Palevsky, Harold I.

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).

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.

In patients treated with macitentan (Opsumit®, Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Basel, Switzerland) for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), prevention and/or effective management of treatment‐related adverse events may improve adherence. However, management of these adverse events can be challenging and the base of evidence and clinical experience for macitentan is limited. In the absence of evidence, consensus recommendations from physicians experienced in using macitentan to treat PAH may benefit patients and physicians who are using macitentan. Consensus recommendations were developed by a panel of physicians experienced with macitentan and PAH using a modified Delphi process. Over three iterations, panelists developed and refined a series of statements on the use of macitentan in PAH and rated their agreement with each statement on a Likert scale. The panel of 18 physicians participated and developed a total of 118 statements on special populations, add‐on therapy, drug–drug interactions, warnings and precautions, hospitalization and functional class, and adverse event management. The resulting consensus recommendations are intended to provide practical guidance on real‐world issues in using macitentan to treat patients with PAH.

Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is characterized by progressive increases in pulmonary vascular resistance, leading to right heart failure and death. Guidelines recommend customization of treatment, necessitating the development of effective strategies for transitioning patients among treatments. In this study, we characterized our experience with patient transitions from parenteral prostacyclin to inhaled iloprost. We retrospectively assessed records from 11 centers of 37 consecutive patients with PAH aged ≥ 18 years who were treated with intravenous (IV) or subcutaneous (SC) prostacyclin analogues and transitioned to inhaled iloprost. The transition period began on the first day of inhaled iloprost with the intent of discontinuing parenteral prostacyclin and ended on the first day on inhaled iloprost free of parenteral prostacyclin. Persistence was defined as the absence of (1) parenteral prostacyclin while remaining on inhaled iloprost during post‐transition Days 1–90 and (2) no reinitiation of parenteral prostacyclin during post‐transition Days 90–365. All patients were clinically stable before transitioning to inhaled iloprost. The mean age was 46.5 years, 70.3% were female, 51.4% had idiopathic PAH, and 43.0% were in New York Heart Association Functional Class III. Among patients with an overlapping transition, the mean transition period was 10.5 days. A transition dosing algorithm was used in 10 patients (27.0%). At one year, 78.4% of the patients remained persistent on inhaled iloprost and 81.1% were free of clinical worsening. In selected patients on background oral PAH therapy, transitioning from parenteral prostacyclin to inhaled iloprost appears safe and feasible and is associated with long‐term success. Further study is needed to define the optimal patient selection criteria and transition algorithm.