ReviewEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2026
Comparative efficacy of pharmacological therapies in non-obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a frequentist network meta-analysis.
Review in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundManagement of symptomatic non-obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) remains challenging, and evidence comparing pharmacological therapies is limited. While several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated individual agents, direct comparisons across multiple therapies are lacking. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of available pharmacological treatments for non-obstructive HCM using network meta-analysis.
methodsThis frequentist network meta-analysis was conducted following PRISMA-NMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials evaluating pharmacological therapies in adult patients with non-obstructive HCM were identified through systematic searches of major databases. Continuous outcomes were analyzed using mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), while NT-proBNP was analyzed using the ratio of means (RoM). The primary outcome was change in peak oxygen consumption (peak VO₂). Secondary outcomes included VE/VCO₂ slope, NT-proBNP levels, E/e' ratio, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) score, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).
resultsNine RCTs involving 1,057 patients were included. No pharmacological therapy demonstrated a significant improvement in peak VO₂, the primary outcome. Mavacamten significantly reduced NT-proBNP compared with placebo (RoM 0.42, 95% CI 0.32-0.56, I² = 0%), whereas ARNI and ninerafaxstat significantly improved VE/VCO₂ slope, and candesartan improved E/e' ratio. No significant differences were observed for KCCQ score or LVEF.
conclusionsDifferent pharmacological therapies may provide benefits in specific physiological domains in patients with non-obstructive HCM; however, no single therapy demonstrated consistent improvements across all evaluated outcomes. These findings highlight the heterogeneity of treatment effects and suggest that targeting multiple pathophysiological pathways may be important. Larger randomized and head-to-head comparative studies are needed to define optimal management in this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42584687What 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.