ArticlePharmacology research & perspectives2025
A Comparative Analysis of Cardiovascular Events Associated With Acalabrutinib Versus Ibrutinib in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Insights From a Global Federated Network.
Article in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common form of leukemia in adults, characterized by the accumulation of dysfunctional lymphocytes. Ibrutinib, a first-generation Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, has significantly improved CLL treatment but is associated with adverse cardiovascular events such as atrial fibrillation (AF) and hypertension (HTN). Second-generation BTK inhibitors (BTKi) such as acalabrutinib were developed to have greater selectivity for BTK to reduce off-target effects and improve safety. Comparative real-world data between ibrutinib and second-generation BTKi are limited. This study analyzed data from the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network to compare cardiovascular outcomes in CLL patients who received ibrutinib or acalabrutinib. The two groups were well-balanced using propensity score matching. The outcomes examined included new-onset AF, HTN, reported heart failure, ventricular arrhythmias, bleeding, and all-cause mortality. The incidence of AF/flutter was lower for acalabrutinib compared to ibrutinib [5.8% vs. 11.7%; HR 0.59 (95% CI 0.43-0.83); p = 0.002]. The incidence of HTN was also lower in the acalabrutinib cohort [15% vs. 26.3%; HR 0.65 (95% CI 0.53-0.81); p < 0.05]. The incidence of heart failure, ventricular arrhythmia, bleeding events, or all-cause mortality did not differ after 3 years of treatment with acalabrutinib or ibrutinib, respectively. Our findings indicate that acalabrutinib has a more favorable cardiovascular toxicity profile compared to ibrutinib; therefore, validating the ELEVATE-RR trial in a real-world setting.
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.