Relationship Between Time From Diagnosis and Morbidity/Mortality in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Results From the Phase III GRIPHON Study

BACKGROUND: Early initiation of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) therapies is associated with improved long-term outcomes, yet data on the early use of prostacyclin pathway agents are limited. In these post hoc analyses of the Prostacyclin (PGI(2)) Receptor Agonist In Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (GRIPHON) study, the largest randomized controlled trial for PAH to date, the prognostic value of time from diagnosis and its impact on treatment response were examined. RESEARCH QUESTION: How does time from diagnosis impact morbidity/mortality events and response to selexipag treatment in patients with PAH? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The GRIPHON study randomly assigned 1,156 patients with PAH to selexipag or placebo treatment. Patients were categorized post hoc into a time from diagnosis of ≤ 6 months and > 6 months at randomization. Hazard ratios (selexipag vs placebo) were calculated for the primary end point of morbidity/mortality by time from diagnosis using Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Time from diagnosis was ≤ 6 months in 34.9% and > 6 months in 65.1% of patients. Time from diagnosis was prognostic of morbidity/mortality, with newly diagnosed patients having a poorer long-term outcome than patients diagnosed for longer. Compared with placebo, selexipag reduced the risk of morbidity/mortality in patients with a time from diagnosis of ≤ 6 months and > 6 months, with a more pronounced effect in newly diagnosed patients (hazard ratio, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.33-0.63] and 0.74 [95% CI, 0.57-0.96], respectively; P = .0219 for interaction). INTERPRETATION: In the GRIPHON study, newly diagnosed PAH patients had a worse prognosis than patients with a longer time from diagnosis. The benefit of selexipag treatment on disease progression was more pronounced in patients treated earlier than in patients treated later. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01106014; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov

Long-Term Survival, Safety and Tolerability with Selexipag in Patients with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Results from GRIPHON and its Open-Label Extension

INTRODUCTION: In the event-driven GRIPHON randomised-controlled trial, the oral prostacyclin receptor agonist selexipag significantly reduced the risk of disease progression (composite primary endpoint of morbidity/mortality), compared with placebo, in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). The ongoing open-label extension study (GRIPHON OL) collects further data on long-term safety, tolerability, and survival of PAH patients treated with selexipag. METHODS: Patients randomised to selexipag or placebo in GRIPHON could enter GRIPHON OL either after experiencing a morbidity event during double-blind treatment or at the end of the study. Patients were followed for adverse events (AE) and survival from selexipag initiation up to 3 days and 30 days after end of treatment, respectively. Data are presented up to a cut-off date of 1 September 2019. RESULTS: Overall, 953 patients in GRIPHON and GRIPHON OL were treated with selexipag. At the time of selexipag initiation, 81.2% of patients were receiving background PAH therapy. Median (min, max) exposure to selexipag was 31.7 months (0, 106), corresponding to a total of 3054.4 patient-years. The most frequently reported AEs were related to known prostacyclin-related effects or underlying disease. There were 305 (32.0%) patients who experienced an AE leading to treatment discontinuation. Survival during GRIPHON and GRIPHON OL was assessed for the 574 patients randomised to selexipag in GRIPHON. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates (95%CI) at 1, 3, 5 and 7 years were 92.0% (89.4, 94.0), 79.3% (75.4, 82.6), 71.2% (66.5, 75.3) and 63.0% (57.4, 68.1), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide the longest follow-up period published to date for a PAH therapy. The safety profile of selexipag over this extended treatment period was consistent with that observed in GRIPHON. A large proportion of the population was receiving background therapy at selexipag initiation, providing further insight into the long-term safety of selexipag as part of a combination therapy regimen. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01106014 and NCT01112306

Three- Versus Two-Drug Therapy for Patients With Newly Diagnosed Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension

BACKGROUND: In pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), there are no data comparing initial triple oral therapy with initial double oral therapy. OBJECTIVES: TRITON (The Efficacy and Safety of Initial Triple Versus Initial Dual Oral Combination Therapy in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension; NCT02558231), a multicenter, double-blind, randomized phase 3b study, evaluated initial triple (macitentan, tadalafil, and selexipag) versus initial double (macitentan, tadalafil, and placebo) oral therapy in newly diagnosed, treatment-naive patients with PAH. METHODS: Efficacy was assessed until the last patient randomized completed week 26 (end of main observation period). The primary endpoint was change in pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) at week 26. RESULTS: Patients were assigned to initial triple (n = 123) or initial double therapy (n = 124). At week 26, both treatment strategies reduced PVR compared with baseline (by 54% and 52%), with no significant difference between groups (ratio of geometric means: 0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.86-1.07; P = 0.42). Six-minute walk distance and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide improved by week 26, with no difference between groups. Risk for disease progression (to end of main observation period) was reduced with initial triple versus initial double therapy (hazard ratio: 0.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.32-1.09). Most common adverse events with initial triple therapy included headache, diarrhea, and nausea. By the end of the main observation period, 2 patients in the initial triple and 9 in the initial double therapy groups had died. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with newly diagnosed PAH, both treatment strategies markedly reduced PVR by week 26, with no significant difference between groups (primary endpoint not met). Exploratory analyses suggested a possible signal for improved long-term outcomes with initial triple versus initial double oral therapy

Clinical outcomes stratified by baseline functional class after initial combination therapy for pulmonary arterial hypertension

Background: Initial combination therapy with ambrisentan and tadalafil reduced the risk of clinical failure events for treatment-naïve participants with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) as compared to monotherapy. Previous studies in PAH have demonstrated greater treatment benefits in more symptomatic participants. Methods: AMBITION was an event-driven, double-blind study in which participants were randomized 2:1:1 to oncedaily initial combination therapy with ambrisentan 10 mg plus tadalafil 40 mg, ambrisentan 10 mg plus placebo, or tadalafil 40 mg plus placebo. In this pre-specified subgroup analysis, we compared the efficacy data between those with functional class (FC) II vs. FC III symptoms at baseline. Results: This analysis included 500 participants in the previously defined primary analysis set (n = 155 FC II, n = 345 FC III). Comparing combination therapy to pooled monotherapy, the risk of clinical failure events was reduced by 79% (hazard ratio, 0.21 [95% confidence interval: 0.071, 0.63]) for FC II patients and 42 (hazard ratio, 0.58 [95% confidence interval: 0.39, 0.86]) for FC III patients. In a post-hoc analysis, the risk of first hospitalization for worsening PAH was also reduced by combination therapy, particularly for FC II patients (0 combination vs. 11 [14%] pooled monotherapy). Adverse events were frequent but comparable between the subgroups. Conclusions: Treatment benefit from initial combination therapy appeared at least as great for FC II as for FC III participants. Hospitalizations for worsening PAH were not observed in FC II participants assigned to combination. The present data support an initial combination strategy for newly diagnosed patients even when symptoms are less severe

Initial combination therapy with ambrisentan + tadalafil on pulmonary arterial hypertension‒related hospitalization in the AMBITION trial

Background: In the randomized, double-blind, event-driven AMBITION study, initial combination therapy with ambrisentan and tadalafil was associated with a 50% reduction in risk of clinical failure (first occurrence of all-cause death, hospitalization for worsening pulmonary arterial hypertension [PAH], disease progression, or unsatisfactory long-term clinical response) vs pooled monotherapy. These results were primarily driven by a reduction in PAH-related hospitalization in the combination therapy group, although a significant effect was not observed in a post-hoc analysis of all-cause hospitalization. Methods: The effect of initial combination therapy with ambrisentan and tadalafil in AMBITION was further explored to study PAH-related hospitalization, which was not reported in the primary publication. Results: Initial combination therapy was associated with a 63% reduction in risk of PAH-related hospitalization when compared with pooled monotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.372, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.217 to 0.639, p = 0.0002). For every 9 patients treated with combination therapy vs monotherapy, 1 PAH-related hospitalization could be prevented over a 1-year period. Serious adverse events leading to hospitalization, not necessarily PAH-related, occurred in 87 of 253 (34%) and 89 of 247 (36%) of patients on combination therapy and pooled monotherapy, respectively (post-hoc summary). Conclusions: Initial combination therapy with ambrisentan and tadalafil was found to reduce the risk of PAH-related hospitalization by 63% compared with pooled monotherapy

Patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension with and without cardiovascular risk factors: Results from the AMBITION trial

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension enrolled in the AMBITION trial with (excluded from the primary analysis set [ex-primary analysis set]) and without (primary analysis set) multiple risk factors for left ventricular diastolic dysfunction. Methods: Treatment-naive patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension were randomized to once-daily ambrisentan and tadalafil combination therapy, ambrisentan monotherapy, or tadalafil monotherapy. The primary end point was time from randomization to first adjudicated clinical failure event. Results: Primary analysis set patients (n = 500), compared with ex-primary analysis set patients (n = 105), were younger (mean, 54.4 vs 62.1 years) with greater baseline 6-minute walk distance (median, 363.7 vs 330.5 meters) and fewer comorbidities (e.g., hypertension and diabetes). Treatment effects of initial combination therapy vs pooled monotherapy were directionally the same for both populations, albeit of a lower magnitude for ex-primary analysis set patients. Initial combination therapy reduced the risk of clinical failure compared with pooled monotherapy in primary analysis set patients (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.35-0.72), whereas the effect was less clear in ex-primary analysis set patients (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.35-1.37). Overall, primary analysis set patients had fewer clinical failure events (25% vs 33%), higher rates of satisfactory clinical response (34% vs 24%), and lower rates of permanent study drug withdrawal due to adverse events (16% vs 31%) than ex-primary analysis set patients. Conclusions: Efficacy of initial combination therapy vs pooled monotherapy was directionally similar for primary analysis set and ex-primary analysis set patients. However, ex-primary analysis set patients (with multiple risk factors for left ventricular diastolic dysfunction) experienced higher rates of clinical failure events and the response to combination therapy vs monotherapy was attenuated. Tolerability was better in primary analysis set than ex-primary analysis set patients

risk assessment in pulmonary arterial hypertension insights from the griphon study

BACKGROUND Approaches to risk assessment in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) include the noninvasive French risk assessment approach (number of low-risk criteria based on the European Society of Cardiology and European Respiratory Society guidelines) and Registry to Evaluate Early and Long-term PAH Disease Management (REVEAL) 2.0 risk calculator. The prognostic and predictive value of these methods for morbidity/mortality was evaluated in the predominantly prevalent population of GRIPHON, the largest randomized controlled trial in PAH. METHODS GRIPHON randomized 1,156 patients with PAH to selexipag or placebo. Post-hoc analyses were performed on the primary composite end-point of morbidity/mortality by the number of low-risk criteria (World Health Organization functional class I-II; 6-minute walk distance >440 m; N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide RESULTS Both the number of low-risk criteria and the REVEAL 2.0 risk category were prognostic for morbidity/mortality at baseline and any time-point during the study. Patients with 3 low-risk criteria at baseline had a 94% reduced risk of morbidity/mortality compared to patients with 0 low-risk criteria and were all categorized as low-risk by REVEAL 2.0. The treatment effect of selexipag on morbidity/mortality was consistent irrespective of the number of low-risk criteria or the REVEAL 2.0 risk category at any time-point during the study. Selexipag-treated patients were more likely to increase their number of low-risk criteria from baseline to week 26 than placebo-treated patients (odds ratio 1.69, p = 0.0002); similar results were observed for REVEAL 2.0 risk score. CONCLUSIONS These results support the association between risk profile and long-term outcome and suggest that selexipag treatment may improve risk profile

Results of an Expert Consensus Survey on the Treatment of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension With Oral Prostacyclin Pathway Agents

Background Treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) has evolved substantially over the past two decades and varies according to etiology, functional class (FC), hemodynamic parameters, and other clinical factors. Current guidelines do not provide definitive recommendations regarding the use of oral prostacyclin pathway agents (PPAs) in PAH. To provide guidance on the use of these agents, an expert panel was convened to develop consensus statements for the initiation of oral PPAs in adults with PAH. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE. The established RAND/University of California Los Angeles appropriateness method, which incorporates the Delphi method and the nominal group technique, was used to create consensus statements. Idiopathic, heritable, repaired congenital heart defect, and drug- or toxin-induced PAH (IPAH+) was considered as one etiologic grouping. The process was focused on the use of oral treprostinil or selexipag in patients with IPAH+ or connective tissue disease-associated PAH and FC II or III symptoms receiving background dual endothelin receptor antagonist/phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor therapy. Results The panel developed 14 consensus statements regarding the appropriate use of oral PPAs in the target population. The panel identified 13 clinical scenarios in which selexipag may be considered as a treatment option. Conclusions The paucity of clinical evidence overall, and particularly from randomized trials in this setting, creates a gap in knowledge. These consensus statements are intended to aid physicians in navigating treatment options and using oral PPAs in the most appropriate manner in patients with PAH

Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension-Related Morbidity Is Prognostic for Mortality

BACKGROUND: Registry data suggest that disease progression in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is indicative of poor prognosis. However, the prognostic relevance of PAH-related morbidity has not been formally evaluated in randomized controlled trials. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of these analyses was to assess the impact of morbidity events on the risk of subsequent mortality using the landmark method and data from the SERAPHIN and GRIPHON studies. METHODS: For each study, the risk of all-cause death up to the end of the study was assessed from the landmark time point (months 3, 6, and 12) according to whether a patient had experienced a primary endpoint morbidity event before the landmark. Each analysis was conducted using data from all patients who were available for survival follow-up at the landmark. RESULTS: In the SERAPHIN study, on the basis of the 3-month landmark time point, patients who experienced a morbidity event before month 3 had an increased risk of death compared with patients who did not (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.39; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.94 to 5.92). In the GRIPHON study, on the basis of the 3-month landmark time point, there was also an increased risk with a HR of 4.48; (95% CI: 2.98 to 6.73). Analyses based on 6-month and 12-month landmarks also showed increased risk in patients who experienced morbidity events, albeit with a reduced HR. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the prognostic relevance of PAH-related morbidity as defined in the SERAPHIN and GRIPHON studies, highlighting the importance of preventing disease progression in patients with PAH and supporting the clinical relevance of SERAPHIN and GRIPHON morbidity events. (Study of Macitentan [ACT-064992] on Morbidity and Mortality in Patients With Symptomatic Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension [SERAPHIN]; NCT00660179; Selexipag [ACT-293987] in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension [GRIPHON]; NCT01106014). ispartof: Journal of the American College of Cardiology vol:71 issue:7 pages:752-763 ispartof: location:United States status: publishe