Abstract
Introduction
Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a rare, severely debilitating disease with high mortality. There are limited data available on treatment patterns and burden of disease from conditions of actual care.
Methods
This analysis assesses the burden of disease for patients with PAH treated with monotherapy and combination therapies excluding and including intravenous (IV) prostacyclin analogues (PGI2). Data were drawn from the Adelphi PAH Disease Specific Programme, a cross sectional survey of consulting patients undertaken in the US, Germany, Italy and the UK in 2010. Outcomes included demographics, clinical characteristics, health-care resource utilization, and quality of life measured by the Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR).
Results
Data were analyzed from 446 patients receiving ≥1 of 3 PAH-specific treatment classes. Physicians comprised mainly pulmonologists and cardiologists. The symptoms, functioning and quality of life scales of the CAMPHOR instrument were completed by 218, 229, and 214 patients, respectively. Although 46.2% of patients were classified as World Health Organization (WHO) functional class III or IV, only 24.4% of the population received combination therapy. Combination therapy including IV PGI2 was used in 4.7% of all patients. Patients on monotherapy had the lowest pulmonary vascular resistance values, the highest recorded 6-min walk distance and the lowest recorded levels of dyspnea. Patients on combination therapy including IV PGI2 scored worse on all three variables and had more hospitalizations than patients on less aggressive combination therapy. With increasing therapeutic regimens, the CAMPHOR scores were higher, indicating worse states of health.
Conclusions
Combination treatment and particularly the use of prostacyclins remain underused in an unselected population of PAH patients surveyed under conditions of actual care. The disease burden is substantial and increases with greater severity of disease and more aggressive treatments. This necessitates improvement in optimizing current therapy, as well as novel and innovative combination options.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Humbert M, Sitbon O, Chaouat A, et al. Pulmonary arterial hypertension in France Results from a National Registry. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;173(9):1023–30.
Peacock AJ, Murphy NF, McMurray JJ, Caballero L, Stewart S. An epidemiological study of pulmonary arterial hypertension. Eur Respir J. 2007;30(1):104–9.
Badesch DB, Raskob GE, Elliott CG, et al. Pulmonary arterial hypertension: baseline characteristics from the REVEAL Registry. Chest. 2010;137:376–87.
Sunil P, Machado RF, Desai AA. Survival in pulmonary arterial hypertension: a brief review of registry data. Pulm Circ. 2011;1(3):430–1.
Galiè N, The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Pulmonary Hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Respiratory Society (ERS), endorsed by the International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT). Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension. Euro Heart J 2009;30:2493–2537.
Ryerson CJ, Nayar S, Swiston JR, Sin DD. Pharmacotherapy in pulmonary arterial hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Respir Res. 2010;11:12.
McGoon MD, Miller DP. REVEAL: a contemporary US pulmonary arterial hypertension registry. Eur Respir Rev. 2012;21(123):8–18.
Galiè N, Negro L, Simonneau G. The use of combination therapy in pulmonary arterial hypertension: new developments. Eur Respir Rev. 2009;18:148–53.
Toews ML, Bylund DB. Pharmacologic principles for combination therapy. Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2005;2(4):282–9.
Bai Y, Sun L, Hu S, Wei Y. Combination therapy in pulmonary arterial hypertension: a meta-analysis. Cardiology. 2011;120(3):157–65.
Fox BD, Shimony A, Langleben D. Meta-analysis of monotherapy versus combination therapy for pulmonary arterial hypertension. Am J Cardiol. 2011;108(8):1177–82.
Zhu B, Wang L, Sun L, Cao R. Combination therapy improves exercise capacity and reduces risk of clinical worsening in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension: a meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2012;60(4):342–6.
Barst RJ, Rubin LJ, Long WA, et al. A comparison of continuous intravenous epoprostenol (prostacyclin) with conventional therapy for primary pulmonary hypertension. N Engl J Med. 1996;334(5):296–301.
McLaughlin VV, Benza RL, Rubin LJ, et al. Addition of inhaled treprostinil to oral therapy for pulmonary arterial hypertension: a randomized controlled clinical trial’. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(18):1915–22.
Thenappan T, Shah SJ, Rich S, Gomberg-Maitland M. A USA-based registry for pulmonary arterial hypertension: 1982–2006. Eur Respir J. 2007;30(6):1103–10.
Humbert M, Sitbon O, Chaouat A, et al. Survival of patients with idiopathic, familial and anorexigen-associated pulmonary arterial hypertension in the modern management era. Circulation. 2010;122:156–63.
Benza RL, Miller DP, Gomberg-Maitland M, et al. Predicting survival in pulmonary arterial hypertension: insights from the Registry to Evaluate Early and Long-Term Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Disease Management (REVEAL). Circulation. 2010;122(2):164–72.
Anderson P, Benford M, Harris N, Karavali M, Piercy J. Real-world physician and patient behaviour across countries: disease-specific programmes—a means to understand. Curr Med Res Opin. 2008;24(11):3063–72.
McKenna SP, Doughty N, Meads DM, Doward LC, Pepke-Zaba J. The Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR): a measure of health-related quality of life and quality of life for patients with pulmonary hypertension. Qual Life Res. 2006;15:103–15.
McKenna SP, Ratcliffe J, Meads DM, Brazier JE. Development and validation of a preference based measure derived from the Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR) for use in cost utility analysis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008;6:65. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-6-65.
Meads DM, McKenna SP, Doughty N, Das C, Gin-Sing W, Langley J, Pepke-Zaba J. The responsiveness and validity of the CAMPHOR Utility Index. Eur Respir J. 2008;32(6):1513–9.
Gomberg-Maitland M, Thenappan T, Rizvi K, Chandra S, Meads DM, McKenna SP. United States validation of the Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR). J Heart Lung Transpl. 2008;27(1):124–30.
Coffin D, Duval K, Martel S, et al. Adaptation of the Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review (CAMPHOR) into French-Canadian and English-Canadian. Can Respir J. 2008;15(2):77–83.
Cima K, Twiss J, Speich R, et al. The German adaptation of the Cambridge pulmonary hypertension outcome review (CAMPHOR). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012;10(1):110.
EphMRA Code of Conduct for International Healthcare Market Research, last update 10 September 2010. http://www.ephmra.org/code-of-conduct/2/A-Purpose-Scope-and-Sources. Accessed 11 Dec 2012.
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Summary of the HIPAA Privacy Rule 2009. http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/. Accessed 10 Dec 2012.
StataCorp. 2011. Stata Statistical Software: Release 12. College Station: StataCorp LP. http://www.stata.com/. Accessed 2 June 2013.
McLaughlin VV, Suissa S. Prognosis of pulmonary arterial hypertension: the power of clinical registries of rare diseases. Circulation. 2010;122(2):106–8.
Archer SL, Weir EK, Wilkins MR. Basic science of pulmonary arterial hypertension for clinicians: new concepts and experimental therapies. Circulation. 2010;121(18):2045–66.
McLaughlin VV, Archer SL, Badesch DB, et al. ACCF/AHA 2009 expert consensus document on pulmonary hypertension: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents and the American Heart Association: developed in collaboration with the American College of Chest Physicians, American Thoracic Society, Inc., and the Pulmonary Hypertension Association. Circulation. 2009;119(16):2250–94.
Rubin LJ. Combination therapy for pulmonary artery hypertension: what is the evidence? Cardiology. 2011;120(3):172–3.
Matura LA, McDonough A, Carroll DL. Cluster analysis of symptoms in pulmonary arterial hypertension: a pilot study. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2012;11(1):51–61.
Selimovic N, Rundqvist B, Kjörk E, Viriden J, Twiss J, Mckenna SP. Adaptation and validation of the Cambridge pulmonary hypertension outcome review for Sweden. Scand J Public Health. 2012;40(8):777–83.
Acknowledgments
Sponsorship for this study and article processing charges were funded by Novartis Pharma AG. Editorial assistance in the preparation of this manuscript was provided by Maren White of White Quill Ltd. Support for this assistance was funded by Novartis Pharma AG.
Dr. Small and Dr Piercy are the guarantors for this article, and take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole.
Conflict of interest
M Small is a full-time employee of Adelphi Real World.
J Piercy is a full-time employee of Adelphi Real World.
J Pike is a full-time employee of Adelphi Real World.
A Cerulli is a full-time employee of Novartis Pharma AG.
Compliance with ethics guidelines
The analysis in this article is based on previously conducted studies, and does not involve any new studies of human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Small, M., Piercy, J., Pike, J. et al. Incremental Burden of Disease in Patients Diagnosed with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Receiving Monotherapy and Combination Vasodilator Therapy. Adv Ther 31, 168–179 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-014-0094-z
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-014-0094-z