Long-term effects of intravenous iloprost in patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension deteriorating on non-parenteral therapy

Background: The majority of patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH) in functional classes II and III are currently being treated with non-parenteral therapies, including endothelin receptor antagonists (ERA), phosphodiesterase (PDE)-5 inhibitors, inhaled iloprost or combinations of these substances. If these treatments fail, current guidelines recommend the addition of parenteral prostanoid therapy. There is, however, limited evidence for the efficacy of parenteral prostanoids when added to combinations of non-parenteral therapies. Methods: In this retrospective, multicentre study we collected data from consecutive IPAH patients receiving intravenous iloprost in addition to optimized non-parenteral therapy between Jan 2002 and Dec 2009. Analyses included 6 min walk distance (6MWD), functional class, need for transplantation, and survival. Results: During the observation period, 50 patients were treated with intravenous iloprost in addition to non-parenteral therapy; 44% of the patients were on dual combination therapy and 52% on triple combination. Three months after initiation of iloprost, functional class had improved in 24% of the patients and the median 6MWD had increased from 289 m to 298 m (n.s.). During the observation period, 22 patients (44%) died and 14 (28%) underwent lung transplantation. The probabilities of LuTx-free survival at 1, 3 and 5 years following iloprost initiation were 38%, 17% and 17%, respectively. A 6MWD < 300 m and persistent functional class IV at 3 months after initiation of intravenous iloprost were predictors of an adverse outcome. Conclusion: In essence, late initiation of intravenous iloprost in IPAH patients who previously failed to respond to non-parenteral therapies appears to be of limited efficacy in the majority patients. Alternative therapeutic options are currently not available, underlying the need for the development of new drugs

Metacognitive Short-Term Intervention in Patients With Mental Disorders Following Cardiovascular Events

Background: Mental disorders are common among patients with severe cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Yet, there is a lack of easily accessible evidence-based treatments. Recent research indicates elevated prevalence of dysfunctional metacognitions in patients with mental disorders following cardiovascular events. As metacognitive therapy (MCT) is an established treatment to modify metacognitions, we tested if a brief metacognitive intervention via videotelephony is effective in this patient group. Methods: A brief MCT treatment was tailored to CVD patients and designed as a face-to-face internet-based intervention. Five patients with CVDs and comorbid mental disorders underwent a psychocardiological examination and diagnostic approach. Each patient participated in eight 50 min sessions via encrypted video messenger service. Metacognitions, depression and anxiety symptoms and quality of life were assessed by self-report measures pre- and post-treatment. Patients rated dysfunctional thought processes, current psychological impairment, and treatment satisfaction after each session. Intended follow-up measures were not reported due to missing data. Results: For most patients, the brief metacognitive intervention was associated with a decrease in dysfunctional metacognitions and a reduction of symptoms of anxiety and depression post-treatment. Psychological and physiological quality of life improved. Patients reported high satisfaction with the tailored treatment. Conclusion: Our results suggest that a brief internet-based metacognitive treatment may be a promising tool for patients with CVDs and comorbid mental disorders. Feasibility and acceptance of the intervention was rated high by the patients. Further research is necessary to support the preliminary findings and to adapt and evaluate the intervention in a controlled clinical trial setting. Copyright © 2022 Gebhardt, Caldarone, Westhoff-Bleck, Olsson, Hoeper, Park, Stapel, Breitner, Werth, Heitland and Kahl

Trends in COVID-19-associated mortality in patients with pulmonary hypertension: a COMPERA analysis

In patients with pulmonary hypertension, the mortality rate associated with COVID-19 has declined sharply with the emergence of the Omicron variants https://bit.ly/42OMsf

Long-term safety and efficacy of imatinib in pulmonary arterial hypertension

Abstract BACKGROUND: Imatinib is an oral inhibitor of several protein kinases implicated in the pathophysiology of pulmonary hypertension. Treatment with imatinib resulted in improved hemodynamics and exercise capacity in a controlled trial (Imatinib [QTI571] in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension, a Randomized Efficacy Study [IMPRES]), among pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients inadequately responsive to 2 to 3 PAH-specific therapies. METHODS: The long-term (up to 204 weeks) safety and efficacy of imatinib in this open-label extension study were reviewed until early study termination on April 16, 2014. Of 202 IMPRES-enrolled patients, 66 imatinib and 78 placebo recipients entered the extension. RESULTS: Overall, 93.8% (135 of 144) of patients discontinued the extension study; administrative issues (i.e., sponsor termination; 32.6%) and adverse events (31.3%) were the primary reasons for discontinuation. Nine patients completed the extension study before it was terminated. Serious and unexpected adverse events were frequent. These included 6 subdural hematomas in the extension study and 17 deaths during or within 30 days of study end. Although the patients who tolerated imatinib and remained in the extension for a longer duration did experience an improvement in functional class and walk distance, most discontinued the drug and the study. CONCLUSIONS: Severe adverse events, significant side effects, and a high discontinuation rate limit the utility of imatinib in the treatment of PAH. These risks outweigh any possible improvements in hemodynamics and walk distance seen in those patients able to remain on drug. The off-label use of this compound in PAH is discouraged

A rare disease patient-reported outcome measure: revision and validation of the German version of the Systemic Sclerosis Quality of Life Questionnaire (SScQoL) using the Rasch model

Background: Rare disease patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) require linguistic adaptation to overcome the challenge of geographically dispersed patient populations. Importantly, PROMs such as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) should accurately capture responses to patient-identified concerns. The Systemic Sclerosis Quality of Life Questionnaire (SScQoL) is a 29-item tool validated in six languages. Previous evaluation of the German version revealed problems with dichotomous responses. This study aimed to revise the German SScQoL, extend the response structure, and evaluate content and construct validity, reliability and unidimensionality. Methods: The instrument validation study involved revising the German SScQoL response structure, cognitive debriefing with patients and validation using Rasch analysis. The revised SScQoL was completed by Swiss-German-speaking patients with SSc within the Swiss MANagement Of Systemic Sclerosis (MANOSS) study. Rasch analysis was employed to test the validity, reliability and unidimensionality of the revised instrument. Results: Based on cognitive debriefing with patients (n = 6) dichotomous items were extended to a polytomous 4-point response structure. A total of 78 patients completed the revised SScQoL. Initial analysis of the 29 items suggested the scale lacked fit to the model (χ2 = 51.224, df = 29, p = 0.007). Grouping items into five domains resulted in an adequate fit to the Rasch model (χ2 = 5.343, df = 5, p = 0.376) and unidimensionality (proportion of significant independent t tests: 0.045, 95% CI 0.016–0.114). Overall, the scale was well targeted, had high internal consistency (Person Separation Index, PSI = 0.931) and worked consistently in patients with different demographic and clinical characteristics. Conclusions: The revised German SScQoL has a 4-point response structure and is a valid, reliable measure. Rasch analysis is useful for validating continuous response structure of quality of life measures. Further evaluation of measurement equivalence with other German-speaking cultures is required for multinational comparisons and data pooling

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

Medical treatment of pulmonary hypertension in adults with congenital heart disease : updated and extended results from the International COMPERA-CHD Registry

Funding Information: The authors are indebted to the COMPERA investigators and their staff. We explicitly thank Dr. Claudia S. Copeland for the professional editing of the final draft of the manuscript. Funding: COMPERA is funded by unrestricted grants from Acceleron, Actelion Pharmaceuticals (Janssen), Bayer, OMT and GSK. These companies were not involved in data analysis or the writing of this manuscript. Funding Information: ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https:// dx.doi.org/10.21037/cdt-21-351). The series “Current Management Aspects in Adult Congenital Heart Disease (ACHD): Part IV” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. Dr. DH reports non-financial support from Actelion, Boehringer-Ingelheim, and Shire, outside the submitted work; Dr. DP reports personal fees from Actelion, Biogen, Aspen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, and Sanofi, outside the submitted work; Dr. MD reports personal fees from Actelion, Bayer, GSK and MSD, outside the submitted work; Dr. HAG reports personal fees from Actelion, Bayer, Gilead, GSK, MSD, Pfizer and United Therapeutics, outside the submitted work; Dr. MG reports personal fees from Actelion, Bayer and GSK, outside the submitted work; Dr. MMH reports personal fees from Acceleron, Actelion, Bayer, MSD and Pfizer, outside the submitted work; Dr. CDV reports personal fees from Actelion, Bayer, GSK, MSD, Pfizer, and United Therapeutics, outside the submitted work; Dr. RE reports personal fees from Actelion, Boehringer Ingelheim, OMT, Bayer, and Berlin Chemie; grants from Actelion and Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work; Dr. MH reports grants and personal fees from Actelion, personal fees from Bayer, Berlin Chemie, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Janssen, Novartis and MSD, outside the submitted work; Dr. MH reports personal fees from Acceleron, Actelion, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BERLIN CHEMIE, GSK, MSD, Novartis and OMT, outside the submitted work; Dr. HW reports personal fees from Action, Bayer, Biotest, Boehringer, GSK, Pfizer, and Roche, outside the submitted work; Dr. DS reports personal fees from Actelion, Bayer, and GSK, outside the submitted work; Dr. LS reports personal fees from Actelion, Bayer, and MSD, outside the submitted work; Dr. SU reports grants from Swiss National Science Foundation, Zurich Lung, Swiss Lung, and Orpha Swiss, grants and personal fees from Actelion SA/Johnson & Johnson, Switzerland, and MSD Switzerland, outside the submitted work; Dr. TJL reports personal fees from Actelion, Janssen-Cilag, BMS, MSD, and OMT GmbH, outside the submitted work; Dr. LB reports personal fees from Actelion, outside the submitted work; Dr. MC reports personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH, Roche Pharma, and Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work; Dr. HW reports personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, and Roche, outside the submitted work. Dr. EG reports personal fees from Actelion, Janssen, Bayer, MSD, Bial, OrPha Swiss GmbH, OMT and Medscape, outside the submitted work; Dr. SR reports personal fees from Actelion, Bayer, GSK, Pfizer, Novartis, Gilead, MSD, and United Therapeutics, outside the submitted work. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare. Publisher Copyright: © Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy. All rights reserved.Background: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is common in congenital heart disease (CHD). Because clinical-trial data on PAH associated with CHD (PAH-CHD) remain limited, registry data on the long-term course are essential. This analysis aimed to update information from the COMPERA-CHD registry on management strategies based on real-world data. Methods: The prospective international pulmonary hypertension registry COMPERA has since 2007 enrolled more than 10,000 patients. COMPERA-CHD is a sub-registry for patients with PAH-CHD Results: A total of 769 patients with PAH-CHD from 62 specialized centers in 12 countries were included into COMPERA-CHD from January 2007 through September 2020. At the last follow-up in 09/2020, patients [mean age 45.3±16.8 years; 512 (66%) female] had either post-tricuspid shunts (n=359; 46.7%), pre-tricuspid shunts (n=249; 32.4%), complex CHD (n=132; 17.2%), congenital left heart or aortic valve or aortic disease (n=9; 1.3%), or miscellaneous CHD (n=20; 2.6%). The mean 6-minute walking distance was 369±121 m, and 28.2%, 56.0%, and 3.8% were in WHO functional class I/II, III or IV, respectively (12.0% unknown). Compared with the previously published COMPERA-CHD data, after 21 months of followup, the number of included PAH-CHD patients increased by 91 (13.4%). Within this group the number of Eisenmenger patients rose by 39 (16.3%), the number of “Non-Eisenmenger PAH” patients by 45 (26.9%). Currently, among the 674 patients from the PAH-CHD group with at least one follow-up, 450 (66.8%) received endothelin receptor antagonists (ERA), 416 (61.7%) PDE-5 inhibitors, 85 (12.6%) prostacyclin analogues, and 36 (5.3%) the sGC stimulator riociguat. While at first inclusion in the COMPERA-CHD registry, treatment was predominantly monotherapy (69.3%), this has shifted to favoring combination therapy in the current group (53%). For the first time, the nature, frequency, and treatment of significant comorbidities requiring supportive care and medication are described. Conclusions: Analyzing “real life data” from the international COMPERA-CHD registry, we present a comprehensive overview about current management modalities and treatment concepts in PAH-CHD. There was an trend towards more aggressive treatment strategies and combination therapies. In the future, particular attention must be directed to the “Non-Eisenmenger PAH” group and to patients with complex CHD, including Fontan patients.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Riociguat treatment in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: Final safety data from the EXPERT registry

Objective: The soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator riociguat is approved for the treatment of adult patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and inoperable or persistent/recurrent chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) following Phase 3 randomized trials. The EXPosurE Registry RiociguaT in patients with pulmonary hypertension (EXPERT) study was designed to monitor the long-term safety of riociguat in clinical practice. Methods: EXPERT was an international, multicenter, prospective, uncontrolled, non-interventional cohort study of patients treated with riociguat. Patients were followed for at least 1 year and up to 4 years from enrollment or until 30 days after stopping riociguat treatment. Primary safety outcomes were adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) coded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities preferred terms and System Organ Classes version 21.0, collected during routine clinic visits and collated via case report forms. Results: In total, 956 patients with CTEPH were included in the analysis. The most common AEs in these patients were peripheral edema/edema (11.7%), dizziness (7.5%), right ventricular (RV)/cardiac failure (7.7%), and pneumonia (5.0%). The most common SAEs were RV/cardiac failure (7.4%), pneumonia (4.1%), dyspnea (3.6%), and syncope (2.5%). Exposure-adjusted rates of hemoptysis/pulmonary hemorrhage and hypotension were low and comparable to those in the long-term extension study of riociguat (Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Soluble Guanylate Cyclase-Stimulator Trial [CHEST-2]). Conclusion: Data from EXPERT show that in patients with CTEPH, the safety of riociguat in routine practice was consistent with the known safety profile of the drug, and no new safety concerns were identified

Riociguat treatment in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension: Final safety data from the EXPERT registry

Objective: The soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator riociguat is approved for the treatment of adult patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and inoperable or persistent/recurrent chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension following Phase 3 randomized trials. The EXPosurE Registry RiociguaT in patients with pulmonary hypertension (EXPERT) study was designed to monitor the long-term safety of riociguat in clinical practice. Methods: EXPERT was an international, multicenter, prospective, uncontrolled, non-interventional cohort study of patients treated with riociguat. Patients were followed for at least 1 year and up to 4 years from enrollment or until 30 days after stopping riociguat treatment. Primary safety outcomes were adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) coded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities preferred terms and System Organ Classes version 21.0, collected during routine clinic visits (usually every 3-6 months) and collated via case report forms. Results: In total, 326 patients with PAH were included in the analysis. The most common AEs in these patients were dizziness (11.7%), right ventricular (RV)/cardiac failure (10.7%), edema/peripheral edema (10.7%), diarrhea (8.6%), dyspnea (8.0%), and cough (7.7%). The most common SAEs were RV/cardiac failure (10.1%), pneumonia (6.1%), dyspnea (4.0%), and syncope (3.4%). The exposure-adjusted rate of hemoptysis/pulmonary hemorrhage was 2.5 events per 100 patient-years. Conclusion: Final data from EXPERT show that in patients with PAH, the safety of riociguat in clinical practice was consistent with clinical trials, with no new safety concerns identified and a lower exposure-adjusted rate of hemoptysis/pulmonary hemorrhage than in the long-term extension of the Phase 3 trial in PAH