ReviewCardiac failure review2026
Estimating the Benefits of the Comprehensive Disease-modifying Pharmacological Treatment in Patients with Heart Failure.
Review in Cardiac failure review, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To determine the effects of the comprehensive disease-modifying pharmacological approach among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, a cross-trial, aggregate-data analysis was performed to estimate the expected combined effect of quintuple therapy by multiplying trial-level HRs, assuming independent and multiplicative treatment effects from Phase III randomised clinical trials: EMPHASIS-HF, PARADIGM-HF, pooled DAPA-HF and EMPEROR-Reduced, and pooled VICTORIA and VICTOR. The imputed aggregate treatment effects on the primary endpoint of cardiovascular death or first heart failure hospitalisation were favourable to the quintuple compared with conventional therapy (HR 0.34; 95% CI [0.27-0.42]). This also occurred for cardiovascular death alone (HR 0.47; 95% CI [0.35-0.63]), first heart failure hospitalisation (HR 0.31; 95% CI [0.23-0.40]) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.51; 95% CI [0.39-0.67]). The numbers needed to treat per year for the primary outcome, cardiovascular death and first heart failure hospitalisation were 10, 23 and 15, respectively. Our findings support the potential benefit of comprehensive therapy, with the incremental role of vericiguat likely greatest in higher-risk patients or those with recent worsening heart failure.
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.