ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Selexipag-based triple combination therapy improves prognosis in Chinese pulmonary arterial hypertension patients.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transitioning Prostacyclin Pathway Agents to Oral Selexipag in Patients with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: A Systematic Literature Review.Advances in therapy · 2026Pooled 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
- Experience with selexipag in triple therapy for pulmonary arterial hypertension in Chinese children.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Real-World Experience with Selexipag in Patients with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Treatment Patterns and Outcomes across Baseline Risk Strata (SPHERE and EXPOSURE Studies).Drugs - real world outcomes · 2026Article
- Could We Maintain the Initial Efficacy of Triple Sequential Combination Therapies with Selexipag Against Progressive Deterioration Risk in Patients with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Insights from a Single-Center Study?Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2026Article
- Upfront triple combination therapy with selexipag: insights from a real world cohort in Chinese patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of different sequential triple oral combination therapies based selexipag on outcomes in pulmonary arterial hypertension.Clinical cardiology · 2024Article
- Oral Prostacyclin Pathway Agents Used in PAH: A Targeted Literature Review.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2024Review
- Evaluating the efficacy and safety of oral triple sequential combination therapy for treating patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension: A multicenter retrospective study.Pulmonary circulation · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Selexipag is an oral selective prostacyclin receptor agonist approved for treatment of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). In the present study, we aim to assess the safety and efficacy of selexipag in triple combination therapy with endothelial receptor antagonists (ERAs) and PDE5is for Chinese PAH patients. Methods and results: A single center retrospective study was performed on group 1 PAH patients ( Conclusion: Triple combination therapy with selexipag was safe and effective in Chinese PAH patients, which was confirmed by acceptable tolerability, and improved exercise capacity, right heart function, risk assessment, and prognosis.
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.