Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Assessment of disease s severity Carmine Dario Vizza Dept. Cardiovascular and Respiratory Diseases La Sapienza University of Rome e-mail : dario.vizza@uniroma1.it
Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: The disease Female 40 yrs PAP = 50 mmhg CI = 2,3 l/m/m2 NYHA Class III 6MWD = 380 m
PAH: natural history CO exercise Symptoms CO FUNCTIONAL CLASS I FUNCTIONAL CLASS II FUNCTIONAL CLASS III FUNCTIONAL CLASS IV RAP PAP PVR Time
Prognosis of Idiopatic Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (PAH) was poor Advanced lung cancer WHO Class IV IPAH 6 months Advanced colorectal cancer Advanced breast cancer WHO Class III IPAH 2.6 years WHO Class I - II IPAH 4.9 years Ischaemic cardiomyopathy 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Survival (years) D'Alonzo GE, et al. Ann Intern Med 1991; 115:343-9. Kato I, et al. Cancer 2001; 92:2211-9. Felker GM, et al. N Engl J Med 2000; 342:1077-84. 7
Specific approved drugs in PAH Prostacyclin Derivatives Epoprostenol: IV Iloprost: inhaled Treprostinil: subcutaneous or IV Endothelin Receptor Antagonists Bosentan: oral Ambrisentan: oral Sitaxsentan Phosphodiesterase Type-5 Inhibitors Sildenafil: oral
The ESC/ERS 2010 therapeutic algorithm Treatment guided by Prognostic risk assessment? It introduces the concept of Inadequate clinical response Need for assessment during Follow-up
Jan 2008 Our experience Run-in Bosentan 62.5 mg bid Bosentan 125 mg bid 1 month 1 month 3 months every 1/3 months Clinical Evaluation Walk-Test Right cath study ET-1 plasma levels BNP plasma levels Clinical Evaluation Clinical worsening Phone contact Clinical Evaluation
KM plot: patients without CW 1,0 Cumulative Proportion Surviving no CW 0,9 0,8 0,7 0,6 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2 0,1 0,0 0 180 360 540 720 900 1080 1260 1440 Time, days
KM plot: patients without CW Cumulative Proportion Surviving no CW 1,0 0,9 0,8 0,7 0,6 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2 Oral 0,1 therapies are not a cure for PAH! 0,0 0 180 Breath-1 NEJM 2002 360 Mc Laughlin ERJ 2005 Provencher Thorax 2005 Need for a strict follow-up! 540 720 900 1080 1260 1440 Time, days
Prognostic indicators Clinical assessment Symptoms Clinical Signs Rate of progression Exercise capacity 6 minute walking test CP exercise test RV function Echo MR heart Hemodynamics Right Atrial Pressure Cardiac Index Biomarkers Troponin-T BNP, Na, Creatinine Uric Acid, PCR
Survival (%) Survival (%) Functional class & with survival 100 3-month epoprostenol 100 1-year epoprostenol 80 80 NYHA I 60 NYHA I or II (n = 91) 60 NYHA II 40 p < 0.0001 40 20. 0 NYHA III or IV (n = 75) 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 Months No. at risk 115 Sitbon O, et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 40:780-8. McLaughlin VV, et al. Circulation 2002; 106:1477-82. 20 0 0 12 112 24 86 36 Months 63 48 46 60 30 72 20 NYHA III NYHA IV 84 10
Cumulative survival 6-minute walk distance & survival 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Time (months) 6-MWD 380 m p = 0.0005 6-MWD < 380 m 0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 Subjects at risk (n) 78 71 56 41 28 15 4 78 54 28 16 8 6 3 3 1 6-MWD 380 m 6-MWD < 380 m Sitbon O, et al. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 40:780-8.
Cardiopulmonary exercise test Wessel R.Circulation. 2002;106:319-324
Prognostic Impact of Echocardigram Raymond RJ. JACC 2002
Sopravvivenza % Tei Index = (Dur IT- T Eiez VD) / T Eiez VD T Eiez VD 100 80 26 pazienti Index < 0.88 60 40 20 Index > 0.88 Dur IT 0 0 10 20 30 Mesi Tei C. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 1996
Heart Magnetic Resonance & Survival
Median survival (months) Haemodynamic abnormalities and prognosis < 55 mmhg 85 mmhg < 10 mmhg 20 mmhg 4 l/min/m 2 <2 l/min/m 2 50 40 30 20 10 0 Mean PAP Mean RAP Mean CI D'Alonzo, et al. Ann Int Med 1991; 115:343-9.
Biomarkers Different mechanism: - Marker of RV overload (BNP, NT-proBNP) - Marker of myocardial injury (Troponin) - Marker of Systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein)
Survival rate (%) Brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) Baseline BNP Follow-up BNP 100 100 80 BNP <150 pg/ml 80 BNP <180 pg/ml 60 60 40 BNP 150 pg/ml 40 20 0 20 0 BNP 180 pg/ml 0 12 24 36 48 0 12 24 36 48 Time (months) Time (months) Nagaya N, et al. Circulation 2000; 102:865-70.
Cumulative survival Troponin I and troponin T 1.0 0.8 p = 0.0005 p = 0.005 ctnt(-) 0.6 p = 0.001 0.4 0.2 0.0 ctnt(+) Subjects at risk, n 48 43 33 30 25 ctnt(-) ctnt(+) 8 4 4 2 2 0 6 12 18 24 Time (months) Torbicki A, et al. Circulation 2003; 108:844-48.
C Reactive Protein Quarck RA, et al. JACC 2009; 53:1211-8.
Follow-up Baseline Montly 6 Months Clinical evaluation X X Clinical judgement ECG X X Walking test X X Blood gas analysis X X Pulmmonary Test X X Echo Doppler X X X Cardiopulm. test X X X Hemodynamic X X X BNP(?) X X
A shift of strategy! We do not have to wait for deterioration, but combine treatments if the patient does not reach clinical meaningful targets
Treat to goals 2005 6MWT > 380 mt Peak VO2 10,4 ml/kg/m Exerc. BP > 120 mmhg Hoeper MM, et al. Eur Respir J 2005; 26:858-63.
Cumulative survival (IPAH) Effect of treatment to goals on survival 1.0 0.8 First-line bosentan Addition of slidenafil/iloprost 2002-2004 0.6 0.4 Historical control group 1999-2001 Expected survival 0.2 Treatment group vs historical control group, p=0.011 Treatment group vs expected survival, p<0.001 for all time points Subjects at risk (n) 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 89 83 69 61 46 43 37 67 64 47 38 31 23 20 Months Treatment group Historical control group Hoeper MM, et al. Eur Respir J 2005; 26:858-63.
ESC/ERS 2009 PAH guidelines Galie N et al, Eur Heart J 2009;doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehp297.
Are these criteria applicable to SSc-PAH?
Registry data of bosentan therapy in PAH-SSc Royal Free Hospital registry-based evaluation of the impact of bosentan on exercise capacity, and survival in patients in class III and class IV PAH and SSc Patients with PAH-SSc treated with bosentan as per BREATHE-1 protocol were compared to PH-SSc BREATHE-1 eligible control patients Williams MH et al. Heart 2006; 92:926-32.
Are these criteria applicable to SSc-PAH? SSc PAH patients have: a worse effort capacity a better cardiac index compared to Idiopathic PAH Williams MH et al. Heart 2006; 92:926-32.
Conclusions Assessment of PAH severity is important at every stage of the disease: Baseline (decision making: which drug is indicated?) Response to treatment Adjustment of treatment regimen A combination of end-points is recommended when evaluating disease severity and progression (NYHA, 6-minWT, echo, hemodynamics, biomarkers?)
PH Unit La Sapienza, University of Rome Head Carmine Dario Vizza PH clinicians (Cardiology ward, CCU, consultation & outpatients management): Senior Cardiologists Dr Vizza, Dr Badagliacca Dr. Poscia Fellows: Dr. Nona, Dr. Crescenzi, In Training: Dr Gambardella, Dr. Pezzuto, Dr Papa, Dr Marcon Echo Lab Dr. Sciomer Dr. Badagliacca PFTs-CPX Lab Prof. Palange Dott.Valli CT & RNM Lab Dott. Carbone Dott. Francone Right Cath Lab Dott. Mancone Dott. Colantoni Reumathologists Prof Valesini Prof.Riccieri Pulmonologists Prof. Parola Liver Transplant Unit Prof. Rossi Prof. Corradini HIV clinic Prof.Vullo Lung Transplant Program Prof.Coloni Prof.Venuta
Back-up slides