COPD associated pulmonary hypertension: A post hoc analysis of the PERFECT study.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Pulmonary Circulation Pub Date : 2024-10-02 eCollection Date: 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1002/pul2.12430
Steven D Nathan, Victoria Lacasse, Heidi Bell, Prakash Sista, Michael Di Marino, Todd Bull, Victor Tapson, Aaron Waxman
{"title":"COPD associated pulmonary hypertension: A post hoc analysis of the PERFECT study.","authors":"Steven D Nathan, Victoria Lacasse, Heidi Bell, Prakash Sista, Michael Di Marino, Todd Bull, Victor Tapson, Aaron Waxman","doi":"10.1002/pul2.12430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The PERFECT study, a randomized, controlled, double-blind study of inhaled treprostinil in patients with COPD and associated pulmonary hypertension (PH-COPD) was a negative trial that was terminated early. The reason(s) for the negative outcome remains uncertain. A post hoc analysis of data from the PERFECT study was undertaken to identify adverse responders and possibly potential responders. The goal was also to provide insight into phenotypes for possible inclusion and exclusion in future PH-COPD clinical trials. An adverse response on active treatment was seen in 36.4% (24/66) of the subjects compared to 27.6% (16/58) on placebo. There was no evidence to suggest that hyperinflation, bronchospasm, or occult heart failure played any role in the untoward outcomes of the study. The patients who died during the study all had baseline diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide ≤25% of predicted. Evidence of a potential response was seen in 10.6% (7/66) of the patients who received inhaled treprostinil. Patients who had evidence of a treatment response had a baseline mean pulmonary artery pressure of ≥40 mmHg and a forced expiratory volume in the first second of ≥40%. Change in N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide did not predict clinical response. This post hoc analysis provides information that may potentially enable improved selection of patients for future therapeutic trials in PH-COPD. These analyses are post hoc, observational, and exploratory. The thresholds defining the spectrum of responders are preliminary and may require further refinement and validation in future studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":20927,"journal":{"name":"Pulmonary Circulation","volume":"14 4","pages":"e12430"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11446833/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pulmonary Circulation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pul2.12430","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The PERFECT study, a randomized, controlled, double-blind study of inhaled treprostinil in patients with COPD and associated pulmonary hypertension (PH-COPD) was a negative trial that was terminated early. The reason(s) for the negative outcome remains uncertain. A post hoc analysis of data from the PERFECT study was undertaken to identify adverse responders and possibly potential responders. The goal was also to provide insight into phenotypes for possible inclusion and exclusion in future PH-COPD clinical trials. An adverse response on active treatment was seen in 36.4% (24/66) of the subjects compared to 27.6% (16/58) on placebo. There was no evidence to suggest that hyperinflation, bronchospasm, or occult heart failure played any role in the untoward outcomes of the study. The patients who died during the study all had baseline diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide ≤25% of predicted. Evidence of a potential response was seen in 10.6% (7/66) of the patients who received inhaled treprostinil. Patients who had evidence of a treatment response had a baseline mean pulmonary artery pressure of ≥40 mmHg and a forced expiratory volume in the first second of ≥40%. Change in N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide did not predict clinical response. This post hoc analysis provides information that may potentially enable improved selection of patients for future therapeutic trials in PH-COPD. These analyses are post hoc, observational, and exploratory. The thresholds defining the spectrum of responders are preliminary and may require further refinement and validation in future studies.

与慢性阻塞性肺疾病相关的肺动脉高压:PERFECT 研究的事后分析。
PERFECT研究是一项针对慢性阻塞性肺病和相关肺动脉高压(PH-COPD)患者吸入曲普瑞替尼的随机对照双盲研究,该研究结果为阴性,试验提前终止。出现阴性结果的原因仍不确定。我们对 PERFECT 研究的数据进行了事后分析,以确定不良反应者和可能的潜在反应者。其目的还在于深入了解表型,以便在未来的 PH-COPD 临床试验中纳入和排除。接受积极治疗的受试者中有 36.4%(24/66)出现不良反应,而接受安慰剂治疗的受试者中有 27.6%(16/58)出现不良反应。没有证据表明过度充气、支气管痉挛或隐性心力衰竭在研究的不良后果中起了任何作用。在研究期间死亡的患者的一氧化碳基线扩散能力均低于预测值的 25%。在接受吸入曲普瑞替尼治疗的患者中,有 10.6%(7/66)的患者出现了潜在反应。有治疗反应证据的患者的基线平均肺动脉压≥40 mmHg,第一秒用力呼气容积≥40%。脑钠肽 N 端前体的变化并不能预测临床反应。这项事后分析提供的信息可能有助于改进未来 PH-COPD 治疗试验对患者的选择。这些分析是事后的、观察性的和探索性的。定义应答者范围的阈值是初步的,可能需要在未来的研究中进一步完善和验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pulmonary Circulation
Pulmonary Circulation Medicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
11.50%
发文量
153
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Pulmonary Circulation''s main goal is to encourage basic, translational, and clinical research by investigators, physician-scientists, and clinicans, in the hope of increasing survival rates for pulmonary hypertension and other pulmonary vascular diseases worldwide, and developing new therapeutic approaches for the diseases. Freely available online, Pulmonary Circulation allows diverse knowledge of research, techniques, and case studies to reach a wide readership of specialists in order to improve patient care and treatment outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信