Aficamten is a cardiac myosin inhibitor indicated for symptomatic obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. This page compares Aficamten to other agents in its class, including Mavacamten (Camzyos).
Aficamten Alternatives: How It Compares to Other Cardiac Myosin Inhibitors
Hipa.ai Research · Source: ClinicalTrials.gov / AACT · Last updated: AI-augmented data · 0/3 curated
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov via AACT · Hipa.ai, 2026-05-07Download chart as PNG
Mavacamten (Camzyos) was approved in 2022, preceding Aficamten's approval in 2025. HRS-1893 remains in Phase 3 development, approximately 1-2 years behind these approved therapies.
Quick comparison table
| Drug | Class | Approved indications | Dosing | Year approved | Lead pivotal endpoint | Annual cost (rough) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aficamten (Myqorzo) | Cardiac myosin inhibitor | symptomatic obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy | Oral, once daily | 2025 | change in peak oxygen uptake (pVO2): 1.8mL/kg/min @ 24 weeks | $108k |
| Mavacamten (Camzyos) | Cardiac myosin inhibitor | Obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy | 2.5 mg to 15 mg orally once daily | 2022 | Composite functional response (pVO2 and NYHA class improvement): 37% @ 30 weeks | $90k |
| HRS-1893 | Cardiac myosin inhibitor | — | 40 mg or 60 mg twice daily | Pipeline | — | — |
Cost estimates are list-price approximations and do not reflect rebates, formulary tier, or out-of-pocket costs after benefits. The class-typical lead-pivotal endpoint here is Change in pVO2; cells render each drug's actual pivotal endpoint, which may differ. The "Year approved" column shows the FDA approval year for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy specifically — drugs approved for other indications first appear with their this-indication date, or as Pipeline if not yet approved for this indication. Cross-trial comparisons can mislead — head-to-head Phase-3 data (when present) is below.
Aficamten vs Mavacamten (Camzyos)
No head-to-head Phase-3 trial directly compares Aficamten with Mavacamten.
In separate pivotal trials, Aficamten reported 1.8mL/kg/min change in peak oxygen uptake (pVO2) at 24 weeks (NCT05186818) versus 37% Composite functional response (pVO2 and NYHA class improvement) at 30 weeks for Mavacamten (NCT03470545).
Cross-trial caveat: the two drugs were tested in different patient populations at different time points. Cross-trial comparisons of response rates can mislead — the only rigorous comparison is a head-to-head randomized trial.
Pipeline alternatives
Investigational therapies targeting IL-17 or IL-17-related pathways are also in active Phase 3 development. One such compound is HRS-1893 from Shandong Suncadia Medicine Co., Ltd., currently being evaluated in a lead Phase 3 trial, NCT07021976. This drug represents a different mechanism of action compared to myosin inhibitors like Aficamten, focusing on IL-17 pathways.
Choosing between Aficamten and its alternatives
When selecting a cardiac myosin inhibitor, clinicians consider various factors, including the patient's specific clinical profile, treatment goals, and the characteristics of available agents. Aficamten, as a newer agent in this class, may be considered for patients where its specific pharmacological profile or dosing regimen could offer advantages. While detailed comparative data are still emerging, newer therapies often aim to refine the mechanism of action or simplify patient management, potentially impacting aspects like titration or monitoring frequency.
In contrast, Mavacamten (Camzyos) offers an established treatment option for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, with a known clinical track record. Clinical trials have demonstrated a composite functional response, defined as improvement in peak oxygen uptake (pVO2) and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, in 37% of patients at 30 weeks. Mavacamten is administered orally once daily, with doses typically ranging from 2.5 mg to 15 mg, requiring careful titration and monitoring for left ventricular ejection fraction.
This information is not medical advice; clinical decisions should always be made by a qualified healthcare provider in consultation with the patient.
Sources and methodology
Trial data was pulled from the ClinicalTrials.gov registry via the AACT relational mirror maintained by the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative. AACT data freshness: .
Cross-trial comparison limitations:drugs without a direct head-to-head trial are compared using each drug's own pivotal trial. These trials enrolled different patient populations at different time points and used different statistical analysis sets. Cross-trial response-rate differences should not be interpreted as proof that one drug is more effective than another.
Related drug pages on Hipa.ai
Not medical advice. This page summarizes publicly-reported clinical trial data for informational purposes. Treatment decisions belong with a qualified prescribing clinician who knows your medical history. Drug approvals, dosing, and safety profiles change over time — always confirm with the current FDA prescribing information.
aficamtenaficamten alternativesalternativescomparisonhypertrophic cardiomyopathycardiac-myosin-inhibitor-hcmaficamten vs mavacamtenaficamten vs hrs-1893