Interventional and pharmacological management of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension.

Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is caused by obstruction of the pulmonary vasculature, leading to increased pulmonary vascular resistance and ultimately right ventricular failure, the leading cause of death in non-operated patients. This article reviews the current management of CTEPH. The standard of care in CTEPH is pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA). However, up to 40% of patients with CTEPH are ineligible for PEA, and up to 51% develop persistent/recurrent PH after PEA. Riociguat is currently the only medical therapy licensed for treatment of inoperable or persistent/recurrent CTEPH after PEA based on the results of the Phase III CHEST-1 study. Studies of balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA) have shown benefits in patients with inoperable or persistent/recurrent CTEPH after PEA; however, data are lacking from large, prospective, controlled studies. Studies of macitentan in patients with inoperable CTEPH and treprostinil in patients with inoperable or persistent/recurrent CTEPH showed positive results. Combination therapy is under evaluation in CTEPH, and long-term data are not available. In the future, CTEPH may be managed by PEA, medical therapy or BPA - alone or in combination, according to individual patient needs. Patients should be referred to experienced centers capable of assessing and delivering all options

Tadalafil for the Treatment of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension A Double-Blind 52-Week Uncontrolled Extension Study

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term safety and durability of efficacy of tadalafil for pulmonary arterial hypertension.BackgroundTadalafil is an oral phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor approved for PAH treatment. In the multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized, 16-week PHIRST (Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Response to Tadalafil) study, tadalafil 40 mg improved exercise capacity and delayed clinical worsening.MethodsEligible patients from PHIRST received once-daily tadalafil 20 mg (T20 mg) or 40 mg (T40 mg) (n = 357) in the double-blind, 52-week, uncontrolled extension study (PHIRST-2); 293 patients completed PHIRST-2. Durability of efficacy was explored using the 6-min walk distance (6MWD) test. Clinical worsening and changes in World Health Organization functional class were evaluated.ResultsThe safety profile of tadalafil in PHIRST-2 was similar to that in PHIRST, with typical phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor adverse events. The 6MWDs achieved in PHIRST for the subset of patients receiving T20 mg and T40 mg in both PHIRST and PHIRST-2 (406 ± 67 m [n = 52] and 413 ± 81 m [n = 59] at PHIRST-2 enrollment, respectively) were maintained at PHIRST-2 completion (415 ± 80 m [n = 51] and 410 ± 78 m [n = 59], respectively). Numerically fewer patients who were on T40 mg in PHIRST and PHIRST-2 experienced World Health Organization functional class deterioration (6% [n = 5]) compared with those randomized to T20 mg (9% [n = 7]) across both studies. Post hoc analyses showed that background bosentan use and higher 6MWD at PHIRST baseline were associated with fewer clinical worsening events.ConclusionsLong-term treatment with tadalafil was well tolerated in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension. In patients receiving either T20 mg or T40 mg, the improvements in 6MWD demonstrated in the 16-week PHIRST study appeared sustained for up to 52 additional weeks of treatment in PHIRST-2. (Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Response to Tadalafil Study; NCT00549302

Pulmonary function and diffusion capacity are associated with pulmonary arterial systolic pressure in the general population : the Rotterdam study

A

Use of responder threshold criteria to evaluate the response to treatment in the phase III CHEST-1 study

BackgroundIn the Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Soluble Guanylate Cyclase - Stimulator Trial 1 (CHEST-1) study, riociguat improved 6-minute walking distance (6MWD) vs placebo in patients with inoperable chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension or persistent/recurrent pulmonary hypertension after pulmonary endarterectomy. In this study, the proportion of patients who achieved responder thresholds that correlate with improved outcome in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension was determined at baseline and at the end of CHEST-1.MethodsPatients received placebo or riociguat individually adjusted up to 2.5 mg 3 times a day for 16 weeks. Response criteria were defined as follows: 6MWD increase ≥40 m, 6MWD ≥380 m, cardiac index ≥2.5 liters/min/m2, pulmonary vascular resistance <500 dyn∙sec∙cm−5, mixed venous oxygen saturation ≥65%, World Health Organization functional class I/II, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide <1,800 pg/ml, and right atrial pressure <8 mm Hg.ResultsRiociguat increased the proportion of patients with 6MWD ≥380 m, World Health Organization functional class I/II, and pulmonary vascular resistance <500 dyn∙sec∙cm−5 from 37%, 34%, and 25% at baseline to 58%, 57%, and 50% at Week 16, whereas there was little change in placebo-treated patients (6MWD ≥380 m, 43% vs 44%; World Health Organization functional class I/II, 29% vs 38%; pulmonary vascular resistance <500 dyn∙sec∙cm−5, 27% vs 26%). Similar changes were observed for thresholds for cardiac index, mixed venous oxygen saturation, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, and right atrial pressure.ConclusionsIn this exploratory analysis, riociguat increased the proportion of patients with inoperable chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension or persistent/recurrent pulmonary hypertension after pulmonary endarterectomy achieving criteria defining a positive response to therapy

Effect of riociguat on right ventricular function in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension

BACKGROUND In the Phase III PATENT-1 (NCT00810693) and CHEST-1 (NCT00855465) studies, riociguat demonstrated efficacy vs placebo in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). Clinical effects were maintained at 2 years in the long-term extension studies PATENT-2 (NCT00863681) and CHEST-2 (NCT00910429). METHODS This post hoc analysis of hemodynamic data from PATENT-1 and CHEST-1 assessed whether riociguat improved right ventricular (RV) function parameters including stroke volume index (SVI), stroke volume, RV work index, and cardiac efficiency. REVEAL Risk Score (RRS) was calculated for patients stratified by SVI and right atrial pressure (RAP) at baseline and follow-up. The association between RV function parameters and SVI and RAP stratification with long-term outcomes was assessed. RESULTS In PATENT-1 (n = 341) and CHEST-1 (n = 238), riociguat improved RV function parameters vs placebo (p < 0.05). At follow-up, there were significant differences in RRS between patients with favorable and unfavorable SVI and RAP, irrespective of treatment arm (p < 0.0001). Multiple RV function parameters at baseline and follow-up were associated with survival and clinical worsening-free survival (CWFS) in PATENT-2 (n = 396; p < 0.05) and CHEST-2 (n = 237). In PATENT-2, favorable SVI and RAP at follow-up only was associated with survival and CWFS (p < 0.05), while in CHEST-2, favorable SVI and RAP at baseline and follow-up were associated with survival and CWFS (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION This post hoc analysis of PATENT and CHEST suggests that riociguat improves RV function in patients with PAH and CTEPH

Measures of subclinical cardiac dysfunction and increased filling pressures associate with pulmonary arterial pressure in the general population: results from the population-based Rotterdam Study

Pulmonary hypertension is associated with increased mortality and morbidity in the elderly population. Heart failure is a common cause of pulmonary hypertension. Yet, the relation between left heart parameters reflective of subclinical cardiac dysfunction and increased filling pressures, and pulmonary arterial pressures in the elderly population remains elusive. Within the population-based Rotterdam Study, 2592 unselected participants with a mean age of 72.6 years (61.4% women) had complete echocardiography data available. We studied the cross-sectional associations of left heart structure and systolic and diastolic function with echocardiographically measured pulmonary artery systolic pressure. Mean pulmonary artery systolic pressure was 25.4 mmHg. After multivariable-adjustment measures of both structure and function were independently associated with pulmonary artery systolic pressure: E/A ratio [0.63 mmHg (95% CI 0.35–0.91) per 1-SD increase], left atrial diameter [0.79 mmHg (0.50–1.09) per 1-SD increase], E/E′ ratio [1.27 mmHg (0.92–1.61) per 1-SD increase], left ventricular volume [0.62 mmHg (0.25–0.98) per 1-SD increase], fractional shortening [0.45 mmHg (0.17–0.74) per 1-SD increase], aortic root diameter [− 0.43 mmHg (− 0.72 to − 0.14) per 1-SD increase], mitral valve deceleration time [− 0.31 mmHg (− 0.57 to − 0.05) per 1-SD increase], and E′ [1.04 mmHg (0.66–1.42) per 1-SD increase]. Results did not materially differ when restricting the analyses to participants free of symptoms of shortness of breath. Structural and functional echocardiographic parameters of subclinical cardiac dysfunction and increased filling pressures are associated with pulmonary arterial pressures in the unselected general ageing population

Pulmonary Hypertension in Patients With COPD : Results From the Comparative, Prospective Registry of Newly Initiated Therapies for Pulmonary Hypertension (COMPERA)

Funding Information: FUNDING/SUPPORT: This work was supported by the German Center of Lung Research (DZL). COMPERA is funded by unrestricted grants from Acceleron , Actelion Pharmaceuticals , Bayer , OMT , and GSK . Funding Information: Financial/nonfinancial disclosures: The authors have reported to CHEST the following: C. D. V. has received fees for serving as a speaker, consultant, and an advisory board member from the following companies: Acceleron, Actelion, Bayer, Dompè, GSK, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, and United Therapeutics. M. M. H. has received speaker fees, honoraria, or both for consultations from Acceleron, Actelion, Bayer, Janssen, MSD, and Pfizer. D. H. has received travel compensation from Actelion, Boehringer-Ingelheim, and Shire. D. P. has received fees for consultations from Actelion, Aspen, Biogen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Daiichi Sankyo, Sanofi, and Pfizer. N. B. received speaker fees from Bayer/MSD and Actelion/Janssen. K. M. O. has received speaker fees from Actelion, Bayer, and Lilly. H. A. G. has received honorariums for consultations, speaking at conferences, or both from Bayer HealthCare AG, Actelion, Encysive, Pfizer, Ergonex, Lilly, and Novartis. He is member of advisory boards for Bayer HealthCare AG, Pfizer, GSK, Actelion, Lilly, Merck, Encysive, and Ergonex. He also has received governmental grants from the German Research Foundation (DFG), Excellence Cluster Cardiopulmonary Research (ECCPS), State Government of Hessen (LOEWE), and the German Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF). M. Held has received speaker fees and honoraria for consultations from Actelion, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma, Encysive, Glaxo Smith Kline, Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Nycomed, Roche, and Servier. H. K. has received speaker fees and honoraria for consultations from Actelion, Bayer, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and United Therapeutics and research grants from Actelion. T. J. L. has received speaker fees, honoraria for consultations, and research funding from Actelion, Acceleron Pharma, Bayer, GSK, Janssen-Cilag, MSD, and Pfizer. S. R. has received honoraria for lectures, consultancy, or both from Actavis, Actelion, Bayer, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and United Therapeutics. D. D. declares honoraria for lectures, consultancy, or both from Actelion, Bayer, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, and Servier; participation in clinical trials for Actelion, Bayer, GSK, and Novartis; and research support to his institution from Actelion. R. B. has received fees from GSK, UT, Dompè, Bayer, Ferrer, MSD, and AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals. M. C. has received fees for consulting from GSK and speaker fees from Bayer and Pfizer. M. Halank has received speaker fees and/or honoraria for consultations from Acceleron, Actelion, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BayerChemie, GSK, Janssen, MSD and Novartis. A. V.-N. reports receiving lecture fees from Actelion, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, and Pfizer; serves on the advisory board of Actelion and Bayer; and serves on steering committees for Actelion, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, and Pfizer. D. S. received fees for lectures, consulting, research support, or a combination thereof to his institution from Actelion, Bayer, GSK, and Pfizer. R. E. has received speaker fees and honoraria for consultations from Actelion, Bayer, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and United Therapeutics. J. S. R. G. has received speaker fees and honoraria for consultations from Acceleron, Actelion, Bayer, Complexa, GSK, MSD, Pfizer, and United Therapeutics. M. D. has received investigator, speaker, consultant, or steering committee member fees from Actelion, Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, Eli Lilly, Encysive, Gilead (Myogen), GlaxoSmithKline, Nippon Shyniaku, Novartis, Pfizer, Schering, and United Therapeutics; educational grants from Actelion, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, and Therabel; and research grants from Actelion, Pfizer, and GlaxoSmithKline. She is holder of the Actelion Chair for Pulmonary Hypertension and of the GSK chair for research and education in pulmonary vascular pathology at the Catholic University of Leuven. J. C. has received fees for consultancies and lectures from Actelion, Bayer, GSK, United Therapeutics, and Pfizer as well as equipment and educational grants from Actelion. C. O. has received speaker fees and honoraria for consultations from Actelion, Bayer, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, and Pfizer. H. K. has received honoraria for lectures, consultancy, or both from Actelion-Janssen, Amicus Therapeutics, and Bristol Meyers Squibb. O. D. has or had consultancy relationships, has received research funding (last 3 years), or both from AbbVie, Actelion, Acceleron Pharma, Amgen, AnaMar, Baecon Discovery, Blade Therapeutics, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Catenion, Competitive Corpus, Drug Development International Ltd, CSL Behring, ChemomAb, Ergonex, Galapagos NV, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, GSK, Horizon (Curzion) Pharmaceuticals, Inventiva, Italfarmaco, iQone, iQvia, Kymera Therapeutics, Lilly, medac, Medscape, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Target Bio Science, and UCB in the area of potential treatments of scleroderma and its complications including PH. In addition, he has a patent mir-29 for the treatment of systemic sclerosis issued (US8247389, EP2331143). E. G. has received honoraria for consultations, speaking at conferences, or both from Bayer/MSD, Actelion/Janssen, GWT-TUD, and OMT/United Therapeutics. None declared (A. S.). Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The AuthorsBackground: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) in COPD is a poorly investigated clinical condition. Research Question: Which factors determine the outcome of PH in COPD? Study Design and Methods: We analyzed the characteristics and outcome of patients enrolled in the Comparative, Prospective Registry of Newly Initiated Therapies for Pulmonary Hypertension (COMPERA) with moderate or severe PH in COPD as defined during the 6th PH World Symposium who received medical therapy for PH and compared them with patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH). Results: The population included incident patients with moderate PH in COPD (n = 68), with severe PH in COPD (n = 307), and with IPAH (n = 489). Patients with PH in COPD were older, predominantly male, and treated mainly with phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors. Despite similar hemodynamic impairment, patients with PH in COPD achieved a worse 6-min walking distance (6MWD) and showed a more advanced World Health Organization functional class (WHO FC). Transplant-free survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were higher in the IPAH group than in the PH in COPD group (IPAH: 94%, 75%, and 55% vs PH in COPD: 86%, 55%, and 38%; P = .004). Risk factors for poor outcomes in PH in COPD were male sex, low 6MWD, and high pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR). In patients with severe PH in COPD, improvements in 6MWD by ≥ 30 m or improvements in WHO FC after initiation of medical therapy were associated with better outcomes. Interpretation: Patients with PH in COPD were functionally more impaired and had a poorer outcome than patients with IPAH. Predictors of death in the PH in COPD group were sex, 6MWD, and PVR. Our data raise the hypothesis that some patients with severe PH in COPD may benefit from PH treatment. Randomized controlled studies are necessary to explore this hypothesis further. Trial Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01347216; URL: www.clinicaltrials.govpublishersversionPeer reviewe

Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension and impairment after pulmonary embolism: the FOCUS study

AIMS: To systematically assess late outcomes of acute pulmonary embolism (PE) and to investigate the clinical implications of post-PE impairment (PPEI) fulfilling prospectively defined criteria. METHODS AND RESULTS: A prospective multicentre observational cohort study was conducted in 17 large-volume centres across Germany. Adult consecutive patients with confirmed acute symptomatic PE were followed with a standardized assessment plan and pre-defined visits at 3, 12, and 24 months. The co-primary outcomes were (i) diagnosis of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), and (ii) PPEI, a combination of persistent or worsening clinical, functional, biochemical, and imaging parameters during follow-up. A total of 1017 patients (45% women, median age 64 years) were included in the primary analysis. They were followed for a median duration of 732 days after PE diagnosis. The CTEPH was diagnosed in 16 (1.6%) patients, after a median of 129 days; the estimated 2-year cumulative incidence was 2.3% (1.2-4.4%). Overall, 880 patients were evaluable for PPEI; the 2-year cumulative incidence was 16.0% (95% confidence interval 12.8-20.8%). The PPEI helped to identify 15 of the 16 patients diagnosed with CTEPH during follow-up (hazard ratio for CTEPH vs. no CTEPH 393; 95% confidence interval 73-2119). Patients with PPEI had a higher risk of re-hospitalization and death as well as worse quality of life compared with those without PPEI. CONCLUSION: In this prospective study, the cumulative 2-year incidence of CTEPH was 2.3%, but PPEI diagnosed by standardized criteria was frequent. Our findings support systematic follow-up of patients after acute PE and may help to optimize guideline recommendations and algorithms for post-PE care