Cited by 75Pulmonary Hypertension Research and TreatmentsVascular Anomalies and TreatmentsApelin-related biomedical research

Efficacy, safety and clinical pharmacology of macitentan in comparison to other endothelin receptor antagonists in the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension

Dingemanse, Jasper, Sidharta, Patricia N, Maddrey, Willis C, Rubin, Lewis J, Mickail, Hani·2014·Expert Opinion on Drug Safety

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Macitentan is a novel dual endothelin receptor antagonist (ERA) showing sustained receptor occupancy. In vitro and in vivo animal studies have demonstrated its potency in antagonizing endothelin-induced disorders. A large morbidity/mortality study in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) taking macitentan has been completed recently. AREAS COVERED: This drug evaluation reviews the efficacy, safety and clinical pharmacology of macitentan in the treatment of PAH. EXPERT OPINION: The large Phase III study (SERAPHIN) tested macitentan in more than 700 PAH patients and has provided unique long-term outcome data for this ERA, not available for other members of this class. The effect on a composite clinically relevant morbidity/mortality end point was highly significant at a 10 mg/day dose. The safety profile of macitentan appears to be superior with respect to hepatic safety and edema/fluid retention than bosentan and ambrisentan, respectively, and is similar when considering decrease in hemoglobin concentration. The drug has a low propensity for drug-drug interactions and has one circulating pharmacologically active metabolite. The pharmacokinetics of macitentan in patients with renal or hepatic impairment does not require dose adjustments. Based on its characteristics, macitentan is an important addition to the therapeutic armamentarium in the long-term treatment of PAH. Its potential use in other disorders is under investigation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1517/14740338.2014.859674

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 106 · Cited by 75

Authors
Dingemanse, J., Sidharta, P. N., Maddrey, W. C., Rubin, L. J., & Mickail, H.
Affiliations
  • Actelion (Switzerland) (CH)
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
Venue
Expert Opinion on Drug Safety
Published
2013-11-22
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
391-405
ISSN
  • 1474-0338 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-764X
OpenAlex
W2085157020
Cited by
75
References
106
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 13
FWCI
1.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Expert Opinion on Drug Safety (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Pulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Vascular Anomalies and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Apelin-related biomedical research
Keywords
macitentan, pulmonary arterial hypertension, endothelin receptor antagonists, hepatic safety, edema, hemoglobin decrease, drug-drug interactions, pharmacokinetics, renal dysfunction, liver dysfunction, bosentan, ambrisentan, drug metabolites
MeSH terms
Animals, Humans, Hypertension, Pulmonary, Pyrimidines, Sulfonamides, Endothelin Receptor Antagonists, Familial Primary Pulmonary Hypertension

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review