Feldman, Jeremy P.

Abstract The INSPIRE trial was a Phase 3, open‐label, multicenter trial (LTI‐301) that enrolled patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) ≥ 18 years of age who transitioned to Yutrepia from nebulized treprostinil (Transition) or added Yutrepia to prostacyclin naïve patients on ≤2 nonprostacyclin oral therapies. The objectives of the trial were to evaluate the safety and tolerability of Yutrepia (dry‐powder formulation of treprostinil) in patients with PAH. The primary safety measures were the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs. Exploratory efficacy measures were also assessed during the trial. Transition patients initiated Yutrepia at a dose comparable to their nebulized treprostinil dose while prostacyclin naïve patients received 26.5‐mcg QID; up‐titration in 26.5‐mcg increments was permitted for both groups. A total of 121 patients were enrolled, of which 29 patients discontinued from the trial, with the most common reason being AEs. Eighty percent of the Transition group and 96% of the prostacyclin naïve group titrated to a dose ≥79.5 mcg QID at Day 360, respectively, with one patient achieving a dose of 212‐mcg QID. The most common AEs were cough, headache, upper respiratory tract infection, dyspnea, dizziness, throat irritation, diarrhea, chest discomfort, fatigue, and nasopharyngitis. Most of these events were considered treatment‐related though mild to moderate in severity and expected for prostacyclin therapy administered by inhalation. In an evaluation of exploratory efficacy measures, patients remained stable or improved over the 1 year of treatment. Yutrepia was found to be a convenient, safe, and well‐tolerated inhaled prostacyclin treatment option for PAH patients.

Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is a rare, morbid, potentially curable subtype of pulmonary hypertension that negatively impacts health‐related quality of life (HRQoL). Little is known about differences in HRQoL and hospitalization between CTEPH patients and idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH) patients. Using multivariable linear regression and mixed effects models, we examined differences in HRQoL assessed by emPHasis‐10 (E10) and SF‐12 between CTEPH and IPAH patients in the Pulmonary Hypertension Association Registry, a prospective multicenter cohort of patients newly evaluated at a Pulmonary Hypertension Care Center. Multivariable negative binomial regression models were used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR) for hospitalization amongst the two groups. We included 461 IPAH patients and 169 CTEPH patients. Twenty‐one percent of CTEPH patients underwent pulmonary thromboendarterectomy (PTE) before the end of follow‐up. At baseline, patients with CTEPH had significantly worse HRQoL (higher E10 scores) (ß 2.83, SE 1.11, p = 0.01); however, differences did not persist over time. CTEPH patients had higher rates of hospitalization (excluding the hospitalization for PTE) compared to IPAH patients after adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, WHO functional class and six‐minute walk distance (IRR 1.66, 95%CI 1.04–2.65, p = 0.03). CTEPH patients who underwent PTE had improved HRQoL as compared to those who were medically managed, but patients who underwent PTE were younger, had higher cardiac outputs and greater six‐minute walk distances. In this large, prospective, multicenter cohort, CTEPH patients had significantly worse baseline HRQoL and higher rates of hospitalizations than those with IPAH. CTEPH patients who underwent PTE had significant improvements in HRQoL.

Compared to idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH), patients with portopulmonary hypertension (POPH) have worse survival. Health disparities may contribute to these differences but have not been studied. We sought to compare socioeconomic factors in patients with POPH and IPAH and to determine whether socioeconomic status and/or POPH diagnosis were associated with treatment and health‐care utilization. We performed a cross‐sectional study of adults enrolled in the Pulmonary Hypertension Association Registry. Patients with IPAH (n = 344) and POPH (n = 57) were compared. Compared with IPAH, patients with POPH were less likely to be college graduates (19.6% vs. 34.9%, p = 0.02) and more likely to be unemployed (54.7% vs. 30.5%, p < 0.001) and have an annual household income below poverty level (45.7% vs. 19.0%, p < 0.001). Patients with POPH had similar functional class, quality of life, 6‐min walk distance, and mean pulmonary arterial pressure with a higher cardiac index. Compared with IPAH, patients with POPH were less likely to receive combination therapy (46.4% vs. 62.2%, p = 0.03) and endothelin receptor antagonists (28.6% vs. 55.1%, p < 0.001) at enrollment with similar treatment at follow‐up. Patients with POPH had more emergency department visits (1.7 ± 2.1 vs. 0.9 ± 1.2, p = 0.009) and hospitalizations in the six months preceding enrollment (1.5 ± 2.1 vs. 0.8 ± 1.1, p = 0.02). Both POPH diagnosis and lower education level were independently associated with a higher number of emergency department visits. Compared to IPAH, patients with POPH have lower socioeconomic status, are less likely to receive initial combination therapy and endothelin receptor antagonists but have similar treatment at follow‐up, and have increased health‐care utilization.

BackgroundThe DelIVery for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension clinical trial was a multi‐center, prospective, single arm, Investigational Device Exemption study utilizing a fully implantable, programmable intravascular delivery system consisting of a pump and a catheter for intravenous treprostinil. The study met its primary endpoint and demonstrated that the intravascular delivery system significantly reduced catheter related complications at 22,000 subject‐days of follow‐up compared with a predefined objective performance criterion. Here we summarize the results obtained during a 6.4‐year follow‐up period.MethodsThroughout study follow‐up, participants had clinic visits and medication refills at least every 12 weeks (dependent on the subjects’ dose). All adverse events and intravascular delivery system complications were evaluated and recorded.ResultsSixty pulmonary arterial hypertension subjects were followed post device implantation for approximately 282 patient‐years (range 87 days to 6.4 years). Of the 60 subjects, 14 died (1 related to intravascular delivery system pump failure), 2 withdrew after lung transplants, and 2 withdrew due to pump pocket infection. No catheter‐related bloodstream infections, catheter thrombosis or occlusions, or catheter kinks occurred through 282 patient‐years. Two participants had adverse events of abdominal pain, rash, due to subcutaneous treprostinil “leaks” after one catheter puncture and one catheter laceration during pump refill and replacement, respectively. Eight pump failure events occurred: seven pump motor stalls and one early replacement (faulty battery).ConclusionDelivery of treprostinil with an intravascular delivery system is a safe alternative to an external delivery system, while providing enhanced life experiences. To preserve the risk–benefit ratio, treatment at specialized pulmonary arterial hypertension centers is recommended until training is disseminated at other sites.