Search

Background: Selexipag is an oral prostacyclin receptor agonist, indicated for pulmonary arterial hypertension to delay disease progression and reduce the risk of pulmonary arterial hypertension-related hospitalization. SelexiPag: tHe usErs dRug rEgistry (NCT03278002) was a US-based, prospective, real-world registry of selexipag-treated patients., Methods: Adults with pulmonary hypertension (enrolled 2016-2020) prescribed selexipag were followed for ≤18 months, with data collected at routine clinic visits. Patients were defined as newly or previously initiated if they had started selexipag ≤60 days or >60 days, respectively, before enrollment., Results: The registry included 829 patients (430 newly initiated, 399 previously initiated; 759 with pulmonary arterial hypertension), of whom 55.6% were World Health Organization functional class (FC) 3/4; 57.3% were intermediate or high risk per Registry to Evaluate Early and Long-Term PAH Disease Management (REVEAL) 2.0. In patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension, 18-month discontinuation rates for adverse events were 22.0%, 32.0%, and 11.9%, and 18-month survival rates were 89.4%, 84.2%, and 94.5% in the overall, newly, and previously initiated patient populations, respectively. From baseline to month 18, most patients had stable or improved FC and stable or improved REVEAL 2.0 risk category status. Discontinuation for adverse events, hospitalization, and survival were similar regardless of patients' individually tolerated selexipag maintenance dose. No new safety signals were identified., Conclusions: In this real-world analysis of patients initiating selexipag, most patients had stable or improved FC and REVEAL 2.0 risk category. Similar to the GRIPHON trial, outcomes with selexipag in this real-world study were comparable across maintenance dose strata, with no new safety signals., (Copyright © 2024 International Society for the Heart and Lung Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: In the event-driven GRIPHON randomised-controlled trial, the oral prostacyclin receptor agonist selexipag significantly reduced the risk of disease progression (composite primary endpoint of morbidity/mortality), compared with placebo, in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). The ongoing open-label extension study (GRIPHON OL) collects further data on long-term safety, tolerability, and survival of PAH patients treated with selexipag., Methods: Patients randomised to selexipag or placebo in GRIPHON could enter GRIPHON OL either after experiencing a morbidity event during double-blind treatment or at the end of the study. Patients were followed for adverse events (AE) and survival from selexipag initiation up to 3 days and 30 days after end of treatment, respectively. Data are presented up to a cut-off date of 1 September 2019., Results: Overall, 953 patients in GRIPHON and GRIPHON OL were treated with selexipag. At the time of selexipag initiation, 81.2% of patients were receiving background PAH therapy. Median (min, max) exposure to selexipag was 31.7 months (0, 106), corresponding to a total of 3054.4 patient-years. The most frequently reported AEs were related to known prostacyclin-related effects or underlying disease. There were 305 (32.0%) patients who experienced an AE leading to treatment discontinuation. Survival during GRIPHON and GRIPHON OL was assessed for the 574 patients randomised to selexipag in GRIPHON. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates (95%CI) at 1, 3, 5 and 7 years were 92.0% (89.4, 94.0), 79.3% (75.4, 82.6), 71.2% (66.5, 75.3) and 63.0% (57.4, 68.1), respectively., Conclusions: These results provide the longest follow-up period published to date for a PAH therapy. The safety profile of selexipag over this extended treatment period was consistent with that observed in GRIPHON. A large proportion of the population was receiving background therapy at selexipag initiation, providing further insight into the long-term safety of selexipag as part of a combination therapy regimen., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01106014 and NCT01112306., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: In pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), there are no data comparing initial triple oral therapy with initial double oral therapy., Objectives: TRITON (The Efficacy and Safety of Initial Triple Versus Initial Dual Oral Combination Therapy in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension; NCT02558231), a multicenter, double-blind, randomized phase 3b study, evaluated initial triple (macitentan, tadalafil, and selexipag) versus initial double (macitentan, tadalafil, and placebo) oral therapy in newly diagnosed, treatment-naive patients with PAH., Methods: Efficacy was assessed until the last patient randomized completed week 26 (end of main observation period). The primary endpoint was change in pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) at week 26., Results: Patients were assigned to initial triple (n = 123) or initial double therapy (n = 124). At week 26, both treatment strategies reduced PVR compared with baseline (by 54% and 52%), with no significant difference between groups (ratio of geometric means: 0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.86-1.07; P = 0.42). Six-minute walk distance and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide improved by week 26, with no difference between groups. Risk for disease progression (to end of main observation period) was reduced with initial triple versus initial double therapy (hazard ratio: 0.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.32-1.09). Most common adverse events with initial triple therapy included headache, diarrhea, and nausea. By the end of the main observation period, 2 patients in the initial triple and 9 in the initial double therapy groups had died., Conclusions: In patients with newly diagnosed PAH, both treatment strategies markedly reduced PVR by week 26, with no significant difference between groups (primary endpoint not met). Exploratory analyses suggested a possible signal for improved long-term outcomes with initial triple versus initial double oral therapy., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was funded by Actelion Pharmaceuticals, a Janssen Pharmaceutical Company of Johnson & Johnson. Dr Chin has served as a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; has received research grants from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, the National Institutes of Health, Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, and SoniVie; has served on advisory boards for Bayer Healthcare (through the University of California, San Diego) and Flowonix; has served as an adjudication committee member for Arena Pharmaceuticals; is an associate editor of Circulation for the American Heart Association; and has received consultancy fees from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson. Prof Sitbon has served as a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; and has served as an advisory board member for and received research grants from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson. Dr Doelberg is an employee of Actelion Pharmaceuticals. Dr Feldman has received speaker and consultancy fees from Bayer and United Therapeutics; and has received consultancy fees from Gilead, Gossamer, Acceleron, Altavant, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, and Bellerophon. Dr Gibbs has served as a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Complexa, and Acceleron; has received consultancy fees from Arena; has received speaker fees from GlaxoSmithKline and Merck Sharp & Dohme; has served as a clinical endpoints committee member for Pfizer, Bayer, Bellerophon, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, and United Therapeutics; and has served as a data and safety monitoring board member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson. Prof Grünig has received grants and personal fees from Bayer, Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and GlaxoSmithKline; and has received grants from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Bayer/Merck Sharp & Dohme, GlaxoSmithKline, and United Therapeutics. Prof Hoeper has served as a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; has received speaker and consultancy fees from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Pfizer; and has received research grants from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson. Mr Martin is an employee of Actelion Pharmaceuticals. Dr Mathai has served as a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; and has served as a consultant for Arena, Liquidia, and United Therapeutics. Prof McLaughlin has served as a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson and Bayer; has received grants from Eiger and SoniVie; and has received personal fees from United Therapeutics, Arena, Caremark, Medtronic, and Merck Sharp & Dohme. Dr Perchenet is an employee of Actelion Pharmaceuticals; has previously held stock and stock options with Actelion Pharmaceuticals; and currently holds stock and stock options in the parent company Johnson & Johnson. Dr Poch has received speaker and consultancy fees from Bayer Healthcare. Dr Saggar has received consultancy fees and research funding from United Therapeutics and Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson. Prof Simonneau has served as a steering committee member for and received research grants from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson and Bayer; and has received speaker and consultancy fees from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Pfizer. Prof Galiè is a steering committee member for Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; has received grant support, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson; and has received grant support and personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, Pfizer, and GlaxoSmithKline., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Early initiation of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) therapies is associated with improved long-term outcomes, yet data on the early use of prostacyclin pathway agents are limited. In these post hoc analyses of the Prostacyclin (PGI 2 ) Receptor Agonist In Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (GRIPHON) study, the largest randomized controlled trial for PAH to date, the prognostic value of time from diagnosis and its impact on treatment response were examined., Research Question: How does time from diagnosis impact morbidity/mortality events and response to selexipag treatment in patients with PAH?, Study Design and Methods: The GRIPHON study randomly assigned 1,156 patients with PAH to selexipag or placebo treatment. Patients were categorized post hoc into a time from diagnosis of ≤ 6 months and > 6 months at randomization. Hazard ratios (selexipag vs placebo) were calculated for the primary end point of morbidity/mortality by time from diagnosis using Cox proportional hazard models., Results: Time from diagnosis was ≤ 6 months in 34.9% and > 6 months in 65.1% of patients. Time from diagnosis was prognostic of morbidity/mortality, with newly diagnosed patients having a poorer long-term outcome than patients diagnosed for longer. Compared with placebo, selexipag reduced the risk of morbidity/mortality in patients with a time from diagnosis of ≤ 6 months and > 6 months, with a more pronounced effect in newly diagnosed patients (hazard ratio, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.33-0.63] and 0.74 [95% CI, 0.57-0.96], respectively; P = .0219 for interaction)., Interpretation: In the GRIPHON study, newly diagnosed PAH patients had a worse prognosis than patients with a longer time from diagnosis. The benefit of selexipag treatment on disease progression was more pronounced in patients treated earlier than in patients treated later., Trial Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01106014; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Selexipag is a selective oral prostacyclin receptor agonist indicated for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) treatment. SelexiPag: tHe usErs dRug rEgistry (SPHERE) (NCT03278002) is collecting data from selexipag-treated patients in real-world clinical practice to elucidate and describe the clinical characteristics, outcomes, and dosing/titration regimens of patients treated with selexipag in routine clinical practice., Methods: SPHERE is a United States (US)-based, ongoing, multicenter, prospective observational study (target N = 800). This study enrolls patients who are either newly initiated on selexipag (≤60 days before enrollment) or were previously receiving selexipag with documentation of dose titration at study enrollment. Data collection for the study occurs at routine clinic visits. In this paper, we report on the first 500 patients enrolled., Results: Median follow-up was 17.8 months; 77.6% of patients completed the planned 18 months follow-up, and 22.4% discontinued early from the study. At diagnosis, 94.8% of patients had PAH (World Health Organization [WHO] Group 1), most commonly idiopathic (49.2%) and connective tissue disease associated (26.4%). Most patients (72.4%) initiated selexipag more than 60 days before enrollment. At initiation, 31.0% of patients had WHO functional class (FC) II disease, and 49.6% had WHO FC II or III disease. In addition, 55.0% of patients were receiving double therapy (most commonly an endothelin receptor antagonist plus phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor [42.3%]), whereas 30.6% were receiving monotherapy. Despite most patients already receiving PAH-specific therapy, at selexipag initiation, 67.2% (336 of 500) were at intermediate risk, and 9.6% (48 of 500) were at high risk of 1-year mortality. Risk scores remained stable in ∼55% of patients and improved in ∼20% at the end of the study. In total, 72.2% of patients had at least 1 adverse event (AE), and 37.6% reported a serious AE. The median selexipag maintenance dose was 1,200 µg twice daily (interquartile range: 800-1,600 µg twice daily)., Conclusions: Real-world, US-based patients with PAH initiating selexipag typically have WHO FC II/III disease and are at intermediate risk, despite receiving PAH-specific treatment. Selexipag was prescribed as part of a combination regimen in most patients. The study identified no unexpected adverse effects., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The oral IP receptor agonist selexipag is approved for the long-term treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Treatment interruptions should be avoided due to the progressive nature of the disease. An intravenous (IV) formulation of selexipag was developed to provide a treatment option for short-term interruptions to oral selexipag. In this prospective, multicenter, open-label study, the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of temporarily switching between oral and IV selexipag were investigated (NCT03187678, ClinicalTrials.gov)., Methods: PAH patients receiving stable oral selexipag doses were enrolled. Following three consecutive IV selexipag infusions patients resumed oral selexipag. Corresponding IV and oral doses were selected to achieve comparable exposure to the active metabolite of selexipag. Safety outcomes were monitored throughout, and pharmacokinetic samples were obtained after oral and IV administration., Results: All 20 patients completed the study. Fifteen patients had adverse events (AEs), most were mild, and none resulted in discontinuation. Headache was the most common AE throughout the study (four patients). Three serious AEs occurred in two patients with underlying comorbidities when oral dosing had resumed. There were no changes in WHO functional class for any patient and no clinically symptomatic changes in blood pressure were observed. Comparable exposure to the active metabolite of selexipag was demonstrated following corresponding oral and IV selexipag doses., Conclusions: Temporarily switching between corresponding doses of oral and IV selexipag was well-tolerated with no unexpected safety findings and comparable exposure to the active metabolite. Treatment with IV selexipag is a feasible option to bridge temporary oral selexipag treatment interruptions.

Aims: Patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension associated with congenital heart disease (CHD-PAH) after defect correction have a poor prognosis compared with other CHD-PAH patients. Therefore, it is important that these patients are treated as early and effectively as possible. Evidence supporting the use of PAH therapies in patients with corrected CHD-PAH from randomised controlled trials is limited. The purpose of these analyses was to characterise the corrected CHD-PAH patients from the GRIPHON study and examine the response to selexipag., Methods and Results: Out of the 110 patients diagnosed with corrected CHD-PAH, 55 had atrial septal defects, 38 had ventricular septal defects, 14 had persistent ducti arteriosus, and 3 had defects not further specified. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the primary composite endpoint were calculated using Cox proportional hazard models. Compared with the non-CHD patients from GRIPHON, patients with corrected CHD-PAH were slightly younger, with a greater proportion being treatment-naive and in World Health Organization functional class I/II. The rate of the primary composite endpoint of morbidity/mortality was lower in patients with corrected CHD-PAH who were treated with selexipag compared with those treated with placebo (HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.25, 1.37). The most common adverse events were those known to be related to selexipag., Conclusions: These post-hoc analyses of GRIPHON provide valuable information about a large population of patients with corrected CHD-PAH, and suggest that selexipag may delay disease progression and was well-tolerated in patients with corrected CHD-PAH., (© 2018 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: A long-term trial showed that the oral prostacyclin (PGl 2 ) receptor (IP) agonist, selexipag, delayed disease progression in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Transition to selexipag in patients treated with more burdensome inhaled therapies that target the prostacyclin pathway may be considered by patients and physicians. The Phase 3b, prospective, open-label TRANSIT-1 (Tolerability and Safety of the Transition From Inhaled Treprostinil to Oral Selexipag in Patients With Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension) study evaluated the safety and tolerability of transition from inhaled treprostinil to oral selexipag., Methods: Patients receiving non-prostanoid oral PAH therapy and inhaled treprostinil at stable doses, in World Health Organization Functional Class II/III, with 6-minute walk distance ≥ 300 meters were enrolled. The 16-week main treatment period included downtitration of inhaled treprostinil over 8 weeks and parallel uptitration of selexipag over 12 weeks. Sustained treatment transition at Week 16 was defined as (1) receiving selexipag at Week 16; (2) no selexipag interruption(s) totaling ≥ 8 days; and (3) no inhaled treprostinil or other prostanoids after Week 8. Clinical parameters and patient-reported treatment satisfaction outcomes were assessed at Week 16., Results: All 34 enrolled patients completed the study. At Week 16, 32 patients (94.1%) had stopped inhaled treprostinil and were receiving selexipag. Twenty-eight patients (82.4%) met all criteria for sustained treatment transition. During the study, 3 patients discontinued selexipag due to adverse events. Overall, most adverse events were typical of prostanoid therapies and started during the uptitration phase. In general, patients remained clinically stable throughout treatment and reported improved convenience., Conclusions: Transition to oral selexipag from inhaled treprostinil in PAH patients was successful and well tolerated in most patients, and associated with greater convenience., Clinical Trial Number: NCT02471183., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Pulmonary arterial hypertension is characterized by abnormalities in the small pulmonary arteries including increased vasoconstriction, vascular remodeling, proliferation of smooth muscle cells, and in situ thrombosis. Selexipag, a novel, oral prostacyclin receptor agonist, has been shown to improve hemodynamics in a phase II clinical trial and reduce clinical worsening in a large phase III clinical trial involving patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension. In this paper, we describe the prostacyclin signaling pathway, currently available oral prostanoid medications, and the development and clinical use of selexipag., Competing Interests: Elizabeth Ashley Hardin reports no conflict of interest in this work. Dr Kelly M Chin has received fees for consulting work with Actelion and United Therapeutics and has received institutional support for pulmonary hypertension research from the Actelion, Bayer, GeNO, Gilead, Pfizer, Reata, United Therapeutics, and the NIH.

Background: In a phase 2 trial, selexipag, an oral selective IP prostacyclin-receptor agonist, was shown to be beneficial in the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension., Methods: In this event-driven, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 1156 patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension to receive placebo or selexipag in individualized doses (maximum dose, 1600 μg twice daily). Patients were eligible for enrollment if they were not receiving treatment for pulmonary arterial hypertension or if they were receiving a stable dose of an endothelin-receptor antagonist, a phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor, or both. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or a complication related to pulmonary arterial hypertension up to the end of the treatment period (defined for each patient as 7 days after the date of the last intake of selexipag or placebo)., Results: A primary end-point event occurred in 397 patients--41.6% of those in the placebo group and 27.0% of those in the selexipag group (hazard ratio in the selexipag group as compared with the placebo group, 0.60; 99% confidence interval, 0.46 to 0.78; P<0.001). Disease progression and hospitalization accounted for 81.9% of the events. The effect of selexipag with respect to the primary end point was similar in the subgroup of patients who were not receiving treatment for the disease at baseline and in the subgroup of patients who were already receiving treatment at baseline (including those who were receiving a combination of two therapies). By the end of the study, 105 patients in the placebo group and 100 patients in the selexipag group had died from any cause. Overall, 7.1% of patients in the placebo group and 14.3% of patients in the selexipag group discontinued their assigned regimen prematurely because of adverse events. The most common adverse events in the selexipag group were consistent with the known side effects of prostacyclin, including headache, diarrhea, nausea, and jaw pain., Conclusions: Among patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension, the risk of the primary composite end point of death or a complication related to pulmonary arterial hypertension was significantly lower with selexipag than with placebo. There was no significant difference in mortality between the two study groups. (Funded by Actelion Pharmaceuticals; GRIPHON ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01106014.).