Supplementary appendix This appendix formed part of the original submission and has been peer reviewed. We post it as supplied by the authors. Supplement to: Ghofrani H-A, Grimminger F, Grünig E, et al. Predictors of long-term outcomes in patients treated with riociguat for pulmonary arterial hypertension: data from the PATENT-2 open-label, randomised, long-term extension trial. Lancet Respir Med 2016; published online April 8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2213- 2600(16)30019-4.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Supplementary appendixThis appendix formed part of the original submission and has been peer reviewed. We post it as supplied by the authors.
Supplement to: Ghofrani H-A, Grimminger F, Grünig E, et al. Predictors of long-term outcomes in patients treated with riociguat for pulmonary arterial hypertension: data from the PATENT-2 open-label, randomised, long-term extension trial. Lancet Respir Med 2016; published online April 8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(16)30019-4.
1
Supplementary figures and tables
Supplementary Table 1: Frequency of AEs per 100 patient-years in the PATENT-2 study.
Hazard ratio (95% CI) p-value Hazard ratio (95% CI) p-value
6MWD Baseline
Change from baseline
0·77 (0·67 to 0·89)
0·86 (0·69 to 1·08)
0·0003
0·1908
0·76 (0·69 to 0·84)
0·80 (0·68 to 0·94)
<0·0001
0·0075
NT-proBNP
Baseline
Change from baseline
0·91 (0·87 to 0·96)
0·91 (0·84 to 0·98)
0·0002
0·0134
0·91 (0·88 to 0·94)
0·90 (0·85 to 0·95)
<0·0001
<0·0001
WHO FC Baseline
Change from baseline
0·40 (0·22 to 0·74)
0·61 (0·32 to 1·15)
0·0031
0·1256
0·39 (0·26 to 0·59)
0·55 (0·35 to 0·87)
<0·0001
0·0110
Baseline hazard ratios provide the risk of experiencing a clinical worsening event at any time for a patient with a given baseline, compared with a
patient whose baseline differs by the value of the unit difference for hazard ratio. For each parameter, baseline values and change from baseline
values have been corrected for each other. Unit differences for hazard ratios were 40 m for 6MWD, –300 pg/mL for NT-proBNP, and –1 class for WHO FC. The cut-offs for 6MWD and
WHO FC were based on previously published thresholds;1–3 the cut-off for NT-proBNP was exploratory.
6MWD=6-minute walking distance; CI=confidence interval; NT-proBNP=N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide; WHO FC=World Health Organization functional class.
3
Supplementary Table 3: Results of a univariate Cox proportional-hazards model for association between
efficacy endpoints at follow-up and survival and clinical worsening-free survival.
Hazard ratio (95% CI) p-value Hazard ratio (95% CI) p-value
6MWD
Follow-up
0·79 (0·69–0·90)
0·0004
0·77 (0·70–0·84)
<0·0001
NT-proBNP Follow-up
0·91 (0·87–0·96)
0·0002
0.91 (0·88–0·94)
<0·0001
WHO FC Follow-up
0·48 (0·29–0·79)
0·0041
0·45 (0·31–0·64)
<0·0001
Follow-up hazard ratios provide the risk of dying at any time for a patient with a given follow-up value, compared with a patient whose follow-up
value differs by the value of the unit difference for hazard ratio. Unit differences for hazard ratios were 40 m for 6MWD, –300 pg/mL for NT-proBNP, and –1 class for WHO FC. The cut-offs for 6MWD and
WHO FC were based on previously published thresholds;1–3 the cut-off for NT-proBNP was exploratory.
6MWD=6-minute walking distance; CI=confidence interval; NT-proBNP=N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide; WHO FC=World Health Organization functional class.
4
Supplementary Table 4: Results of a Cox proportional-hazards model for association between efficacy
endpoints and survival and clinical worsening-free survival, including region and PATENT-1 treatment group
Hazard ratio (95% CI) p-value Hazard ratio (95% CI) p-value
6MWD Baseline
Change from baseline
0·74 (0·64–0·86)
0·83 (0·66–1·05)
<0·0001
0·1170
0·77 (0·69–0·85)
0·81 (0·69–0·96)
<0·0001
0·0143
NT-proBNP Baseline
Change from baseline
0·91 (0·86–0·96)
0·89 (0·82–0·96)
0·0004
0·0050
0·91 (0·88–0·94)
0·90 (0·85–0·95)
<0·0001
0·0003
WHO FC
Baseline
Change from baseline
0·33 (0·17–0·63)
0·54 (0·28–1·07)
0·0008
0·0761
0·38 (0·24–0·59)
0·55 (0·35–0·89)
<0·0001
0·0135
Baseline hazard ratios provide the risk of experiencing a clinical worsening event at any time for a patient with a given baseline, compared with a
patient whose baseline differs by the value of the unit difference for hazard ratio. For each parameter, baseline values and change from baseline
values have been corrected for each other. Unit differences for hazard ratios were 40 m for 6MWD, –300 pg/mL for NT-proBNP, and –1 class for WHO FC. The cut-offs for 6MWD and
WHO FC were based on previously published thresholds;1–3 the cut-off for NT-proBNP was exploratory.
6MWD=6-minute walking distance; CI=confidence interval; NT-proBNP=N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide; WHO FC=World Health Organization functional class.
5
Supplementary Figure 1: 6MWD in the overall population and treatment-naïve and pretreated subgroups of
PATENT-2. Graph shows mean±SEM. Data are observed values. 6MWD=6-minute walking distance;
SEM=standard error of the mean.
6
Supplementary Figure 2: WHO FC in the overall population and treatment-naïve and pretreated subgroups of
PATENT-2. Data are observed values. WHO FC=World Health Organization functional class.
7
Supplementary Figure 3: 6MWD in the subgroup of patients from PATENT-2 with idiopathic/familial PAH.
Graph shows mean±SEM. Data are observed values. 6MWD=6-minute walking distance; PAH=pulmonary arterial
hypertension.
8
Supplementary Figure 4: WHO FC in the subgroup of patients from PATENT-2 with idiopathic/familial PAH.
PAH=pulmonary arterial hypertension; WHO FC=World Health Organization functional class.
9
Supplementary Figure 5: Kaplan–Meier analysis of survival in the population of patients in PATENT-2 with
idiopathic/familial PAH. The estimated survival rate was 98% (95% CI 95–99%) at 1 year and 93% (95% CI 89–
96%) at 2 years. PAH=pulmonary arterial hypertension.
10
Supplementary Figure 6: Kaplan–Meier plot showing the effect of WHO FC on survival based on meeting a
predefined threshold of WHO FC I/II at baseline and follow-up. The curve for patients with WHO FC I/II at
baseline and III/IV at follow-up has not been drawn due to the low patient number in this subgroup.
WHO FC=World Health Organization functional class.
11
Supplementary Figure 7: Kaplan–Meier analyses showing the effect of 6MWD on clinical worsening-free
survival based on patients being ≥ or < a threshold of: the median value at baseline (380 m; A), median value at
follow-up (419 m; B), and median change from baseline to follow-up (+33 m; C). Differences between groups
were assessed using the log-rank test. 6MWD=6-minute walking distance.
12
Supplementary Figure 8: Kaplan–Meier analyses showing the effect of NT-proBNP levels on clinical worsening-
free survival based on patients being ≥ or < a threshold of: the median value at baseline (459 pg/mL; A),
median value at follow-up (267 pg/mL; B), and median change from baseline to follow-up
(–79 pg/mL; C). Differences between groups were assessed using the log-rank test. NT-proBNP=N-terminal
prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide.
13
Supplementary Figure 9: Kaplan–Meier analyses showing the effect of WHO FC on clinical worsening-free
survival, based on whether patients were in WHO FC I/II or III/IV at baseline (A) and follow-up (B) and
whether patients’ WHO FC improved or did not improve from baseline to follow-up (C). Differences between
groups were assessed using the log-rank test. WHO FC=World Health Organization functional class.
14
References
1. Nickel N, Golpon H, Greer M, et al. The prognostic impact of follow-up assessments in patients with idiopathic