Observational studyJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Mavacamten in Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: National Insights on Access and Safety Profile From Real-World Data.
Observational study in Journal of the American Heart Association, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMavacamten improves symptoms in obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, but real-world prescription patterns, safety profile, and the effect of atrial fibrillation (AF) on outcomes remain unclear.
methodsAn observational multicenter analysis using patient-level data from the TriNetX database (2011-2023) compared patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy treated with mavacamten versus those not treated with mavacamten (controls). Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of mavacamten use. Propensity-score matching was used to reduce confounding bias. Outcomes included acute heart failure, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, cardiovascular hospitalization, new-onset AF, and all-cause mortality. Outcomes were also stratified by AF history.
resultsAmong 15 145 patients, 509 (3.5%) received mavacamten; 502 matched to 1475 weighted 1:3 controls (equivalent to 502). Black patients were significantly less likely to receive mavacamten compared with White patients (odds ratio, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.33-0.63]). Of the 502 mavacamten recipients, 4.8% experienced acute heart failure, 8.3% experienced systolic dysfunction, 10.8% experienced cardiovascular hospitalization, 6.4% experienced new-onset AF, and 1.4% died. Overall outcomes were similar between both groups except for a higher incidence of systolic dysfunction in mavacamten patients (log-rank
conclusionsBlack patients have markedly lower access to mavacamten. Preexisting AF was associated with a higher risk of adverse outcomes for patients on mavacamten, highlighting the need for careful monitoring.
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.