Dataset Information

The impact of comorbidities on selexipag treatment effect in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension: insights from the GRIPHON study.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

The number of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients with comorbidities is increasing and there are limited data on response to PAH-targeted therapies in this population. These post hoc analyses explored the effect of selexipag in PAH patients with cardiovascular comorbidities in the GRIPHON study.

Methods and results

Randomized patients (n = 1156) were classified using three methods: (i) by subgroups defined according to previously published comorbidity count and restrictive haemodynamic criteria: Subgroup A (<3 comorbidities and haemodynamic criteria met; n = 962) and Subgroup B (≥3 comorbidities and/or haemodynamic criteria not met; n = 144); comorbidities included body mass index ≥30 kg/m² , essential hypertension, diabetes, history of coronary artery disease; (ii) by number of comorbidities, with addition of atrial fibrillation (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5); (iii) by presence of individual comorbidities. Selexipag to placebo hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for morbidity/mortality (primary composite endpoint) were estimated using Cox regression adjusting selexipag effect for baseline covariates. Approximately half of the patients in GRIPHON (n = 584; 50.5%) had comorbidities. Selexipag reduced the risk of a morbidity/mortality event compared with placebo in both Subgroup A (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.53, 0.82) and Subgroup B (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.26, 0.96), with no evidence of an inconsistent treatment effect between subgroups (interaction p = 0.432). Consistent results were observed in analyses by number and by specific type of comorbidity.

Conclusion

Selexipag reduces the risk of a morbidity/mortality event vs. placebo irrespective of patient comorbidity status, suggesting that comorbidity status does not influence the treatment effect of selexipag.

SUBMITTER: Rosenkranz S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9298818 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe evidence regarding triple oral combination therapy for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is scarce. This study was performed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of triple oral combination therapy with macitentan, riociguat, and selexipag.MethodsAmong consecutive patients with PAH who were referred to our hospital from 2009 to 2020, those who underwent triple oral combination therapy using macitentan, riociguat, and selexipag were retrospectively analyzed. Hemodynamic and echocardiographic assessments and Kaplan-Meier analyses of all-cause death and initiation of prostacyclin infusion were conducted.ResultsTwenty-six patients underwent this combination therapy. These patients were predominantly female (73.1%) with a median age of 38 years at baseline and nine patients were taking some PAH medications at baseline. The median time from initiation of the first PAH drug to the third PAH drug in treatment naïve patients was 24 days (interquartile range, 12-47 days). Four patients (15.0%) discontinued taking any of the three vasodilators because of adverse events, and 17 patients (65.4%) reached the maximum dose of all three drugs. The mean pulmonary arterial pressure, pulmonary vascular resistance, and cardiac output improved by 29%, 65%, and 82%, respectively (median observation period: 441 days) and similar improvements were observed in treatment-naïve patients at baseline. The survival rate and prostacyclin infusion-free rate since administration of all three vasodilators was 93.3% and 74.6% at 3 years, respectively. When patients were divided by risk stratification, the prostacyclin-free rate at 3 years was 92.9% in low-/intermediate-risk patients and 55.0% in high-risk patients.ConclusionTriple oral combination therapy with macitentan, riociguat, and selexipag sufficiently improved clinical parameters and was well tolerated in patients with PAH. This combination could be a particularly promising strategy in patients with low/intermediate risk and possibly even in half of patients with high risk. Further studies are needed to validate these findings.The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.