Open Access

Riociguat is one of several approved therapies available for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Treatment should be initiated and monitored at an expert center by a physician experienced in treating PAH, and the dose adjusted in the absence of signs and symptoms of hypotension. In certain populations, including patients with hepatic or renal impairment, the elderly, and smokers, riociguat exposure may differ, and dose adjustments should therefore be made with caution according to the established scheme. Common adverse events are often easily managed, particularly if they are discussed before starting therapy. Combination therapy with riociguat and other PAH-targeted agents is feasible and generally well tolerated, although the coadministration of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5i) and riociguat is contraindicated. An open-label, randomized study is currently ongoing to assess whether patients who do not achieve treatment goals while receiving PDE5i may benefit from switching to riociguat. In this review, we provide a clinical view on the practical management of patients with PAH receiving riociguat, with a focus on the opinions and personal experience of the authors. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Background: Despite optimized medical therapy, severe idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH) is a devastating disease with a poor outcome. Autoantibodies have been detected in IPAH that can contribute to worsening of the disease. Objectives: The objective of this prospective, open-label, single-arm, multicenter trial was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of immunoadsorption (IA) as an add-on to optimized medical treatment for patients with IPAH. Methods: A total of 10 IPAH patients received IA over 5 days. Their clinical parameters, including hemodynamics measured by right heart catheter, were assessed at baseline and after 3 and 6 months. The primary endpoint was the change in pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR). Secondary endpoints included the change in 6-min walking distance, quality of life, safety, and plasma levels of IgG and autoantibodies. Results: The evaluation of the 10 IPAH patients (75% female; 51 ± 12 years; 166 ± 10 cm; WHO functional class III; 53% on combination therapy) revealed that IA was a safe procedure that efficiently removed IgG and autoantibodies from the circulation. After 3 months, the mean PVR improved significantly by 13.2% (p = 0.03) and the cardiac index improved by 13.1%, but no significant changes were found in 6-min walking distance. The quality of life physical functioning subscale score significantly improved after 6 months. The serious adverse events in 3 patients were possibly related to IA and included pneumonia, temporary disturbance in attention, and thrombocytopenia. Conclusions: IA as an add-on to targeted medical treatment for IPAH is a safe procedure with beneficial effects on hemodynamics, especially in patients with high levels of autoantibodies. Larger-scale controlled studies are needed to assess its efficacy in IPAH and to identify responders.