SERAPHIN haemodynamic substudy: the effect of the dual endothelin receptor antagonist macitentan on haemodynamic parameters and NT-proBNP levels and their association with disease progression in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension.

Aims: The effect of macitentan on haemodynamic parameters and NT-proBNP levels was evaluated in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients in the SERAPHIN study. Association between these parameters and disease progression, assessed by the primary endpoint (time to first morbidity/mortality event), was explored. Methods and results: Of the 742 randomized patients, 187 with right heart catheterization at baseline and month 6 participated in a haemodynamic sub-study. Prespecified endpoints included change from baseline to month 6 in cardiac index (CI), right atrial pressure (RAP), mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP), pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR), mixed-venous oxygen saturation, and NT-proBNP. Exploratory analyses examined associations between CI, RAP, and NT-proBNP and disease progression using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression models. Macitentan improved CI, RAP, mPAP, PVR and NT-proBNP vs. placebo at month 6. Absolute levels of CI, RAP and NT-proBNP at baseline and month 6, but not their changes, were associated with morbidity/mortality events. Patients with CI > 2.5 L/min/m2, RAP < 8 mmHg, or NT-proBNP < 750 fmol/ml at month 6 had a lower risk of morbidity/mortality than those not meeting these thresholds (HR 0.49, 95% CL 0.28-0.86; HR 0.72, 95% CL 0.42-1.22; and HR 0.22, 95% CL 0.15-0.33, respectively). Conclusions: For all treatment groups, baseline and month 6 values of CI, RAP, and NT-proBNP, but not their changes, were associated with morbidity/mortality events, confirming their relevance in predicting disease progression in patients with PAH. By improving those parameters, macitentan increased the likelihood of reaching threshold values associated with lower risk of morbidity/mortality.

Macitentan and morbidity and mortality in pulmonary arterial hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Current therapies for pulmonary arterial hypertension have been adopted on the basis of short-term trials with exercise capacity as the primary end point. We assessed the efficacy of macitentan, a new dual endothelin-receptor antagonist, using a primary end point of morbidity and mortality in a long-term trial. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with symptomatic pulmonary arterial hypertension to receive placebo once daily, macitentan at a once-daily dose of 3 mg, or macitentan at a once-daily dose of 10 mg. Stable use of oral or inhaled therapy for pulmonary arterial hypertension, other than endothelin-receptor antagonists, was allowed at study entry. The primary end point was the time from the initiation of treatment to the first occurrence of a composite end point of death, atrial septostomy, lung transplantation, initiation of treatment with intravenous or subcutaneous prostanoids, or worsening of pulmonary arterial hypertension. RESULTS: A total of 250 patients were randomly assigned to placebo, 250 to the 3-mg macitentan dose, and 242 to the 10-mg macitentan dose. The primary end point occurred in 46.4%, 38.0%, and 31.4% of the patients in these groups, respectively. The hazard ratio for the 3-mg macitentan dose as compared with placebo was 0.70 (97.5% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.96; P=0.01), and the hazard ratio for the 10-mg macitentan dose as compared with placebo was 0.55 (97.5% CI, 0.39 to 0.76; P<0.001). Worsening of pulmonary arterial hypertension was the most frequent primary end-point event. The effect of macitentan on this end point was observed regardless of whether the patient was receiving therapy for pulmonary arterial hypertension at baseline. Adverse events more frequently associated with macitentan than with placebo were headache, nasopharyngitis, and anemia. CONCLUSIONS: Macitentan significantly reduced morbidity and mortality among patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension in this event-driven study. (Funded by Actelion Pharmaceuticals; SERAPHIN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00660179.).

Incident and prevalent cohorts with pulmonary arterial hypertension: insight from SERAPHIN.

In SERAPHIN, a long-term, randomised, controlled trial (NCT00660179) in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), macitentan significantly reduced the risk of morbidity/mortality and PAH-related death/hospitalisation. We evaluated disease progression and the effect of macitentan in treatment-naïve incident and prevalent cohorts.Patients allocated to placebo, or macitentan 3 mg or 10 mg were classified by time from diagnosis to enrolment as incident (≤6 months; n=110) or prevalent (>6 months; n=157). The risk of morbidity/mortality and PAH-related death/hospitalisation was determined using Cox regression.The risk of morbidity/mortality (Kaplan-Meier estimates at month 12: 54.4% versus 26.7%; p=0.006) and PAH-related death/hospitalisation (Kaplan-Meier estimates at month 12: 47.3% versus 19.9%; p=0.006) were significantly higher for incident versus prevalent patients receiving placebo, respectively. There was no significant difference in the risk of all-cause death between incident and prevalent cohorts (p=0.587). Macitentan 10 mg significantly reduced the risk of morbidity/mortality and PAH-related death/hospitalisation versus placebo in incident and prevalent cohorts.Incident patients had a higher risk for PAH progression compared with prevalent patients but not a higher risk of death. Macitentan delayed disease progression in both incident and prevalent PAH patients.

The diagnostic journey of pulmonary arterial hypertension patients: results from a multinational real-world survey.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a life-threatening, progressive disease often diagnosed late in its course. OBJECTIVES: To present patient-reported data that were captured within a large, multinational, point-in-time survey of PAH-treating physicians and their patients to better understand the diagnostic journey. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey conducted in five European countries (EU5), Japan and the USA. METHODS: PAH-treating pulmonologists, cardiologists, rheumatologists or internists (USA only) completed a patient record form (PRF) for the next four consecutive adult PAH patients they saw; these patients filled in a patient self-completion (PSC) form on an anonymous, voluntary basis. Our report focuses on patient data; data are from PSC forms unless stated otherwise. RESULTS: Physician-reported PRFs and self-completed PSC forms were obtained for 1152 and 572 patients, respectively. Patients' mean (SD) age was 59.1 (14.0) years, 55.6% were female, and 57.3% had idiopathic PAH. Patient-reported data showed an average delay of 17.0 months between symptom onset and PAH diagnosis. This is longer than physicians estimated (13.8 months): this disparity may be partly due to the time taken by patients to consult a physician about their symptoms [9.6 months overall, longest in the USA (15.3 months)]. Most patients (71.6%) initially consulted primary care physicians about their symptoms and 76.4% of patients were referred to a specialist. Misdiagnoses occurred in 40.9% of patients [most frequent in the USA (51.3%), least common in Japan (27.6%)] and they saw an average of 2.9 physicians overall (3.5 in EU5 versus 2.0 in Japan/USA) before being diagnosed. Diagnosis was most often made by cardiologists (50.4%) or pulmonologists (49.3%). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that diagnostic delay in PAH results from patient- and physician-related factors, which differ across regions and include lack of awareness of PAH on both sides. Development of better screening strategies may help address this barrier to timely PAH diagnosis.

Performance of DETECT Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Algorithm According to the Hemodynamic Definition of Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension in the 2022 European Society of Cardiology and the European Respiratory Society Guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: The evidence-based DETECT pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) algorithm is frequently used in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) to help clinicians screen for PAH by using noninvasive data to recommend patient referral to echocardiography and, if applicable, for a diagnostic right-sided heart catheterization. However, the hemodynamic definition of PAH was recently updated in the 2022 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Respiratory Society (ERS) guidelines. The performance of DETECT PAH in identifying patients with a high risk of PAH according to this new definition was assessed. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of DETECT, which comprised 466 patients with SSc, the performance of the DETECT PAH algorithm in identifying patients with a high risk of PAH as defined in the 2022 ESC/ERS guidelines (mean pulmonary arterial pressure [mPAP] >20 mm Hg, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure [PCWP] ≤15 mm Hg, and pulmonary vascular resistance >2 Wood units) was assessed using summary statistics and was descriptively compared to the known performance of DETECT PAH as defined in 2014, when it was developed (mPAP ≥25 mm Hg and PCWP ≤15 mm Hg). RESULTS: The sensitivity of DETECT PAH in identifying patients with a high risk of PAH according to the 2022 ESC/ERS definition was lower (88.2%) compared to the 2014 definition (95.8%). Specificity improved from 47.8% to 50.8%. CONCLUSION: The performance of the DETECT algorithm to screen for PAH in patients with SSc is maintained when PAH is defined according to the 2022 ESC/ERS hemodynamic definition, indicating that DETECT remains applicable to screen for PAH in patients with SSc.

Time to diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension and diagnostic burden: A retrospective analysis of nationwide US healthcare data.

The main aim of this analysis was to investigate time from symptom onset (chronic unexplained dyspnoea [CUD]) to diagnosis of Group 1 pulmonary hypertension (PH)-pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH)-and to characterize healthcare resource utilization leading up to diagnosis using a nationwide US claims and an electronic health record (EHR) database from Optum©. Eligible patients were ≥18 years old at first CUD diagnosis (index event) and had a PAH diagnosis on or after index date. Based on administrative codes, PAH was defined as right heart catheterization (RHC), ≥ 2 PAH diagnoses (1 within a year of RHC), and ≥1 post-RHC prescription for PAH treatment. All values are median (1st quartile-3rd quartile) unless otherwise stated. Of 854,722 patients with CUD in the claims database, 582 (0.1%) had PAH. Time from CUD to PAH diagnosis was 2.26 (0.73-4.22) years. PAH patients experienced 3 (2-4) transthoracic echocardiograms (TTEs), 6 (3-12) specialist visits, and 2 (1-4) hospitalizations during the diagnostic interval. Almost one-third of patients (29%) waited 10 months or more to have a TTE. Findings from the EHR database were broadly similar. Resource utilization during the diagnostic interval was also analyzed in an overall PH cohort: findings were generally similar to the PAH cohort (2 [1-3] TTEs, 4 [2-9] specialist visits and 2 [1-4] hospitalizations). These data indicate a delay in the diagnostic pathway for PAH, and illustrate the burden associated with PAH diagnosis.

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.

Psychometric validation of the Hand Disability in Systemic Sclerosis-Digital Ulcers (HDISS-DU®) patient-reported outcome instrument.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to develop a patient-reported outcome measure, in accordance with the US Food and Drug Administration guidance, to capture the impact of systemic sclerosis-related digital ulcers (SSc-DUs) on hand function. Psychometric analyses were conducted to evaluate and document the measurement properties of the resulting instrument-the Hand Disability in Systemic Sclerosis-Digital Ulcers (HDISS-DU®). METHODS: The HDISS-DU was developed through a series of confirmatory, qualitative concept-elicitation interviews (N = 36) to provide supportive evidence that the instrument captures all relevant issues and functional limitations relating to SSc-DUs in this patient population. Psychometric analyses used blinded data from two randomised, controlled, phase 3 trials in patients with SSc-DUs (N = 517). The analyses included assessment of reliability, construct validity, responsiveness and thresholds for meaningful change. RESULTS: Qualitative interviews confirmed that the HDISS-DU had good content coverage and patients understood the HDISS-DU instructions, items and response scale. The HDISS-DU demonstrated excellent internal consistency and test-retest reliability, with satisfactory construct validity. Overall, the HDISS-DU was highly responsive to change in digital ulcer severity: the no-change group (for other criterion measures) had mean differences and effect sizes close to 0, while mean differences were mostly negative (indicating improvement) for the improvement groups (for other criterion measures) and vice versa. The preliminary threshold for meaningful change was a 0.50 difference in HDISS-DU score. CONCLUSIONS: Using data from two large studies of SSc-DU patients, these psychometric analyses support the reliability, validity, discriminating ability and responsiveness to change of the HDISS-DU for evaluating treatment outcomes in future clinical studies and clinical practice.

Early worsening heart failure in patients admitted for acute heart failure: time course, hemodynamic predictors, and outcome.

BACKGROUND: The most common outcome currently assessed in acute heart failure trials (AHF) is dyspnea improvement. Worsening hear failure (WHF) is a new outcome measure that incorporates failure to improve or recurrent symptoms of AHF requiring rescue intravenous therapy, mechanical circulatory or ventilatory support, or readmission because of AHF, occurring within 30 days of AHF admission. METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective data analysis of 120 patients with AHF requiring hemodynamic monitoring who enrolled in the placebo arm of 2 prospective randomized studies. The incidence of WHF was 42% at 30 days from enrollment. Most WHF events occurred in-hospital during the first 7 days after admission (early WHF). Thirty-day readmission from AHF was an infrequent event in the present cohort (5.0%). The strongest hemodynamic predictors of WHF were cardiac power at baseline and its change during the initial 6 hours of monitoring. Other hemodynamic parameters associated with WHF events were blood pressure and its increase, cardiac output, and pulmonary wedge pressure change during the initial 6 hours of monitoring. WHF was found to be a strong predictor of 6-month mortality. CONCLUSIONS: WHF is a common morbid event clustered mostly during the first week of AHF admission and is associated with higher 6-month mortality. The hemodynamic measurements associated with WHF are similar to those predicting adverse outcome in AHF and cardiogenic shock (low cardiac power, higher pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, and vascular resistance), emphasizing the notion that early WHF should become an important AHF-specific outcome measure.

Integrating Data From Randomized Controlled Trials and Observational Studies to Assess Survival in Rare Diseases.

Background Conducting randomized controlled trials to investigate survival in a rare disease like pulmonary arterial hypertension has considerable ethical and logistical constraints. In many studies, such as the Study with an Endothelin Receptor Antagonist in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension to Improve Clinical Outcome (SERAPHIN) randomized controlled trial, evaluating survival is further complicated by bias introduced by allowing active therapy among placebo-treated patients who clinically deteriorate. Methods and Results SERAPHIN enrolled and followed patients in the same time frame as the US Registry to Evaluate Early And Long-term PAH Disease Management, providing an opportunity to compare observed survival for SERAPHIN patients with predicted survival had they received real-world treatment as in the Registry to Evaluate Early And Long-term PAH Disease Management. From the Registry to Evaluate Early And Long-term PAH Disease Management (N=3515), 734 patients who met SERAPHIN eligibility criteria were selected and their data used to build a prediction model for time to death up to 3 years based on 10 baseline prognostic variables. The model was used to predict a survival curve for each of the 742 SERAPHIN patients via their baseline variables. The average of these predicted survival curves was compared with observed survival of the placebo (n=250) and macitentan 10 mg (n=242) groups using a log-rank test and Cox proportional hazard model. Observed mortality risk for patients randomized to placebo, 62% of whom were taking background pulmonary arterial hypertension therapy, tended to be lower than that predicted for all SERAPHIN patients (16% lower; P=0.259). The observed placebo survival curve closely approximated the predicted survival curve for the first 15 months. Beyond that time, observed risk of mortality decreased compared with predicted mortality, potentially reflecting the impact of crossover of patients in the placebo group to active therapy. Over 3 years, risk of mortality observed with macitentan 10 mg was 35% lower than predicted mortality ( P=0.010). Conclusions These analyses show that, in a rare disease, real-world observational data can complement randomized controlled trial data to overcome some challenges associated with assessing survival in the setting of a randomized controlled trial. Clinical Trial Registration https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifiers: NCT00660179 and NCT00370214.

Association between six-minute walk distance and long-term outcomes in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension: Data from the randomized SERAPHIN trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension who achieve a six-minute walk distance of 380-440 m may have improved prognosis. Using the randomized controlled trial of macitentan in pulmonary arterial hypertension (SERAPHIN), the association between six-minute walk distance and long-term outcomes was explored. METHODS: Patients with six-minute walk distance data at Month 6 were dichotomized as above or below the median six-minute walk distance (400 m) and assessed for future risk of pulmonary arterial hypertension-related death or hospitalization and all-cause death. Additionally, six-minute walk distance values at baseline, Month 6 and the change from baseline to Month 6 were categorized by quartiles. All associations were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method using a log-rank test and Cox regression models. RESULTS: Patients with a six-minute walk distance >400 m vs. ≤400 m at Month 6 have a reduced risk of pulmonary arterial hypertension-related death or hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.48; 95% confidence interval 0.33-0.69). The risk was also lower for patients with higher quartiles of six-minute walk distance at baseline or Month 6 (baseline: hazard ratio [Q4 (>430 m) vs. Q1 (≤300 m)] 0.23; 95% confidence interval 0.15-0.36; Month 6: hazard ratio [Q4 (>455 m) vs. Q1 (≤348 m)] 0.33; 95% confidence interval 0.19-0.55). In contrast, six-minute walk distance changes at Month 6 were not associated with the risk of pulmonary arterial hypertension-related death or hospitalization (p = 0.477). These findings were consistent when adjusted for known confounders. Similar results were observed for the risk of all-cause death up to end of study. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension walking >400 m had better long-term prognosis. Although changes in six-minute walk distance were not associated with long-term outcomes, assessing absolute six-minute walk distance values remains important in the clinical management of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension.

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).

Macitentan Improves Health-Related Quality of Life for Patients With Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Results From the Randomized Controlled SERAPHIN Trial.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) leads to reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The objectives of this analysis were to evaluate the effect of macitentan on HRQoL in patients with PAH in the Study with an Endothelin Receptor Antagonist in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension to Improve Clinical Outcome (SERAPHIN) study. The association between baseline HRQoL and long-term outcomes was also investigated. METHODS: Patients were randomized to placebo, macitentan 3 mg, or macitentan 10 mg once daily. Patients aged 14 years or older completed the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) at baseline, at month 6 and month 12, and at the end of treatment (EOT). The absolute change from baseline to month 6 in SF-36 scores was calculated. The time to a clinically meaningful deterioration in the SF-36 physical component summary and mental component summary (PCS and MCS) scores and associations between baseline PCS/MCS scores and time to morbidity/mortality events were also assessed. RESULTS: At month 6, macitentan 10 mg significantly improved seven of eight SF-36 domains and the PCS and MCS scores vs placebo. Macitentan 10 mg significantly reduced the risk of a three-point or greater deterioration in PCS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47-0.76; P < .0001) and MCS scores (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.61-0.95; P = .0173) until EOT vs placebo. Patients with a baseline PCS score greater than the median baseline value had a significantly reduced risk of morbidity/mortality compared with patients with a PCS score less than the median; a similar result was observed for the MCS score. CONCLUSIONS: Macitentan significantly improved HRQoL in patients with PAH compared with placebo and significantly reduced the risk of a clinically meaningful HRQoL deterioration. An association between better baseline HRQoL and improved long-term outcomes was shown. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT00660179; URL: clinicaltrials.gov.

Echocardiographic ejection fraction in patients with acute heart failure: correlations with hemodynamic, clinical, and neurohormonal measures and short-term outcome.

BACKGROUND: Although echocardiographic ejection fraction (EF) is frequently used for the estimation of left ventricular contractility in patients with acute heart failure, its exact role and correlations with clinical, hemodynamic, and neurohormonal variables of cardiac contractility is not known. METHODS: Patients (343) with acute heart failure, enrolled into two prospective placebo-controlled hemodynamic studies of tezosentan, and in whom EF was available at baseline, were included. Outcome was evaluated in a subset of 94 patients who were enrolled in the placebo arms of the studies. RESULTS: Higher echocardiographic EF was correlated with older age, increased incidence of hypertension and atrial fibrillation, and female gender. We observed weak correlation between EF and cardiac output or cardiac power and no correlation with wedge pressure, and the change in hemodynamic variables over time. Higher EF was correlated with more baseline leukocytosis and higher plasma levels of endothelin-1 and blood urea nitrogen, while lower EF was related to higher baseline B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP). We observed no overall correlations between EF and outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute heart failure, echocardiographic EF is weakly correlated with hemodynamic measures of left ventricular contractility and outcome; hence, it should be interpreted cautiously when evaluating patients admitted due to acute heart failure.

The hemodynamic and neurohormonal effects of low doses of tezosentan (an endothelin A/B receptor antagonist) in patients with acute heart failure.

BACKGROUND: In previous studies (the RITZ project), tezosentan, an intravenous (i.v.)-balanced dual endothelin (ET-A/B) antagonist, in doses of 50 and 100 mg/h, improved the hemodynamics but not the clinical outcome of patients with acute heart failure (AHF). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of lower doses of tezosentan in patients with AHF. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Included were 130 patients hospitalized due to AHF with dyspnea at rest, despite initial treatment, and were in need of hemodynamic monitoring with cardiac index (CI)<2.5 l/min/m(2) and wedge pressure > or = 20 mm Hg. Patients were randomized in a double-blind fashion to receive placebo or tezosentan: 0.2, 1, 5, or 25 mg/h for 24 h. RESULTS: The primary endpoint of the study, CI increase at 6 h of treatment, was significant in the 5 and 25 mg/h groups. Tezosentan induced a dose-dependent increase in CI and a decrease in wedge pressure, peaking after 3 h in the 5 and 25 mg/h groups. In the 1 mg/h group, this effect was smaller during the first 6 h and increased gradually, becoming significant at 24 h and beyond treatment discontinuation. There was no hemodynamic effect in the 0.2 mg/h arm. Type-B natriuretic peptide (BNP) decreased in the 1, 5, and 25 mg/h groups but not on placebo. Endothelin levels were significantly increased by the 5 and 25 mg/h groups but not in the lower (< or = 1 mg/h) tezosentan doses. Urine output decreased on the 25 mg/h dose. There was a trend towards improvement in patients' subjective dyspnea score and worsening heart failure events, mainly in the 1 mg/h group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients admitted with AHF, tezosentan doses of 1-25 mg/h are efficacious in improving the hemodynamics and reducing BNP. Tezosentan doses beyond 1 mg/h increased plasma endothelin levels and reduced urine output, probably limiting their clinical efficacy, as compared to tezosentan 1 mg/h.

Bosentan for treatment of inoperable chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: BENEFiT (Bosentan Effects in iNopErable Forms of chronIc Thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension), a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to investigate the effect of treatment with the oral dual endothelin receptor antagonist bosentan on the hemodynamics and exercise capacity of patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). BACKGROUND: CTEPH is characterized by vascular obstruction and remodeling, leading to increased pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR). Although pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) is potentially curative, medical therapy is needed in patients with inoperable disease or persistent/recurrent pulmonary hypertension after PEA. METHODS: The BENEFiT (Bosentan Effects in iNopErable Forms of chronIc Thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension) study was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study in CTEPH including patients with either inoperable CTEPH or persistent/recurrent pulmonary hypertension after PEA (>6 months after PEA). Independent coprimary end points were change in PVR as a percentage of baseline and change from baseline in 6-min walk distance after 16 weeks of treatment with bosentan or placebo. Secondary end points included change from baseline in World Health Organization functional class and other hemodynamic parameters. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-seven patients were enrolled and randomized: 80 to placebo, 77 to bosentan. A statistically significant treatment effect (TE) of bosentan over placebo on PVR was demonstrated: -24.1% of baseline (95% confidence interval [CI]: -31.5% to -16.0%; p < 0.0001). Total pulmonary resistance (TE: -193 dynxsxcm(-5); 95% CI: -283 to -104 dyn.s.cm(-5); p < 0.0001) and cardiac index (TE: 0.3 lxmin(-1)xm(-2); 95% CI: 0.14 to 0.46 lxmin(-1)xm(-2); p = 0.0007) improved. Mean TE on 6-min walk distance was +2.2 m (95% CI: -22.5 to 26.8 m; p = 0.5449). Bosentan treatment was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated a positive TE of bosentan on hemodynamics in this patient population. No improvement was observed in exercise capacity. Further trials are needed to define the role of medical therapy in patients with CTEPH (Bosentan Effects in Inoperable Forms of Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension; NCT00313222).