ArticleDrugs - real world outcomes2025
Comparative Analysis of Survival in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension for Patients Treated with Selexipag in Clinical Practice (EXPOSURE Study).
Article in Drugs - real world outcomes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical research on pulmonary hypertension from a 2025 perspective: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), comparative assessment of treatment effect on survival in randomized controlled settings of contemporary patients has not been feasible.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to use EXPOSURE, the ongoing, real-world, post-authorization safety study, and commitment to the European Medicines Agency to perform pre-specified comparative survival analyses between patients that newly initiated selexipag versus other PAH-specific therapies by applying statistical methods to account for population differences.
methodsEXPOSURE (EUPAS19085) is an observational study comprising patients with PAH who initiated selexipag or other PAH-specific therapy. To balance characteristics of patients in the other PAH therapy cohort with the selexipag cohort at PAH therapy initiation (baseline), propensity score weighting was applied. Mortality rate ratios (MRRs) were calculated.
results2014 patients were available for analysis. Prior to applying propensity score weighting, patients in the selexipag cohort were more likely to have longer time from diagnosis, less functional impairment, and treatment with combination background therapy versus the other PAH therapy cohort. Following weighting, baseline variables for both cohorts were well balanced. Weighted treatment exposure was 827.9 and 840.5 person-years for the selexipag and modelled other PAH therapy cohort, respectively. Weighted proportion of deaths was lower in the selexipag versus modelled other PAH therapy cohort; MRR showed a higher survival rate for selexipag-treated patients (MRR [95% confidence interval]: 0.55 [0.31-0.99]).
conclusionsSurvival analyses in EXPOSURE suggest a reduced risk of mortality among the cohort of patients newly initiated on selexipag compared with the modelled cohort newly initiated with other PAH-specific therapies. Further research is needed to confirm this observation. TRIAL REGISTRY: Trial registration: EUPAS19085.
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.