| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
1 Hannover Medical School, Hannover, 2 Klinikum Grosshadern, Munich, 3 University of Dresden, Dresden, 4 University of the Saarland, Homburg, 5 University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, 6 University of Leipzig, Leipzig, 7 University of Regensburg, Regensburg, 8 University of Freiburg, Freiburg, and 9 Dept of Medicine, University Hospital Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
CORRESPONDENCE: M. M. Hoeper, Hannover Medical School, Dept of Respiratory Medicine, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, 30625 Hannover, Germany. Fax: 49 5115328536. E-mail: hoeper.marius{at}mh-hannover.de
Keywords: Endothelin-receptor antagonists, prostaglandins, pulmonary hypertension
Received: May 1, 2006
Accepted June 22, 2006
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
The trial was terminated early after a futility analysis predicted failure with respect to the predetermined sample size. At that time, 40 patients were randomised to receive either bosentan alone (control group) or bosentan plus inhaled iloprost (combination group) for a 12-week period.
The primary end-point, change in 6-min walking distance, was not met (mean changes +1 m and -9 m in the control and combination group, respectively). These results may have been skewed by three outliers in the iloprost group who presented with severe clinical worsening. None of the secondary end-points including functional class, peak oxygen uptake, and time to clinical worsening differed significantly between groups.
The current study failed to show a positive effect of adding inhaled iloprost to bosentan in idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension patients. Further studies involving larger sample sizes and long-term follow-up are needed to determine the efficacy of adding inhaled iloprost to bosentan in patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension.
Three novel substances have recently been introduced in the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) including: the endothelin receptor antagonist bosentan 1; the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor sildenafil 2; and the prostanoid iloprost, which is usually administered via inhalation 3. Although all these substances result in clinical improvement of patients with PAH after 3–4 months of treatment, long-term results are less favourable, at least with monotherapy. A retrospective study from Germany suggested that in patients receiving first-line therapy with inhaled iloprost, survival free of transplantation or change in treatment was only 29% after 2 yrs, and 42% of patients were transitioned to i.v. prostanoid therapy 4. A similar retrospective study from France showed that first-line therapy with bosentan resulted in an event-free survival of 44% after 2 yrs, and 45% of patients required i.v. prostanoid therapy 5. Comparable long-term data are not yet available for first-line therapy with sildenafil.
Several small and uncontrolled studies have provided preliminary evidence that various combinations of endothelin-receptor antagonists, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors and prostanoids may be safe and efficacious in patients with PAH 6–9, and there is also emerging evidence to suggest that combination therapy may improve long-term outcome in this patient population 10. However, many open questions remain as to the most effective combination regimens and the ideal timing of combination therapy, since long-term randomised, controlled clinical trials have not yet addressed these issues 11.
The present study describes the results of the Combination Therapy of Bosentan and aerosolised Iloprost in Idiopathic Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (COMBI) trial, a German multicentre study addressing the safety and efficacy of adding inhaled iloprost to idiopathic PAH (IPAH) patients already receiving bosentan therapy (Clinical Trials ID: NCT00120380 [ClinicalTrials.gov] ).
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Exclusion criteria included any other form of pulmonary hypertension, severe lung disease (total lung capacity <70% predicted, forced expiratory volume in one second <50% pred), clinical instability as defined by right-heart failure within the last 3 months, a 6MWD <150 m, or a systolic blood pressure <85 mmHg, serious accompanying diseases, concomitant sildenafil therapy, or treatment with prostanoids within 3 months prior to study entry.
Randomisation was performed by using pre-prepared, sealed envelopes, which were distributed to the centres during initiation of the study.
All measurements at week 12 were performed between 1 h and 3 h after the last inhalation of iloprost. The primary study end-point was the change in 6MWD after 12 weeks. Secondary end-points included changes in functional class, peak oxygen uptake, peak systolic blood pressure during exercise, and ventilatory efficacy (minute ventilation/carbon dioxide production at the anaerobic threshold) assessed during cardiopulmonary exercise testing, quality of life assessed by the 0–100 scale from the EuroQoL questionnaire 13, and clinical worsening defined as the occurrence of death, hospital admission for right-heart failure, deterioration in functional class or a decrease in 6MWD by 20% from baseline or <150 m.
Safety was assessed by documentation of adverse events and laboratory measurements including blood counts and blood chemicals at week 6 and week 12.
Patients were seen at their centres at week 6 for a safety check and to ensure proper inhalation technique.
The study was approved by the ethics committees of all participating centres and local authorities, and all patients gave written informed consent.
Treatments
Bosentan was used at the recommended dose of 125 mg b.i.d. Inhaled iloprost was administered six times daily at a dose of 5 µg per inhalation using the Ventaneb® nebuliser (Nebutec, Elsenfeld, Germany) with treatment interruptions during the night-time. Patients assigned to the control group were not given placebo inhalations.
Statistical analysis
A sample size of 36 patients in each group was calculated to detect, with 80% power, a mean difference in the change of the 6MWD of 45 m with equal standard deviations of 75 m using the Mann–Whitney U-test. This change of 6MWD was derived from the results of the pivotal study with iloprost monotherapy. An interim analysis was planned a priori after enrolment of 36 patients; however, there was no predefined p-value for premature termination.
The intention-to-treat strategy was used for all analyses including a last-observation-carried-forward strategy if data were available after 6 weeks, but not after 12 weeks. All data are expressed as mean±SD unless indicated otherwise. Statistical comparisons between groups at baseline were performed with an unpaired t-test. Analysis of within-group changes used the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and between-group changes were analysed with the Mann–Whitney U-test. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
.
|
The outcome of the trial was affected by three patients, all randomised to receive iloprost, who had clinical worsening accompanied by marked deteriorations in their 6MWD from 198 m to 66 m (-132 m), 264 m to 66 m (-198 m), and 425 m to 158 m (-267 m), respectively. In fact, more patients improved in the iloprost group than in the control group, and the median changes in 6MWDs were +5 m in the control group and +25 m in the iloprost group (fig. 1).
|
, there were no significant differences in any of the secondary end-points. Clinical worsening (in all cases due to a decline in 6MWD by >20% from baseline or to <150 m, and/or a deterioration in functional class) occurred in four patients in the control group and in three patients in the iloprost group.
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Another study has recently assessed the safety and efficacy of adding inhaled iloprost to bosentan. The STEP trial (iloprost inhalation solution, safety and pilot efficacy trial in combination with bosentan for evaluation in pulmonary arterial hypertension) was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that studied the effects of 12-week treatment with inhaled iloprost in 65 patients with PAH already being treated with bosentan (V.V. McLaughlin, Dept of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; unpublished data). In this trial, the change in 6MWD from baseline was +4 m in the control group and +30 m in the iloprost group, resulting in a placebo-adjusted difference of +26 m in favour of the iloprost group (p = 0.051). When interpreting these results it should be noted that the 12-week results were obtained almost immediately after inhalation of iloprost or placebo, respectively. In contrast, the pre-inhalation results at week 12 did not differ significantly in both groups (placebo-adjusted difference 19 m; p = 0.14). Thus, with regards to 6MWD, the results of both the STEP study and the COMBI study may not be as different as they seem on first glance. However, in contrast to the present study, the STEP trial did show significant improvements in the iloprost group in functional class and time to clinical worsening, as well as in post-inhalation, but not pre-inhalation, haemodynamics.
One potential reason for the different outcomes of the STEP trial and the COMBI study could be that the COMBI population tended to have more severe disease as indicated both by haemodynamics (mean pulmonary vascular resistance 10.2 Wood units in STEP versus 13.2 Wood units in COMBI) as well as 6MWD at baseline (335 m versus 306 m, respectively). It is possible that inhaled iloprost is less efficacious in patients with more advanced disease; however, there is insufficient evidence to support this conclusion.
A major limitation of the current study was the small sample size (n = 40). The initial power calculation was based on an expected difference in change in 6MWD of 45 m between groups as observed in the pivotal iloprost monotherapy trial 3. The present results and preliminary data from other studies suggest that a difference of 25 m would have been more realistic and with that figure, as such, a sample size of 182 patients would have been required to reach statistical significance. With 21 patients in the control group and 19 patients in the iloprost group, the present study was affected out of proportion by outliers, i.e. the three patients who experienced marked clinical deterioration, who had all been randomised into the iloprost group. In addition, the present study is further limited by the fact that it was not blinded, although it would have been expected that lack of blinding would favour the iloprost group.
The present study concept of adding another drug to patients who respond insufficiently to monotherapy is only one possible approach to combination therapy for PAH. However, this approach will always favour the selection of patients who may have more resistant disease, thereby potentially underestimating the potential of combination therapy. An alternative way to address combination therapy would be the initiation of multiple therapies at the time of the diagnosis, which may yield better clinical results. This point needs to be addressed in future studies.
In conclusion, with the currently available data based on the current study and the STEP trial, it should not be concluded that the addition of inhaled iloprost to patients on bosentan treatment is more or less efficacious compared with treatment with either drug alone. The most important limitation of both studies is the short observation period of only 12 weeks. Now that effective treatments for pulmonary arterial hypertension are available, one reason to use combination therapy is further improvement in exercise tolerance but the ultimate rationale for combination therapy is better long-term outcome. Improvements in 6-min walk distance between 20 m and 30 m may be statistically significant when the sample size is large enough, but may not be truly meaningful from the perspective of both patients and physicians. The present authors hope that larger long-term studies with appropriate end-points will answer these questions.
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. L. Benza, B. K. Rayburn, J. A. Tallaj, S. V. Pamboukian, and R. C. Bourge Treprostinil-Based Therapy in the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Long-term Efficacy and Combination With Bosentan Chest, July 1, 2008; 134(1): 139 - 145. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. M. Chin and L. J. Rubin Pulmonary arterial hypertension. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., April 22, 2008; 51(16): 1527 - 1538. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Gomberg-Maitland and H. Olschewski Prostacyclin therapies for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension Eur. Respir. J., April 1, 2008; 31(4): 891 - 901. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 National Pulmonary Hypertension Centres of the UK Consensus statement on the management of pulmonary hypertension in clinical practice in the UK and Ireland Heart, March 1, 2008; 94(Suppl_1): i1 - i41. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 National Pulmonary Hypertension Centres of the UK Consensus statement on the management of pulmonary hypertension in clinical practice in the UK and Ireland Thorax, March 1, 2008; 63(Suppl_2): ii1 - ii41. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Dupuis and M. M. Hoeper Endothelin receptor antagonists in pulmonary arterial hypertension Eur. Respir. J., February 1, 2008; 31(2): 407 - 415. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. D. Ivy, A. K. Doran, K. J. Smith, G. B. Mallory Jr, M. Beghetti, R. J. Barst, D. Brady, Y. Law, D. Parker, L. Claussen, et al. Short- and Long-Term Effects of Inhaled Iloprost Therapy in Children With Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., January 15, 2008; 51(2): 161 - 169. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. L. Helman Jr, A. W. Brown, J. L. Jackson, and A. F. Shorr Analyzing the Short-term Effect of Placebo Therapy in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Potential Implications for the Design of Future Clinical Trials Chest, September 1, 2007; 132(3): 764 - 772. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. M. Hoeper Observational trials in pulmonary arterial hypertension: low scientific evidence but high clinical value Eur. Respir. J., March 1, 2007; 29(3): 432 - 434. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Gomberg-Maitland Learning to pair therapies and the expanding matrix for pulmonary arterial hypertension: is more better? Eur. Respir. J., October 1, 2006; 28(4): 683 - 686. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
