysed. Using the three-stratum model, most patients were classified as intermediate risk (76.0% at baseline and 63.9% at first follow-up). The refined four-stratum risk model yielded a more nuanced separation and predicted long-term survival, especially at follow-up assessment. Changes in risk from baseline to follow-up were observed in 31.1% of the patients with the three-stratum model and in 49.2% with the four-stratum model. These changes, including those between the intermediate-low and intermediate-high strata, were associated with changes in long-term mortality risk.
conclusionsModified risk stratification using a four-stratum model based on refined cut-off levels for functional class, 6MWD and BNP/NT-proBNP was more sensitive to prognostically relevant changes in risk than the original three-stratum model.
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.