Search

Oral treprostinil has recently been shown to delay disease progression in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension in a long-term outcomes study. The potential advantages of an oral formulation have resulted in patients transitioning from inhaled to oral treprostinil. The current study reports a retrospective analysis of patients who transitioned from treatment with inhaled to oral treprostinil. A multicenter retrospective chart review was conducted for 29 patients with pulmonary hypertension that transitioned from inhaled to oral treprostinil. Data were collected from inhaled treprostinil initiation and patients were followed until discontinuation of oral treprostinil or the end of the observation period. Persistence was calculated using Kaplan–Meier estimates. Prior to transition to oral treprostinil, patients had received inhaled treprostinil for a median of 643 (IQR: 322–991) days and 52% of patients were New York Heart Association/World Health Organization Functional Class III. For patients that cross-titrated between formulations, the median time to complete the cross titration was 24 (IQR: 1–57) days. At 16- and 24-weeks post-transition, oral treprostinil persistence was 86 and 76%, respectively. Persistence was 59% at 52 weeks post-transition. Clinical stability for the majority of patients at first follow-up post-transition was suggested based on available New York Heart Association/World Health Organization Functional Classification. Transitions from inhaled to oral treprostinil appeared safe and tolerable in the short-term. Additional prospective studies are needed to fully evaluate the safety and efficacy of transitions from inhaled to oral treprostinil.

The 2015 European Society of Cardiology/European Respiratory Society treatment guidelines recommend frequent risk assessment in pulmonary arterial hypertension utilizing risk variables. Our objectives were: (1) to investigate the impact of inhaled treprostinil on risk stratification using the French noninvasive approach and REVEAL 2.0, and (2) to analyze the prognostic utility of both risk stratification methods in the predominantly New York Heart Association/World Health Organization functional class III/IV cohorts of TRIUMPH and BEAT. A post hoc analysis was performed to assess risk at baseline and follow-up at Week 12 in the TRIUMPH cohort ( n = 148) and at Week 16, 21, and 30 in the inhaled treprostinil naïve placebo BEAT cohort ( n = 73). Overall survival, clinical worsening-free survival, and pulmonary arterial hypertension-related hospitalization-free survival were all assessed in the pooled TRIUMPH and inhaled treprostinil naïve placebo BEAT cohorts based on risk group/strata at Week 12/16 follow-up. Inhaled treprostinil improved REVEAL 2.0 risk stratum (OR: 2.38, 95% CI: 1.09–5.19, p = 0.0298) and REVEAL 2.0 score ( p = 0.0008) compared to placebo in the TRIUMPH cohort at Week 12. REVEAL 2.0 risk stratum and the number of low-risk criteria by the French approach improved at Weeks 16, 21, and 30 in the inhaled treprostinil naïve placebo BEAT cohort. Combining cohorts, REVEAL 2.0 risk stratification at follow-up was prognostic for clinical worsening-free, pulmonary arterial hypertension hospitalization-free, and overall survival, whereas the number of low-risk criteria was not. These post-hoc pooled analyses suggest inhaled treprostinil improves risk status and indicates that the REVEAL 2.0 calculator may be more suitable than the French noninvasive method for evaluating short-term clinical change in the New York Heart Association/World Health Organization functional class III/IV population.