Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Pharmacological Therapies in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

IntroductionHeart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) represents nearly half of all heart failure cases worldwide and remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality, especially in older adults. Despite advances in pharmacotherapy, no single intervention has consistently improved survival outcomes in this heterogeneous population. Multiple drug classes, including SGLT2 inhibitors, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and other agents, have demonstrated varying efficacy across clinical endpoints. A network meta-analysis allows comprehensive comparison of direct and indirect evidence across therapies to clarify their relative effectiveness and safety. MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with HFpEF. Databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science were searched up to September 2025. Eligible studies compared pharmacologic therapies with placebo or active comparators and reported outcomes including all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, rehospitalization, functional capacity, quality of life (KCCQ), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), NT-proBNP, and safety endpoints such as hyperkalemia, hypotension, and renal outcomes. Data extraction was performed independently, and risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0. Random-effects network meta-analysis was applied, and results were expressed as odds ratios (OR), mean differences (MD), or risk ratios (RR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI). ResultsFrom 968 studies screened, 37 RCTs with 65,068 patients (34,178 men and 30,447 women; mean age 70.6 {+/-} 8 years, mean follow-up 16.1 {+/-} 3 months) were included. Of these, 33,986 received active treatment and 30,289 were assigned to placebo or standard therapy. Across the network, all-cause mortality was not significantly reduced by any drug, with odds ratios overlapping unity; beta-blockers (OR 0.88, 95% CrI 0.17-4.56) and sacubitril/valsartan (OR 0.99, 95% CrI 0.18-5.54) showed neutrality, while vericiguat trended toward harm (OR 3.95, 95% CrI 0.64-24.8). For cardiovascular mortality, sacubitril/valsartan (OR 0.62, 95% CI -1.42 to 0.17) and finerenone (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.81-1.05) demonstrated benefit, while vericiguat increased risk (OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.58-2.75). Rehospitalization was significantly reduced by sacubitril/valsartan (RR -0.28, 95% CI -0.49 to - 0.08) and finerenone (RR -0.21, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.13), with dapagliflozin and tirzepatide showing additional favorable effects. Functional outcomes improved modestly, with treatment groups achieving a mean 6-minute walk distance of 248.6 {+/-} 129 cm compared with 240.5 {+/-} 130.8 cm in controls. Quality of life (KCCQ scores) improved with dapagliflozin (MD +1.60), tirzepatide (MD +9.90), pirfenidone (MD +11.5), and semaglutide (MD +7.0). Biomarker analysis showed NT-proBNP reductions with sacubitril/valsartan (MD -188.5) and spironolactone (MD -200), whereas vericiguat increased levels. LVEF changes were neutral across most agents. Safety analysis revealed increased hyperkalemia with finerenone, while sacubitril/valsartan and MRAs were associated with higher risks of hypotension and renal impairment, underscoring the need for careful clinical monitoring. ConclusionThis network meta-analysis demonstrates that while no pharmacologic therapy significantly reduces all-cause mortality in HFpEF, certain agents, notably sacubitril/valsartan, finerenone, and SGLT2 inhibitors, improve morbidity outcomes, reduce rehospitalizations, and enhance quality of life. Safety concerns, particularly hyperkalemia and renal dysfunction with MRAs, highlight the importance of careful patient selection and monitoring. These findings support the integration of multimodal therapy for morbidity reduction in HFpEF, while emphasizing the urgent need for future trials to address survival outcomes.