SynthesisCritical pathways in cardiology2026
Efficacy and Safety of Mavacamten and Aficamten in Obstructive and Nonobstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Critical pathways in cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac myosin inhibitors (CMIs) are novel, disease-modifying therapies for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of CMIs versus placebo in patients with HCM. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials involving adults with obstructive and nonobstructive HCM was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines and registered on PROSPERO. Databases including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched through September 2025. Random-effects models were performed using standardized mean differences for biomarker and WMDs for echocardiographic parameters. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals. Seven randomized controlled trials, comprising 1406 patients (732 CMI; 674 placebo), were included. CMIs significantly improved resting [WMD: -57.27 mm Hg (-63.05, -51.49); P < 0.001] and post-Valsalva left ventricular outflow tract gradient [WMD: -55.87 mm Hg (-63.05, -51.49); P < 0.001]. Left ventricular ejection fraction decreased modestly [WMD: -4.74% (-7.22, -2.26); P = 0.0002]. CMIs increased the likelihood of ≥1 New York Heart Association class improvement [RR: 1.94 (1.37, 2.74); P < 0.001] and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Score [WMD: +6.60 points (3.84, 9.35); P < 0.001]. N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide [WMD: -13.35 (-18.04, -8.67); P < 0.001] and cardiac troponin I [WMD: -11.90 (-15.07, -8.73); P < 0.001] declined. Peak oxygen uptake showed no overall change [WMD: +0.64 mL/kg/min (-0.18, 1.47); P = 0.12]. CMIs increased adverse events [RR: 1.07 (1.02, 1.13); P = 0.008], particularly hypertension [RR: 2.19 (1.06, 4.53); P = 0.03]. CMIs improve hemodynamics, functional status, and biomarkers in HCM with an acceptable safety profile and hold promise as disease-modifying therapy, though long-term outcomes require confirmation.
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.