ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Heterogeneous Treatment Effects in HFpEF: Distinguishing Drug-Specific Response from Prognostic Phenotypes Across Randomized Trials.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
35 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a heterogeneous syndrome comprising multiple pathophysiological phenotypes. HFpEF trials have largely enrolled diverse populations and reported average treatment effects, consistently yielding neutral results that may obscure drug-specific benefits within distinct subgroups. To address this issue, we employ an interaction-based that incorporates treatment-by-variable interactions to uncover drug-specific responses. Methods: We leveraged four HFpEF clinical trials (TOPCAT, RELAX, NEAT-HFpEF, INDIE-HFpEF) and developed a framework comprising two complementary approaches. The first employed a prognostic responder model to evaluate whether conventional responder definitions reflect treatment-specific benefit or instead capture favorable clinical trajectories common to both treatment and placebo groups. The second used an interaction-based individual treatment effect (ITE) modeling to identify baseline variables that modify therapy effect, distinguishing drug-specific response from prognostic phenotypes. Results: Although the prognostic responder model demonstrated good discrimination, further analisys suggested it primarily captured a prognostic signal associated with favorable clinical trajectories common to both treatment and placebo arms. In contrast, the ITE model identified distinct, drug-specific effect modifiers across trials (cardiorenal-inflammatory for spironolactone (TOPCAT), NO-mediated anti-inflammatory for isosorbide mononitrate (NEAT-HFpEF), afterload-reducing for inorganic nitrite (INDIE-HFpEF), and anti-volume-overload for sildenafil (RELAX). Each ITE model demonstrated significance only within its own trial suggesting drug-specific signal. Conclusions: The proposed method identifies mechanism-specific effect modifiers, and uncovers clinically meaningful heterogeneity in treatment response, which is not captured by conventional MCID-based approaches. Although exploratory, these findings support phenotype-guided therapy in HFpEF and argue for phenotype-informed trial design to enhance treatment-effect detection and therapy targeting.
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.