A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials in targeted treatments of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension

Brazilian Thoracic Society recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension

Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is a serious and debilitating disease caused by occlusion of the pulmonary arterial bed by hematic emboli and by the resulting fibrous material. Such occlusion increases vascular resistance and, consequently, the pressure in the region of the pulmonary artery, which is the definition of pulmonary hypertension. The increased load imposed on the right ventricle leads to its progressive dysfunction and, finally, to death. However, CTEPH has a highly significant feature that distinguishes it from other forms of pulmonary hypertension: the fact that it can be cured through treatment with pulmonary thromboendarterectomy. Therefore, the primary objective of the management of CTEPH should be the assessment of patient fitness for surgery at a referral center, given that not all patients are good candidates. For the patients who are not good candidates for pulmonary thromboendarterectomy, the viable therapeutic alternatives include pulmonary artery angioplasty and pharmacological treatment. In these recommendations, the pathophysiological bases for the onset of CTEPH, such as acute pulmonary embolism and the clinical condition of the patient, will be discussed, as will the diagnostic algorithm to be followed and the therapeutic alternatives currently available.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Targeted Therapies for Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background

There is significant controversy relating to whether chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) can be treated with pulmonary arterial hypertension- (PAH-) targeted therapies and which therapy is the optimal choice for patients. A large number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared PAH-targeted therapies with placebo or conventional therapies. In this study, we aimed to compare all of the PAH-targeted medications that are used to treat CTEPH and rank their efficacy by the application of network meta-analysis (NMA).

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register, https://clinicaltrials.gov, and who.int/trialsearch/, for relevant RCTs published up to January 2020. In addition to traditional meta-analysis, we also performed NMA in our systematic review, as deployed in a previous protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42020173765).

Results

Our study identified eight eligible RCTs that evaluated seven PAH-targeted therapies in 703 patients with CTEPH. NMA revealed that riociguat was ranked first as the most optimized therapy for ameliorating the 6-minute walk distance with a probability of 80.4%. Bosentan was significantly better than others with regard to reducing brain natriuretic peptide/N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide with a probability of 84.3%. Sildenafil was identified as the best drug in terms of improving the New York Heart Association/World Health Organization functional class with a probability of 87.3%. Treprostinil and macitentan were more beneficial than other drugs in reducing pulmonary vascular resistance and lowering the incidence of clinical worsening with probabilities of 86.2% and 79.2%, respectively.

Conclusion

Analysis revealed positive advantages for the use of PAH-targeted drugs in patients with CTEPH. Overall, treprostinil and riociguat were superior to all other PAH-targeted medications in most of the outcomes investigated.

Efficacy and safety of riociguat in the treatment of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary arterial hypertension: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Riociguat is a novel soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator, and has been widely used for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). Some studies found that riociguat had better effects on CTEPH and proved to be safe, but the results were not utterly consistent. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of riociguat in the treatment of CTEPH.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials on riociguat for the treatment of CTEPH were searched through such electronic databases as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China national knowledge internet, and Wanfang. The outcomes included exercise capacity, pulmonary hemodynamics, and side effects. The fixed-effects or random-effects models were used to analyze the pooled data, and heterogeneity was assessed by the I2 test.

RESULTS

Four studies involving 520 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with the placebo group, riociguat significantly improved the hemodynamic indexes and increased 6-min walking distance (P < .0001, standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.24, 95%CI -0.35 to -0.12; P < .00001, SMD = 0.52, 95%CI 0.33 to 0.71), and decreased the Borg dyspnea score (P = .002, SMD = -0.31, 95%CI -0.51 to -0.12). In addition, riociguat could also significantly reduce the living with pulmonary hypertension scores and increase the EQ-5D scores (P = .01, SMD=-0.23, 95%CI -0.42 to -0.05; P < .00001, SMD = 0.47, 95%CI 0.27 to 0.66), but there was no significant difference in the change level of N-terminal pro-hormone B-type natriuretic peptide in patients with riociguat (P = .20, SMD = -0.24, 95%CI -0.61 to -0.13). The common adverse events of riociguat were dyspepsia and peripheral edema, and no other serious adverse reactions were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

We confirmed that riociguat had better therapeutic effects in improving the hemodynamic parameters and exercise capacity in patients with CTEPH without inducing serious adverse events. This will provide a reasonable medication regimen for the treatment of CTEPH.