A Canadian, retrospective, multicenter experience with selexipag for a heterogeneous group of pediatric pulmonary hypertension patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Selexipag, an oral nonprostanoid prostaglandin receptor agonist, has led to reduced morbidity and mortality in adults with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). While the adult literature has been extrapolated to suggest selexipag as an oral treatment for severe pediatric pulmonary hypertension (PH), longitudinal, multicenter data on the benefits of selexipag in this population are lacking. The purpose of this study is to present a longitudinal, multicentre experience with selexipag in a relatively large cohort of pediatric PH patients and add to the existing selexipag literature. Materials and methods: We performed a retrospective, multicenter review describing the clinical outcomes of pediatric PH patients receiving selexipag in addition to standard oral pulmonary vasodilator therapy across three Canadian centers between January 2005 and June 2021. Results: Twenty-four pediatric patients (fifteen female) with a mean age of 9.7 (range 2.0-15.5) years were included. Of this cohort, eighteen (75.0%) were in group 1, one (4.2%) was in group 2, four (16.7%) were in group 3, and one (4.2%) was in group 4. Twenty-two (91.7%) patients were on dual PH therapy after six months. Dosing was targeted to achieve 20-30 mcg/kg/dose orally every twelve hours. Median dose after twelve months was 30 mcg/kg/dose. Twelve months following selexipag initiation, median decreases of 0.2 cm in tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, 3.5 mmHg in right-ventricular systolic pressure, and 6.1 mmHg in mean pulmonary arterial pressure were observed; none of these changes were statistically significant. Three patients died, one clinically deteriorated and required admission to a pediatric intensive care unit, ten had gastrointestinal symptoms, and three had flushing. Conclusion: Selexipag appears to be a safe and effective adjunctive therapy for pediatric PH patients and has a tolerable adverse effect profile aside from gastrointestinal disturbances. Additional prospective studies of changes in hemodynamics and functional classification over a longer period and with a larger sample are needed. Future research should aim to identify subgroups that stand to benefit from the addition of selexipag as well as optimal timing and dosing for the pediatric population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".