Rame, J. Eduardo

AbstractMacitentan is a dual endothelin receptor antagonist (ERA) approved for treating pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). SOPRANO evaluated the efficacy and safety of macitentan versus placebo in pulmonary hypertension (PH) patients after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. SOPRANO was a phase 2, multicenter, double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group study. Patients with an LVAD implanted within the prior 90 days who had persistent PH (i.e., mean pulmonary arterial pressure ≥25 mmHg, pulmonary artery wedge pressure [PAWP] ≤18 mmHg, and pulmonary vascular resistance [PVR] >3 Wood units [WU]) were randomized (1:1) to macitentan 10 mg or placebo once daily for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in PVR. Secondary endpoints included change in right‐heart catheterization hemodynamic variables, N‐terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide levels, World Health Organization functional class, and safety/tolerability. Fifty‐seven patients were randomized to macitentan (n = 28) or placebo (n = 29). A statistically significant reduction in PVR from baseline to Week 12 was observed with macitentan versus placebo (placebo‐corrected geometric mean ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.58–0.94; p = .0158). No statistically significant differences were observed in secondary endpoints. In a post‐hoc analysis, 66.7% of patients receiving macitentan achieved PVR <3 WU versus 40.0% receiving placebo (p = .0383). Macitentan was generally well tolerated; adverse events were consistent with those in previous PAH studies with macitentan. In conclusion, macitentan showed promising tolerability and significantly reduced PVR in PH patients with persistently elevated PVR after LVAD implantation. ClinicalTrials. gov identifier: NCT02554903.

Treatment of giant cell myocarditis (GCM) can require bridging to orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) or recovery with mechanical circulatory support (MCS). Since the roles of MCS and immunotherapy are not well-defined in GCM, we sought to analyze outcomes of patients with GCM who required MCS. A systematic search was performed in June 2019 to identify all studies of biopsy-proven GCM requiring MCS after 2009. We identified 27 studies with 43 patients. Patient-level data were extracted for analysis. Median patient age was 45 (interquartile range (IQR): 32–57) years. 42.1% (16/38) were female. 34.9% (15/43) presented in acute heart failure. 20.9% (9/43) presented in cardiogenic shock. Biventricular (BiVAD) MCS was required in 76.7% (33/43) of cases. Of the 62.8% (27/43) of patients who received immunotherapy, 81.5% (22/27) used steroids combined with at least one other immunosuppressant. Cyclosporine was the most common non-steroidal agent, used in 40.7% (11/27) of regimens. Immunosuppression was initiated before MCS in 59.3% (16/27) of cases, after MCS in 29.6% (8/27), and not specified in 11.1% (3/27). Immunosuppression started prior to MCS was associated with significantly better survival than MCS alone (p = 0.006); 60.5% (26/43) of patients received bridge-to-transplant MCS; 39.5% (17/43) received bridge-to-recovery MCS; 58.5% (24/41) underwent OHT a median of 104 (58–255) days from diagnosis. GCM recurrence after OHT was reported in 8.3% (2/24) of transplanted cases. BiVAD predominates in mechanically supported patients with GCM. Survival and bridge to recovery appear better in patients on immunosuppression, especially if initiated before MCS.