The Efficacy and Safety of Initial Triple Versus Initial Dual Oral Combination Therapy in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: A Multi-center, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Phase 3b Study
Abstract
The objective of this clinical trial is to compare the efficacy and safety of an initial triple oral treatment regimen (macitentan, tadalafil, selexipag) versus an initial dual oral treatment regimen (macitentan, tadalafil, placebo) in newly diagnosed, treatment-naïve patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension.
Conditions: Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension.
Primary outcome: Change From Baseline to Week 26 in Pulmonary Vascular Resistance (PVR).
Enrollment: 247 participants.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 247 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Safety and efficacy of COVID‐19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials
- Accuracy Comparison between Robot-Assisted Dental Implant Placement and Static/Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies
- Determinants of passive antibody efficacy in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Cleaning efficacy of EDDY versus ultrasonically-activated irrigation in root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Bonding Efficacy of Universal Resin Adhesives to Zirconia Substrates: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- In vitro antimicrobial activity of extracts and essential oils of Cinnamomum, Salvia, and Mentha spp. against foodborne pathogens: A meta-analysis study
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.