SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Efficacy and safety of switching from bosentan or ambrisentan to macitentan in pulmonary arterial hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Overview of Systematic Reviews on Treatments for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Assessing Methodological Quality and Mapping Evidence Gaps.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2025Pooled it
- Psychometric properties of the sit-to-stand test for patients with pulmonary hypertension: A systematic review.Brazilian journal of physical therapyPooled it
- Real-World Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Clinical Outcomes of Patients Initiated on Macitentan/Tadalafil Single-Tablet Combination Therapy in the United States.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Selection of Endothelin Receptor Antagonists in the Treatment of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.Advances in therapy · 2026Review
- Co-Spray-Dried Macitentan-Tadalafil with Leucine Microparticles for Inhalable Delivery in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension.Pharmaceutics · 2026Article
- Aprocitentan in hypertension management: clinical efficacy, safety, and future prospects.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Comparative Treatment Persistence and Adherence to Endothelin Receptor Antagonists Among Patients with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension in Japan: A Real-World Administrative Claims Database Study.Pulmonary therapy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is little evidence of the effectiveness of switching from the endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs) bosentan and ambrisentan to a novel ERA, macitentan, in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of patients with PAH switching from other ERAs to macitentan. Methods: We retrieved the relevant literature published before January 2022 for the meta-analysis from the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Efficacy included changes in the 6-min walk distance (6MWD), World Health Organization functional class (WHO-FC), N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels, hemodynamics, echocardiography and survival. Results: Nine studies, consisting of 408 PAH patients, that met the inclusion criteria were included. The switch from bosentan or ambrisentan to macitentan effectively increased the 6MWD by 20.71 m (95% CI: 10.35-31.07, Conclusion: The switch from bosentan or ambrisentan to macitentan significantly increased the 6MWD in PAH patients, improved the WHO-FC, and exerted safety benefits. The effects of the switch on NT-proBNP levels, hemodynamics, and echocardiography still need to be further confirmed. Systematic review registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42021292554].
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.