Abstract 4368219: Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Vutrisiran, Acoramidis, Tafamidis in Transthyretin Amyloid Cardiomyopathy: A Network Meta-Analysis
Abstract
Background: Transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) is a progressive, life-threatening disorder caused by transthyretin deposition in cardiac tissue. Tafamidis, Acoramidis, and Vutrisiran are FDA-approved agents targeting different disease mechanisms. In the absence of head-to-head trials, this network meta-analysis compares their efficacy and safety. Methods: A systematic search across five databases identified relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Network meta-analysis was conducted using the Netmeta package in R, with visualization in Stata 18.0. Study quality was assessed using the ROB 2.0 tool. Results: Thirty-five RCTs (n = 5,721) included: Vutrisiran (n = 1,132), Acoramidis (n = 1,056), Tafamidis (n = 1,036), Patisiran (n = 254) (Used as Placebo in some RCTs), and placebo (n = 1,958). Vutrisiran showed the best survival benefit (ORs: 0.20 [0.03–1.27] to 0.53 [0.26–1.05]), followed by Acoramidis (ORs: 0.34 [0.13–0.90] to 0.75 [0.50–1.14]) and Tafamidis (ORs: 0.18 [0.03–1.15] to 7.26 [3.54–14.90]). Patisiran outperformed Tafamidis (OR 1.79 [1.21–2.67]) but not Vutrisiran (OR 2.43 [0.40–14.90]). SUCRA ranked Tafamidis highest, placebo, Acoramidis, and Vutrisiran. Mortality risk reduction was greatest with Vutrisiran (RR 0.04 [0.02–0.06]), followed by Acoramidis (RR 0.13 [0.05–0.31]) and Tafamidis (RR 0.27 [0.01–0.54]). In the 6-minute walk test, Acoramidis improved most (mean 9.55 [1.33–20.43]), followed by Vutrisiran (mean 2.51 [2.13–2.89]) and Tafamidis (mean 1.45 [1.00–3.90]). Vutrisiran had the lowest rehospitalization rate (mean −2.12 [−2.44 to −1.79]), then Tafamidis (mean −0.85 [−1.03 to −0.66]), while Acoramidis increased risk (RR 1.23 [0.79–1.68]). Vutrisiran reduced NT-proBNP most (mean 0.98 [0.73–1.07]), followed by Tafamidis (mean 0.68 [−1.58 to 3.25]) and Acoramidis (mean 0.41 [−2.72 to 3.50]). Stroke volume improved most with Vutrisiran (mean 2.90 [2.70–3.10]), followed by Acoramidis (mean 1.67 [1.49–1.85]) and Tafamidis (mean 1.20 [0.11–2.51]). HRQOL changes were modest for Acoramidis (mean −6.43 [−15.11 to 2.25]) and Tafamidis (mean −6.69 [−17.01 to 30.39]), with no data for Vutrisiran. Risk of bias was low across studies. Conclusion: Vutrisiran demonstrated the most consistent survival and biomarker benefits, while Patisiran ranked highest in overall efficacy. Acoramidis showed strong improvement in functional capacity but varied across domains.
Article Details
Authors (16)
Harshawardhan Dhanraj Ramteke
Rhythm Heart and Critical Care, Nagpur, India
Rakhshanda khan
Ayaan institute of medical sciences, Moinabad, India
Junaid Gulzar
acharya shri chander college of medical sciences, Sidhra, India
KARTHIK SAI MAKINENI
SRM MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL, Chennai, India
Manognya Bellam
UCSD, La Jolla, California, United States
Jonty Gill
government medical college amritsar, Amritsar, India
Aman Narula
GMERS medical college and hospital, Vadodara, India
Mridula Bhattacharjee
Kushtia medical college, Kushtia, Bangladesh
Bhanu Verma
Rayat Bahra University, Punjab, Mohali, India
Rucha Chaudhari
Seth GS medical college and KEMH, Mumbai, India
Surya Malaiyappan
arunai medical college and hospital, Tiruvannamalai, India
Pranav Verma
Chitkara University, Rajpura, India
Varuni Karnasula
government medical college nizamabad, Nizamabad, India
susmitha Banda
government medical college nizamabad, Nizamabad, India
Manish Juneja
Rhythm Heart and Critical Care, Nagpur, India
Ivin Jolly
Anhui medical university, Anhui, India