Evidence Hub

Comparative Safety of Drugs Targeting the Nitric Oxide Pathway in Pulmonary Hypertension: A Mixed Approach Combining a Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials and a Disproportionality Analysis From the World Health Organization Pharmacovigilance Database

Khouri C, Lepelley M, Roustit M, Montastruc F, Humbert M, Cracowski JL

Chest, 2018

24 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines recommend riociguat, a soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) stimulator, and the type 5 phosphodiesterase inhibitor (PDE5i) tadalafil or sildenafil as treatments for pulmonary arterial hypertension. We compared the safety profiles of sildenafil, tadalafil, and riociguat in pulmonary hypertension.

METHODS: We combined two approaches. First, we performed a meta-analysis of safety data extracted from randomized controlled trials. Second, we conducted a disproportionality analysis of data from VigiBase, the World Health Organization's global database of individual case safety reports, to compare the safety profiles with real-life data.

RESULTS: In the meta-analysis, a significant difference between the three drugs was only detected for gastrointestinal disorders, in disfavor of riociguat (P < .01 for interaction). In the disproportionality analysis, the use of riociguat was associated with fewer reports of visual disorders but increased reporting of gastrointestinal, hemorrhagic, and musculoskeletal disorders compared with sildenafil and tadalafil. Pharmacovigilance signals of hearing/vestibular disorders were heterogeneous: vestibular disorders (dizziness) were reported more frequently for riociguat, whereas hearing disorders (deafness) were reported less frequently compared with PDE5is.

CONCLUSIONS: The safety profiles of PDE5is and sGC stimulators significantly differ in pulmonary hypertension. Accordingly, there is a safety rationale in switching…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

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