No abstract

Rationale: An initial oral combination of drugs is being recommended in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), but the effects of this approach on risk reduction and pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) are not known.Objectives: To test the hypothesis that a low-risk status would be determined by the reduction of PVR in patients with PAH treated upfront with a combination of oral drugs. Methods:The study enrolled 181 treatment-naive patients with PAH (81% idiopathic) with a follow-up right heart catheterization at 6 months (interquartile range, 144-363 d) after the initial combination of endothelin receptor antagonist 1 phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor drugs and clinical evaluation and risk assessments by European guidelines and Registry to Evaluate Early and Long-Term PAH Disease Management scores.Measurements and Main Results: Initial combination therapy improved functional class and 6-minute-walk distance and decreased PVR by an average of 35% (median, 40%). One-third of the patients had a decrease in PVR ,25%. This poor hemodynamic response was independently predicted by age, male sex, pulmonary artery pressure and cardiac index, and at echocardiography, a right/left ventricular surface area ratio of greater than 1 associated with low tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion of less than 18 mm. A low-risk status at 6 months was achieved or maintained in only 34.8% (Registry to Evaluate Early and Long-Term PAH Disease Management score) to 43.1% (European score) of the patients. Adding criteria of poor hemodynamic response improved prediction of a low-risk status.Conclusions: A majority of patients with PAH still insufficiently improved after 6 months of initial combinations of oral drugs is identifiable at initial evaluation by hemodynamic response criteria added to risk scores.

No abstract

Aims To assess the proportion of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who are eligible for sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) based on the European Medicines Agency/Food and Drug Administration (EMA/FDA) label, the PARADIGM‐HF trial and the 2016 ESC guidelines, and the association between eligibility and outcomes. Methods and results Outpatients with HFrEF in the ESC‐EORP‐HFA Long‐Term Heart Failure (HF‐LT) Registry between March 2011 and November 2013 were considered. Criteria for LCZ696 based on EMA/FDA label, PARADIGM‐HF and ESC guidelines were applied. Of 5443 patients, 2197 and 2373 had complete information for trial and guideline eligibility assessment, and 84%, 12% and 12% met EMA/FDA label, PARADIGM‐HF and guideline criteria, respectively. Absent PARADIGM‐HF criteria were low natriuretic peptides (21%), hyperkalemia (4%), hypotension (7%) and sub‐optimal pharmacotherapy (74%); absent Guidelines criteria were LVEF>35% (23%), insufficient NP levels (30%) and sub‐optimal pharmacotherapy (82%); absent label criteria were absence of symptoms (New York Heart Association class I). When a daily requirement of ACEi/ARB ≥ 10 mg enalapril (instead of ≥ 20 mg) was used, eligibility rose from 12% to 28% based on both PARADIGM‐HF and guidelines. One‐year heart failure hospitalization was higher (12% and 17% vs. 12%) and all‐cause mortality lower (5.3% and 6.5% vs. 7.7%) in registry eligible patients compared to the enalapril arm of PARADIGM‐HF. Conclusions Among outpatients with HFrEF in the ESC‐EORP‐HFA HF‐LT Registry, 84% met label criteria, while only 12% and 28% met PARADIGM‐HF and guideline criteria for LCZ696 if requiring ≥ 20 mg and ≥ 10 mg enalapril, respectively. Registry patients eligible for LCZ696 had greater heart failure hospitalization but lower mortality rates than the PARADIGM‐HF enalapril group.

No abstract