Raina, Amresh

Abstract Background Post-hoc analyses of the FREEDOM-EV study demonstrated that addition of oral treprostinil (ORE) to background monotherapy improves risk in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Evidence is needed to understand the incremental effect of ORE added to dual background therapy with an endothelin receptor antagonist (ERA) and phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor (PDE5)/soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator (sGC). Purpose To describe longitudinal changes in REVEAL Lite 2 and COMPERA 2.0 risk status in patients initiating ORE on dual background therapy. Methods A multisite, double-blind retrospective chart review of PAH patients was conducted by US PAH-treating physicians and included patients meeting prior diagnostic PAH criteria (mPAP ≥25 mmHg/PAWP ≤15 mmHg/PVR >3 WU), age ≥18 at diagnosis, began a PAH treatment 01/2014–03/2017, and had NT-proBNP/BNP, WHO functional class (FC), and 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) at baseline visit. Baseline was most recent assessment prior to ORE initiation. This analysis included a subset of patients on dual background therapy at time of ORE initiation without prior prostacyclin use. Follow-up was evaluated in 0–6 and 6–12 months after ORE initiation. Results 30 (61.2%) of 49 ORE patients were on dual background therapy at time of ORE start; 23 had baseline assessments while on dual background therapy and were included in this analysis. At baseline, mean (SD) 6MWD was 140.9 (49.8) m and 21 (91.3%) patients were FC III. Prior to ORE, median (IQR) time on ERA was 6.6 (5.5–7.6) months and PDE5/sGC was 3.7 (3.3–5.7) months. After ORE start, median (IQR) time to follow-up was 4.3 (3.4–5.6) months in 0–6 months and 10.9 (9.6–11.6) months in 6–12 months. Using REVEAL Lite 2, baseline mean (SD) REVEAL Lite 2 risk score was 7.9 (0.8); 1 (4.4%), 2 (8.7%), and 20 (87%) patients were in the low, intermediate, and high risk strata, respectively. In 0–6 months (n=22), 13 (59.1%) patients improved and 9 (40.9%) stabilized REVEAL Lite 2 risk strata from baseline. In 6–12 months (n=22), mean (SD) REVEAL Lite 2 risk score was 6.5 (1.1); 15 patients (68.2%) improved, 6 (27.3%) stabilized, and 1 (4.6%) worsened REVEAL Lite 2 risk strata from baseline. Using COMPERA 2.0, at baseline, 1 (4.4%) patient was in the intermediate-low and 22 (95.7%) patients were in the intermediate-high risk strata. In 0–6 months (n=15), 10 (66.7%) patients improved and 5 (33.3%) patients stabilized COMPERA 2.0 risk strata from baseline. In 6–12 months (n=17), 15 (88.2%) patients improved and 2 (11.8%) stabilized COMPERA 2.0 risk strata from baseline. Conclusion Of patients initiating oral treprostinil in this study, most were on dual background therapy and at high risk by REVEAL Lite 2 or intermediate-high risk by COMPERA 2.0. This analysis suggests adding ORE to dual background therapy can improve risk status in patients, with clinical benefit attained within 6 months and continued incremental improvement through first year of therapy. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): United Therapeutics Corporation

Background Current mortality data for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) in the United States are based on registries that enrolled patients prior to 2010. We sought to determine mortality in PAH in the modern era using the PHAR (Pulmonary Hypertension Association Registry). Methods and Results We identified all adult patients with PAH enrolled in the PHAR between September 2015 and September 2020 (N=935). We used Kaplan‐Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards models to assess mortality at 1, 2, and 3 years. Patients were stratified based on disease severity by 3 validated risk scores. In treatment‐naïve patients, we compared survival based on initial treatment strategy. The median age was 56 years (44–68 years), and 76% were women. Of the 935 patients, 483 (52%) were ≤6 months from PAH diagnosis. There were 121 deaths (12.9%) during a median follow‐up time of 489 days (281–812 days). The 1‐, 2‐, and 3‐year mortality was 8% (95% CI, 6%–10%), 16% (95% CI, 13%–19%), and 21% (95% CI, 17%–25%), respectively. When stratified into low‐, intermediate‐, and high‐risk PAH, the mortality at 1, 2, and 3 years was 1%, 4% to 6%, and 7% to 11% for low risk; 7% to 8%, 11% to 16%, and 18% to 20% for intermediate risk; and 12% to 19%, 22% to 38%, and 28% to 55% for high risk, respectively. In treatment‐naïve patients, initial combination therapy was associated with better 1‐year survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.19–0.95]; P =0.037). Conclusions Mortality in the intermediate‐ and high‐risk patients with PAH remains unacceptably high in the PHAR, suggesting the importance for early diagnosis, aggressive use of available therapies, and the need for better therapeutics.

While parenteral prostacyclin (pPCY) therapy, delivered either subcutaneously or intravenously, is recommended for pulmonary arterial hypertension patients with severe or rapidly developing disease, some patients refuse this treatment. This study aimed to understand, directly from patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension, why pPCY was refused and, in some cases, later accepted. Interviews were conducted with 25 pulmonary arterial hypertension patients who previously refused pPCY therapy (Group A: Refused/Never initiated (n = 9) and Group B: Refused/Initiated (n = 16)). Patients in both groups believed that pPCY could improve their symptoms, slow disease progression, and provide them a greater ability to perform activities. Reasons for refusal included concern over side effects and the perceived limitations of pPCY on daily activities. Group A perceived their decision as a balance between quality of life and prolonging life and most acknowledged they would reconsider pPCY if other treatment options were exhausted. Group B cited they initiated therapy due to a worsening of symptoms, disease progression, to improve quality of life, to be there for their family, or a desire to live. Following initiation, Group B indicated their experience met expectations with reduced symptoms, slowed disease progression, and perception of improved survival; concerns related to pPCY were described as manageable. Given the efficacy of pPCY therapy, clinicians should apply knowledge of these findings in clinical practice. Patients noted improvements to parenteral pump technologies to include smaller size, water resistance, and implantability may increase their acceptance of this modality. Development efforts should focus on technologies that increase the acceptance of pPCY when indicated.