Evidence Hub

Study design and rationale of EXPLORER-CN: a phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mavacamten in Chinese adults with symptomatic obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

Tian Z, Wang F, Jin W, Zhang Q, Zhou J, Yang P, Wang G, Hsu P et al.

BMJ open, 2023

81 participants · 10 citations

Abstract

Introduction: Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a primary myocardial disease commonly caused by pathogenic genetic variants encoding sarcomere proteins. Mavacamten, a first-in-class allosteric inhibitor of cardiac-specific myosin, has demonstrated efficacy and safety in international clinical trials of patients with symptomatic obstructive HCM (oHCM) but clinical evidence for mavacamten in the Chinese population is lacking.

Methods and analysis: EXPLORER-CN is a multicentre, phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled registration trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mavacamten in Chinese adults with symptomatic oHCM. The study will enrol approximately 81 participants with symptomatic oHCM. Eligible participants are randomised 2:1 to receive once-daily, oral mavacamten (starting dose 2.5 mg/day), or matching placebo, for 30 weeks, followed by a long-term extension (LTE) period of 48 weeks with active treatment for all subjects. The mavacamten dose will be adjusted by pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) parameters during the double-blinded, placebo-controlled period and PD-only during the LTE period. The primary efficacy endpoint is change from baseline to week 30 in Valsalva left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) peak gradient determined by Doppler echocardiography. Secondary efficacy endpoints are change in resting LVOT peak gradient, proportion of participants achieving a Valsalva LVOT peak gradient <30 or < 50 mm Hg, New York Heart Association…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 81 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

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.

Open this study Sign up free