Background: Previous meta-analyses of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) combination therapy pooled sequential and initial combination together, which might threaten their authenticity and clinical significance for the difference between two strategies.
Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared sequential combination therapy (SCT) with background therapy (BT) in PAH patients. Raw data were extracted to calculate risk ratio (RR) or weighted mean difference (WMD) for predefined efficacy and safety outcomes. Mantel-Haenszel fixed or random effects model was used based on heterogeneity.
Results: 17 RCTs involving 4343 patients (97.2% of patients with WHO-FC II-III) were included. SCT decreased clinical worsening (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.76), nonfatal clinical worsening (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.71), functional class (decrease of 28% in the portion of patients with WHO-FC worsening and increase of 33% in the portion of patients with WHO-FC improvement), and increased 6-min walk distance (WMD 17.68 m, 95% CI 10.16 to 25.20), but didn't reduce mortality, lung transplantation, admission to hospital, and treatment escalation compared with BT. Although any adverse event and serious adverse event were similar between SCT and BT, SCT increased all-cause treatment discontinuation (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.71) and drug-related treatment discontinuation (RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.84) with higher incidence of headache, flushing, nausea, diarrhoea and jaw pain.
Conclusions: For WHO-FC II-III PAH patients who have established BT, our study reinforced the recommendation of SCT to improve clinical worsening, functional status, and exercise capacity, although with higher incidence of side-effects and withdrawal.
Keywords: Background therapy; Meta-Analysis; Pulmonary arterial hypertension; Randomized controlled trial; Sequential combination therapy.
Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.