Abstract:Background: Endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs) such as ambrisentan, sitaxsentan, bosentan and macitentan are primary drug therapies for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients. However, the optimal drugs for PAH remained controversial due to heterogeneous nature of randomized control trials (RCTs). Methods: Apart from traditional meta-analysis, network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed in this study for multiple comparisons among PAH therapies. The 6 minute walking distance (6MWD) and clinical worsening were efficacy outcomes whereas serious adverse effects (SAE) and all-cause discontinuation were acceptability outcomes. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR) along with their 95% confidence interval (95% CI) or 95% credible interval (95% CrI) were used to evaluate the positive and negative effects of these therapies on PAH patients. Results: By synthesizing direct evidence from 10 studies with a total number of 2172 patients, we discovered that all of the four PAH therapies significantly increased the average 6MWD in comparison to the placebo (P-value<0.05). Moreover, bosentan and ambrisentan both showed significant association with a decrease in the risk of clinical worsening compared to placebo. Regarding of all-cause discontinuation, ambrisentan is the only therapy which was significantly associated with a risk decrease compared to placebo. However, there was no sufficient evidence suggesting significant difference in any efficacy or acceptability outcomes between any two of the PAH therapies (P-value>0.05). Conclusion: Ambrisentan could be considered as the most appropriate therapy among the four ERAs for PAH patients. Bosentan also behaved well, but it is not as safe as ambrisentan.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of endothelin receptor antagonists for pulmonary arterial hypertension: A network meta-analysis