Abstract 4142906: Efficacy and Safety of Aficamten in Patients Guideline-Eligible for Septal Reduction Therapy in the FOREST-HCM Trial
Abstract
Background:
Patients (pts) with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) with severe symptoms despite medical therapy are offered septal reduction therapy (SRT) when available. We report the efficacy and safety of aficamten in SRT-eligible pts in the Phase 2 open-label extension trial FOREST-HCM (NCT04848506).
Methods:
Pts completing an aficamten parent study were offered participation in FOREST-HCM. Aficamten was initiated in all participants at 5 mg and escalated (10, 15, and 20 mg) at investigators’ discretion with protocol guidance according to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and left ventricular outflow obstruction (LVOT) criteria. SRT eligibility was defined per guidelines as both New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV and any peak LVOT-G ≥50 mmHg.
Results:
Of 180 oHCM pts (mean age 60.8±13.1 years, 54% male) enrolled in FOREST-HCM from May 28, 2021 to March 15, 2024 with ≥24 weeks of follow-up, 57 (31.6%) were SRT-eligible at baseline. By week 24, only 2 (3.5%) pts remained SRT eligible (32 [56.1%] met neither criteria, 20 [35.1%] had LVOT-G ≥50 mmHg but were NYHA class I/II, and 2 (3.5%) had NYHA III/IV but LVOT-G <50 mmHg). NYHA improved ≥1 class in 52 (92.9%) SRT-eligible pts and in 80 (67.8%) pts of the remaining cohort. Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS) improved more in SRT-eligible pts than remaining cohort (21.7±19.3 vs 13.5±13.9; p=0.003)
{Figure}.
Proportional reductions from baseline in…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, 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.
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.