From:  Is mavacamten superior to aficamten for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy? A frequentist network meta-analysis

 Direct comparison of mavacamten versus placebo and aficamten versus placebo; and indirect comparison of aficamten versus mavacamten through a common comparator placebo.

Direct evidence
OutcomeDrug 1Drug 2No. of studiesPooled effect size
MD [95% CI]
Change in resting LVOT gradientAficamtenPlacebo2–48.32 [–57.48; –39.17]
MavacamtenPlacebo3–63.07 [–70.40; –55.74]
Decrease in LVEFAficamtenPlacebo2–8.47 [–12.41; –4.52]
MavacamtenPlacebo4–2.88 [–5.69; –0.06]
NYHA class improvementAficamtenPlacebo22.12 [0.95; 3.28]
MavacamtenPlacebo42.48 [1.66; 3.30]
Indirect evidence
OutcomeDrug 1Drug 2Pooled effect size
MD [95%CI]
Inconsistency tests (between designs)
Q, df
Change in resting LVOT gradientAficamtenMavacamten14.74 [3.02; 26.47]0.00
Decrease in LVEFAficamtenMavacamten–5.59 [–10.43; –0.75]0.00
NYHA class improvementAficamtenMavacamten–0.37 [–1.79; 1.06]0.00

MD: mean difference; LVOT: left ventricular outflow tract; LVEF: left ventricular ejection fraction; NYHA: New York Heart Association.