Oral targeted therapies play an important role in the treatment of pulmonary
arterial hypertension (PAH). Several new oral agents have emerged for PAH in
recent years. However, whether they provide a survival advantage is still not
clear. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of oral
targeted therapies, especially on predefined clinical worsening events. Trials
were searched in the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PUBMED databases through June
2018. We calculated risk ratios for dichotomous data and weighted mean
differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous data. Twenty-five
trials with a total of 6847 participants were included in the meta-analysis.
Oral targeted therapies were associated with significant risk reduction in
clinical worsening compared with placebo (relative risk [RR] 0.64; 95%
CI = 0.58–0.70; P < 0.001). This reduction in risk was
driven by reduction in non-fatal endpoints, including PAH-related admissions to
hospital (RR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.56–0.76; P < 0.001),
treatment escalation (RR = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.28–0.66;
P < 0.001), and symptomatic progression (RR = 0.55; 95%
CI = 0.48–0.64; P < 0.001), but not by reduction of
mortality (RR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.68–1.12; P = 0.215). Oral
targeted therapies were also associated with improvement in 6-min walk distance
(26.62 m; 95% CI = 20.54–32.71; P < 0.001) and World Health
Organization functional class (RR = 1.36; 95% CI = 1.20–1.54;
P < 0.001). The results of this meta-analysis showed the
benefits of oral treatments on clinical worsening events in PAH. However, these
oral agents did not show any survival benefit in the short-term follow-up.