Nick H Kim,Richard Channick,Marion Delcroix,Michael Madani,Joanna Pepke-Zaba,Julian I Borissoff,Valerie Easton,Sophie Gesang,Dominik Richard,Hossein-Ardeschir Ghofrani
{"title":"selexipag对无法手术或持续/复发性CTEPH患者的疗效和安全性(SELECT随机试验)。","authors":"Nick H Kim,Richard Channick,Marion Delcroix,Michael Madani,Joanna Pepke-Zaba,Julian I Borissoff,Valerie Easton,Sophie Gesang,Dominik Richard,Hossein-Ardeschir Ghofrani","doi":"10.1183/13993003.00193-2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nSELECT was the first global randomised controlled trial of selexipag with standard of care in patients with inoperable or persistent/recurrent chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nSELECT was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, group-sequential, phase 3 study (NCT03689244). Adults aged ≤85 years in WHO functional class I-IV, with a 6-minute walk distance (6 MWD) of 100-450 m, were randomised (1:1) to receive selexipag (200-1600 µg b.i.d. titration until individual maximum tolerated dose)+standard of care or placebo+standard of care. Patients were recruited into the haemodynamic set (first 91 randomised patients to undergo right heart catheterisation [RHC]; Week 20) or non-haemodynamic cohort (remaining patients, no RHC required). Primary endpoint was percent of baseline pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR; Week 20). Safety was also assessed.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nOf 321 patients screened, 128 were randomised (haemodynamic set: n=91 [selexipag: n=47; placebo: n=44]). In the haemodynamic set, 29 (31.9%) patients had previous pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA), 20 (22.0%) balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA), and 14 (15.4%) both PEA and BPA; 28 (30.8%) were inoperable. The Independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended to stop the study for futility as no statistically significant difference was observed for the primary endpoint (between-treatment geometric least squares mean ratio of PVR: 0.95 [95% CI 0.84, 1.07; p=0.412]). Adverse events were reported in 63 (98.4%) and 53 (82.8%) patients for selexipag and placebo, respectively.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nSELECT was discontinued for futility, as no treatment effect on the primary endpoint (PVR) was observed. Safety data were consistent with the established safety profile of selexipag, with no new safety signals identified.","PeriodicalId":12265,"journal":{"name":"European Respiratory Journal","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":16.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of selexipag in patients with inoperable or persistent/recurrent CTEPH (SELECT randomised trial).\",\"authors\":\"Nick H Kim,Richard Channick,Marion Delcroix,Michael Madani,Joanna Pepke-Zaba,Julian I Borissoff,Valerie Easton,Sophie Gesang,Dominik Richard,Hossein-Ardeschir Ghofrani\",\"doi\":\"10.1183/13993003.00193-2024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\r\\nSELECT was the first global randomised controlled trial of selexipag with standard of care in patients with inoperable or persistent/recurrent chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHODS\\r\\nSELECT was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, group-sequential, phase 3 study (NCT03689244). Adults aged ≤85 years in WHO functional class I-IV, with a 6-minute walk distance (6 MWD) of 100-450 m, were randomised (1:1) to receive selexipag (200-1600 µg b.i.d. titration until individual maximum tolerated dose)+standard of care or placebo+standard of care. Patients were recruited into the haemodynamic set (first 91 randomised patients to undergo right heart catheterisation [RHC]; Week 20) or non-haemodynamic cohort (remaining patients, no RHC required). Primary endpoint was percent of baseline pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR; Week 20). Safety was also assessed.\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\nOf 321 patients screened, 128 were randomised (haemodynamic set: n=91 [selexipag: n=47; placebo: n=44]). In the haemodynamic set, 29 (31.9%) patients had previous pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA), 20 (22.0%) balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA), and 14 (15.4%) both PEA and BPA; 28 (30.8%) were inoperable. The Independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended to stop the study for futility as no statistically significant difference was observed for the primary endpoint (between-treatment geometric least squares mean ratio of PVR: 0.95 [95% CI 0.84, 1.07; p=0.412]). Adverse events were reported in 63 (98.4%) and 53 (82.8%) patients for selexipag and placebo, respectively.\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSION\\r\\nSELECT was discontinued for futility, as no treatment effect on the primary endpoint (PVR) was observed. Safety data were consistent with the established safety profile of selexipag, with no new safety signals identified.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12265,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Respiratory Journal\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Respiratory Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.00193-2024\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Respiratory Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.00193-2024","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
Efficacy and safety of selexipag in patients with inoperable or persistent/recurrent CTEPH (SELECT randomised trial).
BACKGROUND
SELECT was the first global randomised controlled trial of selexipag with standard of care in patients with inoperable or persistent/recurrent chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension.
METHODS
SELECT was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, group-sequential, phase 3 study (NCT03689244). Adults aged ≤85 years in WHO functional class I-IV, with a 6-minute walk distance (6 MWD) of 100-450 m, were randomised (1:1) to receive selexipag (200-1600 µg b.i.d. titration until individual maximum tolerated dose)+standard of care or placebo+standard of care. Patients were recruited into the haemodynamic set (first 91 randomised patients to undergo right heart catheterisation [RHC]; Week 20) or non-haemodynamic cohort (remaining patients, no RHC required). Primary endpoint was percent of baseline pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR; Week 20). Safety was also assessed.
RESULTS
Of 321 patients screened, 128 were randomised (haemodynamic set: n=91 [selexipag: n=47; placebo: n=44]). In the haemodynamic set, 29 (31.9%) patients had previous pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA), 20 (22.0%) balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA), and 14 (15.4%) both PEA and BPA; 28 (30.8%) were inoperable. The Independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended to stop the study for futility as no statistically significant difference was observed for the primary endpoint (between-treatment geometric least squares mean ratio of PVR: 0.95 [95% CI 0.84, 1.07; p=0.412]). Adverse events were reported in 63 (98.4%) and 53 (82.8%) patients for selexipag and placebo, respectively.
CONCLUSION
SELECT was discontinued for futility, as no treatment effect on the primary endpoint (PVR) was observed. Safety data were consistent with the established safety profile of selexipag, with no new safety signals identified.
期刊介绍:
The European Respiratory Journal (ERJ) is the flagship journal of the European Respiratory Society. It has a current impact factor of 24.9. The journal covers various aspects of adult and paediatric respiratory medicine, including cell biology, epidemiology, immunology, oncology, pathophysiology, imaging, occupational medicine, intensive care, sleep medicine, and thoracic surgery. In addition to original research material, the ERJ publishes editorial commentaries, reviews, short research letters, and correspondence to the editor. The articles are published continuously and collected into 12 monthly issues in two volumes per year.