Search

INTRODUCTION: Data on real-world clinical practice and outcomes of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension associated with connective tissue disease (CTD-PAH) are scarce. The OPUS/OrPHeUS studies enrolled patients newly initiating macitentan, including those with CTD-PAH. This analysis describes patient characteristics, treatment patterns, outcomes, and safety profiles of patients with CTD-PAH newly initiating macitentan in the US using the OPUS/OrPHeUS combined dataset. METHODS: OPUS was a prospective, US, multicenter, long-term, observational drug registry (April 2014-June 2020). OrPHeUS was a retrospective, US, multicenter medical chart review (October 2013-March 2017). The characteristics, treatment patterns, safety, and outcomes during macitentan treatment of patients with CTD-PAH and its subgroups systemic sclerosis (SSc-PAH), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE-PAH), and mixed CTD (MCTD-PAH) were descriptively compared to patients with idiopathic/heritable PAH (I/HPAH). RESULTS: The combined OPUS/OrPHeUS population included 2498 patients with I/HPAH and 1192 patients with CTD-PAH (708 SSc-PAH; 159 SLE-PAH; 124 MCTD-PAH, and 201 other CTD-PAH etiologies). At macitentan initiation for patients with I/HPAH and CTD-PAH, respectively: 61.2 and 69.3% were in World Health Organization functional class (WHO FC) III/IV; median 6-min walk distance was 289 and 279 m; and 58.1 and 65.2% received macitentan as combination therapy. During follow-up, for patients with I/HPAH and CTD-PAH, respectively: median duration of macitentan exposure observed was 14.0 and 15.8 months; 79.0 and 83.0% experienced an adverse event; Kaplan-Meier estimates (95% confidence limits [CL]) of patients free from all-cause hospitalization at 1 year were 60.3% (58.1, 62.4) and 59.3% (56.1, 62.3); and Kaplan-Meier estimates (95% CL) of survival at 1 year were 90.5% (89.1, 91.7) and 90.6% (88.6, 92.3). CONCLUSIONS: Macitentan was used in clinical practice in patients with CTD-PAH and its subgroups, including as combination therapy. The safety and tolerability profile of macitentan in patients with CTD-PAH was comparable to that of patients with I/HPAH. TRIAL REGISTRATION: OPsumit® Users Registry (OPUS): NCT02126943; Opsumit® Historical Users cohort (OrPHeUS): NCT03197688; www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Graphical abstract available for this article.

Introduction: Historically, patients recently (≤ 6 months) diagnosed with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH; incident) have had poorer survival than those with a longer (> 6 months) time from PAH diagnosis (prevalent). Despite guideline recommendations for initial combination therapy for most patients with PAH, many are initiated and maintained on monotherapy. Real-world evidence to evaluate the benefit of early combination treatment in newly-diagnosed patients is lacking. Methods: Patients with PAH initiating combination therapy with the endothelin receptor antagonist macitentan and the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor tadalafil (M+T) were identified from the combined dataset of the US, multicenter OPUS (prospective, observational drug registry; NCT02126943) and OrPHeUS (retrospective, medical chart review; NCT03197688) studies (2013–2020). Descriptive analyses were performed for the incident and prevalent cohorts, as well as the subcohort of incident patients who received M+T as first-line combination therapy (incident initial combination). Results: In OPUS/OrPHeUS, 1336 patients with PAH received M+T during the observation period. For the incident [n = 453 (33.9%)], incident initial combination [n = 272 (20.4%)], and prevalent [n = 837 (62.6%)] cohorts: median (Q1, Q3) M+T exposure was 14.2 (4.2, 27.5), 12.2 (3.2, 25.5), and 14.7 (4.5, 28.0) months. 12-month Kaplan–Meier estimates (95% confidence limits) for survival were 91.2% (87.7, 93.7), 88.5% (83.2, 92.2), and 92.9% (90.6, 94.6), for patients free from hospitalization were 59.4% (54.1, 64.4), 56.3% (49.1, 62.9), and 62.3% (58.5, 65.9), and for patients persisting on combination therapy were 68.6% (63.9, 72.8), 65.0% (58.8, 70.6) and 66.9% (63.5, 70.0). Adverse events (OPUS only) were reported in 77.8%, 80.2%, and 80.3% of patients, respectively, with no unexpected adverse events observed. Conclusions: Despite a historically worse prognosis, incident patients receiving M+T, including as initial combination therapy, had similar survival and hospitalization as prevalent patients. Safety profiles were similar across cohorts. Together, these data support the use of early combination therapy with macitentan and tadalafil. Plain Language Summary: In earlier studies, patients diagnosed with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) within the past 6 months (newly-diagnosed PAH, called 'incident patients' in this article) had worse health than patients diagnosed with PAH more than 6 months before (long-standing PAH, called 'prevalent patients' in this article). This is because some newly-diagnosed patients have very advanced disease and do poorly within the first 6 months. The OPUS (NCT02126943) and OrPHeUS (NCT03197688) studies collected information on patients with PAH treated in US clinics between 2013 and 2020. We identified patients that were treated with a combination of two PAH medications, macitentan and tadalafil. We then grouped them as newly-diagnosed (453 patients) or long-standing (837 patients). We also looked at the subgroup of newly-diagnosed patients who received the combination as their first treatment (272 patients, called 'incident initial combination patients' in this article). We then looked at how these patients did over time. Patients were treated with macitentan and tadalafil for an average of 12–14 months. We found that after 1 year of combination treatment, results were similar between the groups: patient survival was 91%, 89%, and 93% for those with newly-diagnosed, newly-diagnosed and previously untreated, and long-standing PAH; the proportion remaining hospitalization-free was 59%, 56%, and 62%; and the proportion remaining on combination treatment was 69%, 65%, and 67%, respectively. Side effects were in line with the known safety profiles of the medications. Despite historically having worse health outcomes, newly-diagnosed patients receiving the macitentan and tadalafil combination had similar survival and hospitalization as patients with long-standing PAH. These data suggest that there is a benefit to starting this combination of medicines early in the treatment of PAH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Macitentan, either as monotherapy or part of combination therapy, improved clinical outcomes in patients with pulmonary artery hypertension (PAH) in clinical trials. Evidence on the effectiveness and safety of macitentan administered in real-world clinical practice in China is limited. Methods: This real-world, retrospective, multicenter chart review study was conducted at seven hospitals in China. Adult patients with a diagnosis of PAH who initiated macitentan and had medical assessments at 3–7 months after macitentan initiation were included. The primary outcomes were changes in the World Health Organization functional class (WHO-FC), 6-min walk distance (6MWD), and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP)/B-type natriuretic peptide from baseline to first follow-up visit (months 3–7). Serious adverse events (SAEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of macitentan were collected. Results: From 30 August 2021 to 31 March 2022, 214 eligible patients were included in the safety analysis set and 105 patients were included in the analysis of effectiveness. At the first follow-up visit compared with baseline, significant changes in WHO-FC were observed (p =.04), 93.5% patients had their WHO-FC improved (25.8%) or maintained (67.7%). 6MWD changed by a mean (standard deviation [SD]) of 45.0 (81.4) meters (p <.001), with 94.7% having their 6MWD improved (34.7%) or maintained (60.0%). The mean (SD) of NT-proBNP decreased from 1667.4 (3233.0) ng/L to 1090.0 (2230.1) ng/L (p <.001). In the safety analysis set, 24 (11.2%) patients experienced at least one ADR and/or SAE. ADRs and SAEs were reported in 11 (5.1%) and 18 (8.4%), respectively. No deaths or unexpected safety events were observed. Conclusion: This study provided real-world evidence on the clinical benefits and good tolerance of macitentan in Chinese patients with PAH treated in routine clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Aims Methods and results Conclusions According to current guidelines, initial monotherapy should be considered for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients with cardiopulmonary comorbidities. This analysis of combined data from the TRITON and REPAIR clinical trials, assesses efficacy and safety of initial double combination therapy in patients without vs. with 1–2 cardiac comorbidities.Data were combined for patients from TRITON (NCT02558231) and REPAIR (NCT02310672) on initial macitentan and tadalafil double combination therapy (overall set, n = 148) and two subgroups defined as patients without cardiac comorbidities (n = 62) and those with 1–2 cardiac comorbidities (n = 78). Patients with ≥3 comorbidities were excluded from these studies. For the overall set, the median (Q1–Q3) duration of combined macitentan and tadalafil exposure was 513.0 (364.0–778.0) days, and was similar between subgroups. Change from baseline to Week 26 for pulmonary vascular resistance was −55% and −50% for patients without and with 1–2 cardiac comorbidities, respectively; marked improvements in other hemodynamic and functional parameters were also observed, although functional parameters improved to a lesser extent in patients with comorbidities. At Week 26, the majority of patients had improved PAH risk status, according to the non‐invasive four‐strata and REVEAL Lite 2.0 methods. The safety profile of initial macitentan plus tadalafil combination therapy was consistent with the known profiles of the two drugs, and similar between the subgroups.Initial double combination therapy with macitentan plus tadalafil is efficacious in patients with PAH with 1–2 cardiac comorbidities and those without, with similar safety and tolerability profiles between the two groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The primary aim was to demonstrate bioequivalence between the 10/20 mg fixed‐dose combination (FDC) of macitentan/tadalafil in a single tablet and the free combination of both drugs, and to evaluate the food effect on the 10/20 mg FDC in healthy participants. In this single‐center, randomized, open‐label, 3‐way crossover, single‐dose Phase 1 study in healthy adult participants, macitentan/tadalafil was administered as a 10/20 mg FDC formulation and compared with the free combination of macitentan and tadalafil. The food effect on the FDC was also evaluated. Pharmacokinetic sampling (216 h) was conducted. The 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the geometric mean ratios of maximum observed plasma analyte concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma analyte concentration–time curves (AUCs) for Treatment A (FDC, fasted) versus C (free combination, fasted) were within bioequivalence limits demonstrating that the FDC formulation can be considered bioequivalent to the free combination. The 90% CIs for the geometric mean ratios of Cmax and AUC for Treatment B (FDC, fed) versus A (FDC, fasted) were contained within bioequivalence limits demonstrating that there was no food effect. The administration of the 10/20 mg FDC was generally safe and well tolerated in healthy participants. This study demonstrated bioequivalence between the FDC of macitentan/tadalafil (10/20 mg) in a single tablet and the free combination of both drugs in healthy participants, and that the FDC can be taken without regard to food, similarly to the individual components. The FDC was generally safe and well tolerated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Introduction Data on real-world clinical practice and outcomes of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension associated with connective tissue disease (CTD-PAH) are scarce. The OPUS/OrPHeUS studies enrolled patients newly initiating macitentan, including those with CTD-PAH. This analysis describes patient characteristics, treatment patterns, outcomes, and safety profiles of patients with CTD-PAH newly initiating macitentan in the US using the OPUS/OrPHeUS combined dataset. Methods OPUS was a prospective, US, multicenter, long-term, observational drug registry (April 2014–June 2020). OrPHeUS was a retrospective, US, multicenter medical chart review (October 2013–March 2017). The characteristics, treatment patterns, safety, and outcomes during macitentan treatment of patients with CTD-PAH and its subgroups systemic sclerosis (SSc-PAH), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE-PAH), and mixed CTD (MCTD-PAH) were descriptively compared to patients with idiopathic/heritable PAH (I/HPAH). Results The combined OPUS/OrPHeUS population included 2498 patients with I/HPAH and 1192 patients with CTD-PAH (708 SSc-PAH; 159 SLE-PAH; 124 MCTD-PAH, and 201 other CTD-PAH etiologies). At macitentan initiation for patients with I/HPAH and CTD-PAH, respectively: 61.2 and 69.3% were in World Health Organization functional class (WHO FC) III/IV; median 6-min walk distance was 289 and 279 m; and 58.1 and 65.2% received macitentan as combination therapy. During follow-up, for patients with I/HPAH and CTD-PAH, respectively: median duration of macitentan exposure observed was 14.0 and 15.8 months; 79.0 and 83.0% experienced an adverse event; Kaplan–Meier estimates (95% confidence limits [CL]) of patients free from all-cause hospitalization at 1 year were 60.3% (58.1, 62.4) and 59.3% (56.1, 62.3); and Kaplan–Meier estimates (95% CL) of survival at 1 year were 90.5% (89.1, 91.7) and 90.6% (88.6, 92.3). Conclusions Macitentan was used in clinical practice in patients with CTD-PAH and its subgroups, including as combination therapy. The safety and tolerability profile of macitentan in patients with CTD-PAH was comparable to that of patients with I/HPAH. Trial Registration OPsumit® Users Registry (OPUS): NCT02126943; Opsumit® Historical Users cohort (OrPHeUS): NCT03197688; www.clinicaltrials.gov Graphical abstract available for this article. Graphical Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this sub-study was to evaluate the relationship between echocardiography (echo) and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI) variables and to utilize echo to assess the effect of macitentan on right ventricle (RV) structure and function. Methods: REPAIR (NCT02310672) was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label, 52-week, phase 4 study in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients, which investigated the effect of macitentan 10 mg as monotherapy, or in combination with a phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor, on RV structure, function, and hemodynamics using cMRI and right heart catheterization. In this sub-study, patients were also assessed by echo at screening and at weeks 26 and/or 52. Post hoc correlation analyses between echo and cMRI variables were performed using Pearson's correlation coefficient, Spearman's correlation coefficient, and Bland–Altman analyses. Results: The Echo sub-study included 45 patients. Improvements in echo-assessed RV stroke volume (RVSV), left ventricular SV (LVSV), LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), RV fractional area change (RVFAC), tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE), and in 2D global longitudinal RV strain (2D GLRVS) were observed at weeks 26 and 52 compared to baseline. There was a strong correlation between echo (LVSV, 2D GLRVS, and LVEDV) and cMRI variables, with a moderate correlation for RVSV. Bland–Altman analyses showed a good agreement for LVSV measured by echo versus cMRI, whereas an overestimation in echo-assessed RVSV was observed compared to cMRI (bias of − 15 mL). Hemodynamic and functional variables, as well as safety, were comparable between the Echo sub-study and REPAIR. Conclusions: A good relationship between relevant echo and cMRI parameters was shown. Improvements in RV structure and function with macitentan treatment was observed by echo, consistent with results observed by cMRI in the primary analysis of the REPAIR study. Echo is a valuable complementary method to cMRI, with the potential to non-invasively monitor treatment response at follow-up. Trial registration number: REPAIR NCT02310672. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Portopulmonary hypertension (PoPH) carries a worse prognosis than other forms of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Data regarding use of PAH-specific therapies in patients with PoPH are sparse as they are usually excluded from clinical trials. This analysis describes patient characteristics, treatment patterns, outcomes, and safety profiles in patients with PoPH newly initiating macitentan in the USA using the OPUS/OrPHeUS combined dataset. Methods: OPUS was a prospective, US, multicenter, observational drug registry (April 2014–June 2020); OrPHeUS was a retrospective, US, multicenter chart review (October 2013–March 2017). Additional information regarding patients' liver disease was retrospectively collected for patients with PoPH in OPUS. Results: The OPUS/OrPHeUS dataset included 206 patients with PoPH (median age 58 years; 52.4% female), with baseline cirrhosis and liver test abnormalities reported in 72.8% and 31.6% of patients respectively. Macitentan was initiated as combination therapy in 74.8% of patients and median (Q1, Q3) exposure to macitentan was 11.9 (3.1, 26.0) months. One-year Kaplan–Meier estimates (95% confidence limit, CL) of patients free from all-cause hospitalization and survival were 48.6% (40.7, 56.0) and 82.2% (75.1, 87.4). Of the 96 patients with PoPH in OPUS, 29.2% were classified as in need of liver transplant due to underlying liver disease during the study; transplant waitlist registration was precluded because of PAH severity for 32.1% and 17.9% were transplanted. Hepatic adverse events (HAE) were experienced by 49.0% of patients; the most common being increased bilirubin (16.0%), ascites (7.3%), and hepatic encephalopathy (5.8%); 1.5% and 21.8% of patients discontinued macitentan as a result of HAE and non-hepatic adverse events. Conclusion: There were no unexpected safety findings in patients with PoPH treated with macitentan. These data add to the evidence supporting the safety and tolerability of macitentan in patients with PoPH. A graphical abstract is available with this article. Trial Registration: OPsumit® Users Registry (OPUS): NCT02126943; OPsumit® Historical Users cohort (OrPHeUS): NCT03197688; www.clinicaltrials.gov. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract The primary aim was to demonstrate bioequivalence between the 10/20 mg fixed‐dose combination (FDC) of macitentan/tadalafil in a single tablet and the free combination of both drugs, and to evaluate the food effect on the 10/20 mg FDC in healthy participants. In this single‐center, randomized, open‐label, 3‐way crossover, single‐dose Phase 1 study in healthy adult participants, macitentan/tadalafil was administered as a 10/20 mg FDC formulation and compared with the free combination of macitentan and tadalafil. The food effect on the FDC was also evaluated. Pharmacokinetic sampling (216 h) was conducted. The 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the geometric mean ratios of maximum observed plasma analyte concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma analyte concentration–time curves (AUCs) for Treatment A (FDC, fasted) versus C (free combination, fasted) were within bioequivalence limits demonstrating that the FDC formulation can be considered bioequivalent to the free combination. The 90% CIs for the geometric mean ratios of Cmax and AUC for Treatment B (FDC, fed) versus A (FDC, fasted) were contained within bioequivalence limits demonstrating that there was no food effect. The administration of the 10/20 mg FDC was generally safe and well tolerated in healthy participants. This study demonstrated bioequivalence between the FDC of macitentan/tadalafil (10/20 mg) in a single tablet and the free combination of both drugs in healthy participants, and that the FDC can be taken without regard to food, similarly to the individual components. The FDC was generally safe and well tolerated.

Abstract Introduction Portopulmonary hypertension (PoPH) carries a worse prognosis than other forms of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Data regarding use of PAH-specific therapies in patients with PoPH are sparse as they are usually excluded from clinical trials. This analysis describes patient characteristics, treatment patterns, outcomes, and safety profiles in patients with PoPH newly initiating macitentan in the USA using the OPUS/OrPHeUS combined dataset. Methods OPUS was a prospective, US, multicenter, observational drug registry (April 2014–June 2020); OrPHeUS was a retrospective, US, multicenter chart review (October 2013–March 2017). Additional information regarding patients’ liver disease was retrospectively collected for patients with PoPH in OPUS. Results The OPUS/OrPHeUS dataset included 206 patients with PoPH (median age 58 years; 52.4% female), with baseline cirrhosis and liver test abnormalities reported in 72.8% and 31.6% of patients respectively. Macitentan was initiated as combination therapy in 74.8% of patients and median (Q1, Q3) exposure to macitentan was 11.9 (3.1, 26.0) months. One-year Kaplan–Meier estimates (95% confidence limit, CL) of patients free from all-cause hospitalization and survival were 48.6% (40.7, 56.0) and 82.2% (75.1, 87.4). Of the 96 patients with PoPH in OPUS, 29.2% were classified as in need of liver transplant due to underlying liver disease during the study; transplant waitlist registration was precluded because of PAH severity for 32.1% and 17.9% were transplanted. Hepatic adverse events (HAE) were experienced by 49.0% of patients; the most common being increased bilirubin (16.0%), ascites (7.3%), and hepatic encephalopathy (5.8%); 1.5% and 21.8% of patients discontinued macitentan as a result of HAE and non-hepatic adverse events. Conclusion There were no unexpected safety findings in patients with PoPH treated with macitentan. These data add to the evidence supporting the safety and tolerability of macitentan in patients with PoPH. A graphical abstract is available with this article. Trial Registration OPsumit® Users Registry (OPUS): NCT02126943; OPsumit® Historical Users cohort (OrPHeUS): NCT03197688; www.clinicaltrials.gov . Graphical Abstract

Abstract Introduction The aim of this sub-study was to evaluate the relationship between echocardiography (echo) and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI) variables and to utilize echo to assess the effect of macitentan on right ventricle (RV) structure and function. Methods REPAIR (NCT02310672) was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label, 52-week, phase 4 study in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients, which investigated the effect of macitentan 10 mg as monotherapy, or in combination with a phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor, on RV structure, function, and hemodynamics using cMRI and right heart catheterization. In this sub-study, patients were also assessed by echo at screening and at weeks 26 and/or 52. Post hoc correlation analyses between echo and cMRI variables were performed using Pearson’s correlation coefficient, Spearman's correlation coefficient, and Bland–Altman analyses. Results The Echo sub-study included 45 patients. Improvements in echo-assessed RV stroke volume (RVSV), left ventricular SV (LVSV), LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), RV fractional area change (RVFAC), tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE), and in 2D global longitudinal RV strain (2D GLRVS) were observed at weeks 26 and 52 compared to baseline. There was a strong correlation between echo (LVSV, 2D GLRVS, and LVEDV) and cMRI variables, with a moderate correlation for RVSV. Bland–Altman analyses showed a good agreement for LVSV measured by echo versus cMRI, whereas an overestimation in echo-assessed RVSV was observed compared to cMRI (bias of − 15 mL). Hemodynamic and functional variables, as well as safety, were comparable between the Echo sub-study and REPAIR. Conclusions A good relationship between relevant echo and cMRI parameters was shown. Improvements in RV structure and function with macitentan treatment was observed by echo, consistent with results observed by cMRI in the primary analysis of the REPAIR study. Echo is a valuable complementary method to cMRI, with the potential to non-invasively monitor treatment response at follow-up. Trial registration number REPAIR NCT02310672. Graphical Abstract

Group 5 pulmonary hypertension (PH) encompasses diverse diseases, with a few cases linking it to T-cell large granular lymphocytic (LGL) leukemia. We report a case of a 76-year-old woman, diagnosed with LGL leukemia and concomitant PH, treated with oral triple pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) therapy. She initially presented with dyspnea on exertion; evaluation revealed severe precapillary PH. Implementing cyclophosphamide for leukemia along with tadalafil and macitentan for PH led to sustained symptomatic and hemodynamic improvement for over 3 years. At that time, deterioration in PH prompted the addition of selexipag, resulting in sustained clinical improvement for an additional 5 years. This case exemplifies the potential for sustained benefits of PAH therapy in leukemia-associated PH and highlights the need for continued research on the mechanistic relationship between LGL leukemia and PH, with the hope of identifying new management strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Endothelin receptor antagonist (ERA) and phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor (PDE5i) combination therapy is recommended for low-/intermediate-risk pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients. A fixed-dose combination of the ERA macitentan and PDE5i tadalafil (M/T FDC) in a once-daily, single tablet would simplify treatment. The multicenter, double-blind, adaptive phase 3 A DUE study investigated the efficacy and safety of M/T FDC vs macitentan 10 mg and vs tadalafil 40 mg monotherapies in PAH patients, including treatment-naïve and prior ERA or PDE5i monotherapy-treated patients. World Health Organization functional class II-III patients were randomized to M/T FDC, macitentan, or tadalafil depending on their PAH treatment (treatment-naïve, ERA, or PDE5i monotherapy) at baseline. The primary endpoint was change in pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) at week 16. In total, 187 patients were randomized to single-tablet M/T FDC (n = 108), macitentan (n = 35), or tadalafil (n = 44). PVR reduction with M/T FDC was significantly greater vs macitentan (29%; geometric mean ratio 0.71; 95% CL: 0.61-0.82; P < 0.0001) and vs tadalafil (28%; geometric mean ratio 0.72; 95% CL: 0.64-0.80; P < 0.0001). Three patients died in the M/T FDC arm (judged unrelated to treatment). Adverse events (AEs) leading to discontinuation, serious AEs, and those of special interest (anemia, hypotension, and edema) were more frequent with M/T FDC. Macitentan and tadalafil FDC significantly improved PVR vs monotherapies in PAH patients, with a safety and tolerability profile consistent with the individual components. The A DUE study supports M/T FDC as a once-daily, single-tablet combination for initial therapy and escalation to double combination therapy in patients with PAH. (Clinical Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Macitentan and Tadalafil Monotherapies With the Corresponding Fixed-dose Combination Therapy in Subjects With Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension [PAH]) [A DUE]; NCT03904693) [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current management of patients with congenital heart disease has increased their survival into adulthood. This is accompanied by potential cardiac complications, including pulmonary hypertension associated with congenital heart disease (PAH-CHD). PAH-CHD constitutes a challenging subgroup of pulmonary hypertension and requires expert management to improve quality of life and prognosis. Novel agents have shown a significant improvement in morbidity and mortality in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension. However, the long-term effects of these medications on PAH-CHD patients remain somewhat uncertain, necessitating treatment plans largely founded on the clinical experience of the healthcare providers. The aim of this review is to summarize the current evidence and future perspectives regarding treatment strategies for PAH-CHD to help better guide management of this complex disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Introduction Our purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect and safety of macitentan in the treatment of pulmonary hypertension (PH). Methods We retrieved the safety and efficacy of macitentan treatment for PH using PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE databases and clinicaltrials.gov. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used for literature screening and quality assessment. Data analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4.1 and Stata/SE 15.1 software. Results are presented as standardization mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratio (OR). Results Meta‐analysis of seven randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies and four non‐RCT studies with 2769 patients was included, involving 723 in the macitentan group and 599 in the placebo group. The results of the study showed that macitentan had effectively decreased pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) (SMD = −0.53, 95% CI: −0.77–−0.29, p

Abstract Pulmonary arterial hypertension‐targeted therapies in portopulmonary hypertension (PoPH) are scarce, let alone for patients with chronic liver failure (CLF) and hepatopulmonary syndrome (HPS). A 48‐year male was admitted to the hospital because of cirrhosis for 18 years, systemic oedema, and chest distress after exercise for 1 week. He was diagnosed with CLF, PoPH, and HPS. After 7 weeks of macitentan treatment, the patient's activity tolerance, pulmonary artery systolic pressure, arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), cTNI, and NT‐proBNP changes indicated gradual recovery, without hepatic safety concerns. This case indicated that administering macitentan in patients diagnosed as PoPH (with CLF and HPS) may be efficient and safe enough in a clinical setting.

A 69-year-old woman was diagnosed with idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (IIP). The patient underwent a combination therapy of steroid therapy and intravenous cyclophosphamide, long-term oxygen therapy, and the initiation of Nintedanib. However, there was no improvement in IIP, and as a result, the activities of daily living also declined. As one of the various examinations conducted, the results of the right heart catheterization diagnosed the patient with mild pulmonary hypertension, and Macitentan therapy was initiated. The subsequent clinical course appeared to show an improvement in Idiopathic Interstitial Pneumonia (IIP) by adding Macitentan therapy to Nintedanib therapy.

Background: Macitentan has demonstrated its effectiveness in patients with pulmonary hypertension (PH), but its safety, especially for long‐term use, needs to be further explored. This systematic review and meta‐analysis aimed to determine the safety of long‐term use of macitentan in patients with PH. Methods: A systematic search was made of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and clinicaltrials.gov, without language restrictions. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on treatment of PH with macitentan, compared with placebo, were reviewed. Estimated effects of included studies were pooled as risk ratios (RRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Six RCTs (enrolling 1003 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Anaemia (RR 3.86, 95% CI 2.05–7.30), headache (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.02–2.26) and bronchitis (RR 2.24, 95% CI 1.30–3.87) were more frequent in the macitentan groups. There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients with at least one adverse event (AE) or serious adverse event (SAE), AEs leading to discontinuation of study treatment, all‐cause death, right ventricular failure (RVF) and peripheral oedema between the two groups. Conclusions: The long‐term use of macitentan is safe for patients with PH, although with a higher risk of anaemia, headache and bronchitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Our purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect and safety of macitentan in the treatment of pulmonary hypertension (PH). Methods: We retrieved the safety and efficacy of macitentan treatment for PH using PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE databases and clinicaltrials.gov. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used for literature screening and quality assessment. Data analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4.1 and Stata/SE 15.1 software. Results are presented as standardization mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratio (OR). Results: Meta‐analysis of seven randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies and four non‐RCT studies with 2769 patients was included, involving 723 in the macitentan group and 599 in the placebo group. The results of the study showed that macitentan had effectively decreased pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) (SMD = −0.53, 95% CI: −0.77–−0.29, p < 0.05), cardiac index (CI) (SMD = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.37–0.83, p < 0.05) and N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP) (SMD = −0.22, 95% CI: −0.40–−0.03, p < 0.05). Furthermore, macitentan also significantly reduced PVR (SMD = −0.58, 95% CI: −0.80–−0.35, p < 0.05), 6‐min walk distance (6WMD) (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.15–0.50, p < 0.05), CI (SMD = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.28–0.69, p < 0.05), mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) (SMD = −0.43, 95% CI: −0.64–−0.23, p < 0.05) and NT‐proBNP (SMD = −0.55, 95% CI: −1.07–−0.03, p < 0.05) between baseline and follow‐up. The adverse reactions to macitentan were mild, with headache, anaemia and bronchitis. Other efficacy and safety outcomes did not reach statistical differences. Conclusion: Macitentan therapy for PH is effective and safe. The effectiveness on PVR, mPAP, mean right atrial pressure (mRAP), mortality and other indicators still needs to be further confirmed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) is the treatment of choice for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), many patients have inoperable disease, and some have persistent or recurrent pulmonary hypertension (PH) after surgery. Alternative options (balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA) and PH-targeted medical therapy) are, therefore, required. Studies of medical therapies for CTEPH have evolved since Aerosolized Iloprost Randomized (AIR), the first randomized, controlled study of a PH-targeted therapy (inhaled iloprost) to include patients with CTEPH. Key learnings from these studies include the need to evaluate CTEPH separately from other types of PH, the importance of prospective operability adjudication as part of the protocol, and the need for sufficient duration to allow treatment benefits to become apparent. The 16-week Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Soluble Guanylate Cyclase-Stimulator Study 1 (CHEST-1) study was the first to operationalize these learnings, demonstrating a significant mean improvement in 6-minute walk distance (+46 m) and improvements in hemodynamic endpoints with riociguat versus placebo. Findings from previous studies will inform the design of future studies to address key issues related to combination medical therapy. Data on combinations of macitentan with phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors or oral prostanoids are available from MERIT, the first study to allow such regimens. No data on combinations including riociguat, the only licensed medical therapy for CTEPH, are available. Studies are also needed for multimodality treatment, including medical therapy plus BPA, and medical therapy as a bridge to PEA in selected operable patients. To address these issues and improve patient outcomes, it is vital that we learn from current studies to improve future trial design.

[Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]