Back to Authors

Restrepo‐Jaramillo, Ricardo

Mayo Clinic

University of South Florida

Citations 2

BREEZE: Open‐label clinical study to evaluate the safety and tolerability of treprostinil inhalation powder as Tyvaso DPI™ in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension
Spikes, Leslie , Eggert, Michael, Johri, Shilpa , Joly, Joanna M., Mehta, J.P. , Palevsky, Harold I. , Ramani, Gautam , Restrepo‐Jaramillo, Ricardo, Sahay, Sandeep , Shah, Trushil , Miceli, Melissa, Smith, Peter , Shapiro, Shelley, Spikes, Leslie A , Sahay, Sandeep , Bajwa, Abubakr A. , Burger, Charles D. , Desai, Sapna V., El‐Kersh, Karim , Fisher, Micah R., Deng, Chunqin

Pulmonary Circulation | March 23, 2022 | Volume: 12 | Issue: 2 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/pul2.12063 Get It

AbstractInhaled treprostinil is an approved therapy for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and pulmonary hypertension associated with interstitial lung disease in the United States. Studies have confirmed the robust benefits and safety of nebulized inhaled treprostinil, but it requires a time investment for nebulizer preparation, maintenance, and treatment. A small, portable treprostinil dry powder inhaler has been developed for the treatment of PAH. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of treprostinil inhalation powder (TreT) in patients currently treated with treprostinil inhalation solution. Fifty‐one patients on a stable dose of treprostinil inhalation solution enrolled and transitioned to TreT at a corresponding dose. Six‐minute walk distance (6MWD), device preference and satisfaction (Preference Questionnaire for Inhaled Treprostinil Devices [PQ‐ITD]), PAH Symptoms and Impact (PAH‐SYMPACT®) questionnaire, and systemic exposure and pharmacokinetics for up to 5 h were assessed at baseline for treprostinil inhalation solution and at Week 3 for TreT. Adverse events (AEs) were consistent with studies of inhaled treprostinil in patients with PAH, and there were no study drug‐related serious AEs. Statistically significant improvements occurred in 6MWD, PQ‐ITD, and PAH‐SYMPACT. Forty‐nine patients completed the 3‐week treatment phase and all elected to participate in an optional extension phase. These results demonstrate that, in patients with PAH, transition from treprostinil inhalation solution to TreT is safe, well‐tolerated, and accompanied by statistically significant improvements in key clinical assessments and patient‐reported outcomes with comparable systemic exposure between the two formulations at evaluated doses (trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03950739).
Delphi consensus recommendation for optimization of pulmonary hypertension therapy focusing on switching from a phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor to riociguat
Rahaghi, Franck , Balasubramanian, Vijay , Chakinala, Murali M. , Eggert, Michael, Elwing, Jean , Feldman, Jeremy, King, Christopher S. , Klinger, James R. , Mathai, Stephen C. , McConnell, John W., Palevsky, Harold I. , Restrepo‐Jaramillo, Ricardo, Safdar, Zeenat , Sager, Jeffrey S., Sood, Namita , Sulica, Roxana, Hill, Nicholas S. , Elwing, Jean M , Mathai, Stephen C , Bourge, Robert C. , Burger, Charles D. , White, R. James

Pulmonary Circulation | March 5, 2022 | Volume: 12 | Issue: 2 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/pul2.12055 Get It

AbstractDual combination therapy with a phosphodiesterase‐5 inhibitor (PDE5i) and endothelin receptor antagonist is recommended for most patients with intermediate‐risk pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). The RESPITE and REPLACE studies suggest that switching from a PDE5i to a soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) activator may provide clinical improvement in this situation. The optimal approach to escalation or transition of therapy in this or other scenarios is not well defined. We developed an expert consensus statement on the transition to sGC and other treatment escalations and transitions in PAH using a modified Delphi process. The Delphi process used a panel of 20 physicians with expertise in PAH. Panelists answered three questionnaires on the management of treatment escalations and transitions in PAH. The initial questionnaire included open‐ended questions. Later questionnaires consolidated the responses into statements that panelists rated on a Likert scale from −5 (strongly disagree) to +5 (strongly agree) to determine consensus. The Delphi process produced several consensus recommendations. Escalation should be considered for patients who are at high risk or not achieving treatment goals, by adding an agent from a new class, switching from oral to parenteral prostacyclins, or increasing the dose. Switching to a new class or within a class should be considered if tolerability or other considerations unrelated to efficacy are affecting adherence. Switching from a PDE5i to an SGC activator may benefit patients with intermediate risk who are not improving on their present therapy. These consensus‐based recommendations may be helpful to clinicians and beneficial for patients when evidence‐based guidance is unavailable.