ReviewDrug design, development and therapy2026
Cardiac Myosin Activators in Heart Failure: Experimental Advances Amid Clinical Uncertainty.
Review in Drug design, development and therapy, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality despite advances in neurohormonal and device-based therapies, and conventional inotropes are constrained by pro-arrhythmic and energetically costly mechanisms. Cardiac myosin activators (CMAs) offer a conceptually distinct approach by directly modulating the actin-myosin cross-bridge cycle within the sarcomere, but their clinical trajectory has been more nuanced than initially anticipated. Omecamtiv mecarbil(OM) and danicamtiv are the most advanced CMAs to enter human trials; both show reproducible, dose-dependent improvements in systolic function and chamber mechanics in preclinical and early-phase studies, yet a narrow exposure window, signals of diastolic and energetic trade-offs at higher doses, and largely modest or heterogeneous effects on clinical outcomes have tempered expectations and no agent has yet achieved regulatory approval. In this review, we critically appraise the mechanistic rationale, translational evidence and pivotal clinical trials of these agents, integrating emerging work on myocardial energetics and diastolic function. We also compare myosin activation with myosin inhibition and outline future research priorities-including optimisation of dosing strategies, phenotype-guided patient selection, rigorous evaluation of long-term safety and exploration of next-generation myosin-targeting strategies-that must be addressed before CMAs can be credibly positioned within routine heart-failure management.
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.