Citations

ABSTRACT Pulmonary hypertension (PH) comprises a heterogeneous group of disorders characterized by elevated pressure in the pulmonary arteries. Despite advances in awareness, utilization of non‐invasive screening with echocardiography, increasing number of targeted therapies, and evolving clinical guidelines emphasizing referral to PH specialty centers, barriers to timely diagnosis and treatment persist. Key challenges span patient‐related and system‐level domains that hinder the effective diagnosis, management, and treatment of PH, particularly pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). In this article, the obstacles to PH care are examined and actionable recommendations are proposed. By integrating patient‐related and system‐level perspectives, this review provides a framework to bridge persistent gaps in PH care delivery in the United States.

Abstract Rationale Pulmonary hypertension (PH) in interstitial lung disease (ILD) lacks approved therapies. Objectives The Pulmonary Vascular Research Institute GoDeep metaregistry collects real-world data of patients with PH from international PH referral centers. Methods Patients with ILD-PH and relevant subgroups (idiopathic interstitial pneumonia [IIP], idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis [IPF]) were stratified by pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR). Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were employed, additionally accounting for immortal time bias, sensitivity analyses, Heller explained relative risk statistics, and target trial emulation framework analysis. Measurements and Main Results Among 34,482 patients, 940 with hemodynamically fully characterized incident ILD-PH (median age, 67 [IQR, 59–74] yr) were identified. A total of 62% had severe ILD-PH with PVR >5 Wood units (WU) and poor survival rates (29% and 18% at 3 and 5 yr), significantly worse than patients with ILD-PH with PVR ≤5 WU and patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension. Survival was poorest in severe IPF-PH. A total of 59% of all patients ILD-PH received PH-targeted therapy, predominantly phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5is). PDE5i treatment was consistently associated with significantly improved survival in patients with severe PH (hazard ratios of 0.537 [0.370–0.781], 0.461 [0.233–0.913], and 0.435 [0.215–0.8] for IIP-PH, IPF-PH, and IIP-PH with nintedanib/pirfenidone background therapy), but not in patients with less severe hemodynamic impairment, supported by sensitivity analyses, Heller statistics, and target trial emulation framework analysis. The survival statistics of patients with PDE5i-treated IIP-PH or IPF-PH were validated in the independent COMPERA registry. Combination therapy with PDE5is and inhaled prostacyclin analogues was superior to monotherapy using PDE5is (hazard ratio, 0.341; 0.205–0.566). Conclusions Prognosis in ILD-PH was generally very poor and was related to PH severity. PDE5i treatment in severe IIP-PH and IPF-PH was associated with improved survival, which is to be further verified in controlled trials.

ABSTRACTPortopulmonary hypertension (PoPH), a type of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) in patients with liver disease, is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The relationship between cardiopulmonary hemodynamics, PAH therapy, and survival in PoPH remains unclear. We performed a retrospective cohort study of PoPH patients from the international pulmonary hypertension (PH) meta‐registry, PVRI GoDeep. PAH was defined by a mean pulmonary arterial pressure > 20 mmHg, pulmonary arterial wedge pressure ≤ 15 mmHg, and a pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) > 2 Wood Units. PoPH diagnoses were assigned by each center's PH specialist based on international guidelines at the time of enrollment. 246 incident PoPH patients met eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis, equally split between males (51%) and females (49%), with a median age of 54 years. When compared to both patients with IPAH and those with other subtypes of PAH (not classified as PoPH or IPAH), those with PoPH had significantly lower 5‐year survival rates (46% vs. 68% vs. 65%, log‐rank p < 0.001). Amongst the PoPH patients, however, there was no significant difference in 5‐year survival when dichotomized by disease severity, either by a PVR of 5 Wood Units or a CI of 2.5 L/min/m2. Treatment of the PoPH patients with PAH‐targeted therapies was associated with significantly higher 5‐year survival rates compared to those not receiving such treatments, as shown by Kaplan–Meier analysis. This survival benefit was observed for PDE5i (50% vs. 34%, log‐rank p = 0.029), ERA (58% vs. 34%, log‐rank p < 0.001), and the combination of PDE5i and/or ERA (51% vs. 22%, log‐rank p < 0.001), as well as any PAH‐targeting treatment (50% vs. 26%, log‐rank p = 0.007). Corresponding survival advantage was noted when including only PoPH patients with MELD Score ≥ 13. PoPH is a disease with significantly worse long‐term survival than other PAH subtypes, but targeted PAH therapy is associated with a robust survival benefit. Survival did not differ across high‐risk PVR and cardiac index thresholds, suggesting the factors that influence prognosis and survival in PoPH may be unique as compared to other PAH subtypes, and warrant further investigation.

Abstract Introduction Sex-based differences in morbidity and mortality for pulmonary hypertension (PH) are insufficiently addressed in current research. However, recognizing these differences is crucial for optimal clinical management and improving outcomes. This study assesses the effect of sex on survival among PH patients, while accounting for disease severity, comorbidities, treatment, and race. Methods We analyzed data from the PVRI GoDeep meta-registry, including all incident patients with complete hemodynamic profiles. Survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for various confounders. Analyses included both PAH and non-PAH groups and risk assessment by the ESC/ERS 2022, REVEAL lite 2, and COMPERA 4-strata scores. All analyses were performed using R (The R Foundation). Results A total of 19,663 incident PH patients were included in the analysis, with 5,581 patients (28%) diagnosed with Group 1 PH and a median age of 64 years [IQR: 52-73]. Among these, male patients (8,704, 44%) had a significantly higher mortality risk than female patients across the entire cohort and within all PH subtypes. The adjusted hazard ratio for mortality in male versus female patients was 1.391 [95% CI: 1.260-1.536] in the overall population and 1.404 [95% CI: 1.264-1.561] for those with PAH. This survival difference was consistent across various severity levels, age groups, and in the presence of comorbidities such as obesity and cardiovascular diseases, as well as among those receiving PAH-specific therapies as well as patients who remained without treatment during the observation period. Notably, male disadvantage in survival was observed in low, intermediate, and high-risk categories for ESC/ERS 2022, REVEAL lite 2, and COMPERA scores but not within REVEAL 2.0, which includes male sex as a non-modifiable risk factor. Racial analysis revealed a greater mortality risk for males among White patients, with no significant differences noted in Black or Asian populations. Conclusion Our PVRI GoDeep meta-registry analysis demonstrates that male PH patients face higher mortality risk across both PAH and non-PAH groups, independent of disease etiology, age, severity, comorbidities, and treatment factors, with this risk amplified in White patients. These findings suggest that male sex should be further considered as a risk factor to refine predictive models for survival in PH.

AbstractRight heart (RH) structure and function are major determinants of symptoms and prognosis in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). RH imaging provides detailed information, but evidence and guidelines on the use of RH imaging in treatment decisions are limited. We conducted a Delphi study to gather expert opinion on the role of RH imaging in decision‐making for treatment escalation in PAH. A panel of 17 physicians with expertise in PAH and RH imaging used three surveys in a modified Delphi process to reach consensus on the role of RH imaging in PAH. Survey 1 used open‐ended questions to gather information. Survey 2 contained Likert scale and other questions intended to identify consensus on topics identified in Survey 1. Survey 3 contained Likert scale questions derived from Survey 2 and summary information on the results of Survey 2. The Delphi panel reached consensus that RH imaging is likely to improve the current risk stratification algorithms and help differentiate risk levels in patients at intermediate risk. Tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, right ventricular fractional area change, right atrial area, tricuspid regurgitation, inferior venae cavae diameter, and pericardial effusion should be part of routine echocardiography in PAH. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging is valuable but limited by cost and access. A pattern of abnormal RH imaging results should prompt consideration of hemodynamic evaluation and possible treatment escalation. RH imaging is an important tool for decisions about treatment escalation in PAH, but systematically collected evidence is needed to clarify its role.

AbstractThe Pulmonary Vascular Research Institute GoDeep meta‐registry is a collaboration of pulmonary hypertension (PH) reference centers across the globe. Merging worldwide PH data in a central meta‐registry to allow advanced analysis of the heterogeneity of PH and its groups/subgroups on a worldwide geographical, ethnical, and etiological landscape (ClinTrial. gov NCT05329714). Retrospective and prospective PH patient data (diagnosis based on catheterization; individuals with exclusion of PH are included as a comparator group) are mapped to a common clinical parameter set of more than 350 items, anonymized and electronically exported to a central server. Use and access is decided by the GoDeep steering board, where each center has one vote. As of April 2022, GoDeep comprised 15,742 individuals with 1.9 million data points from eight PH centers. Geographic distribution comprises 3990 enrollees (25%) from America and 11,752 (75%) from Europe. Eighty‐nine perecent were diagnosed with PH and 11% were classified as not PH and provided a comparator group. The retrospective observation period is an average of 3.5 years (standard error of the mean 0.04), with 1159 PH patients followed for over 10 years. Pulmonary arterial hypertension represents the largest PH group (42.6%), followed by Group 2 (21.7%), Group 3 (17.3%), Group 4 (15.2%), and Group 5 (3.3%). The age distribution spans several decades, with patients 60 years or older comprising 60%. The majority of patients met an intermediate risk profile upon diagnosis. Data entry from a further six centers is ongoing, and negotiations with >10 centers worldwide have commenced. Using electronic interface‐based automated retrospective and prospective data transfer, GoDeep aims to provide in‐depth epidemiological and etiological understanding of PH and its various groups/subgroups on a global scale, offering insights for improved management.

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.

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.