Evidence Hub

Hemodynamics and risk assessment 2 years after the initiation of upfront ambrisentan‒tadalafil in pulmonary arterial hypertension

M. D’Alto, R. Badagliacca, F. Lo Giudice, P. Argiento, G. Casu, M. Corda, M. Correale, S. Ghio et al.

The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 2020

106 participants · 37 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Upfront combination therapy with ambrisentan and tadalafil has been reported to improve the condition of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) more than with either drug alone. However, little is known about the long-term associated changes in hemodynamics and risk assessment scores.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, retrospective analysis of clinical data in 106 patients with newly diagnosed PAH. Clinical evaluations, including demographics, medical history, World Health Organization (WHO) functional class (FC) and 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), right heart catheterization, and Registry to Evaluate Early and Long-Term PAH Disease Management (REVEAL) risk score 2.0, were assessed over 48 months of ambrisentan‒tadalafil therapy.

RESULTS

At baseline, 9 patients (9%) showed a low (8) REVEAL risk score. At a median follow-up of 2 years, 45 patients (43%) showed a low, 47 patients (44%) showed an intermediate, and 14 patients (13%) showed a high REVEAL score, along with improvements in WHO FC, 6MWD and a decrease in mean pulmonary artery pressure and N-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide (all p 50% or a stroke volume within the limits of normal.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial combination therapy with ambrisentan and tadalafil in PAH improves the REVEAL risk score in proportion to decreased PVR and preserved stroke volume but still insufficiently so in approximately 50% of the patients.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 106 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free