Selexipag in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension associated with connective tissue disease (PAH‐CTD): Real‐world experience from EXPOSURE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selexipag is indicated for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), including PAH associated with connective tissue disease (CTD), and further insights into the management of selexipag-treated PAH-CTD patients in clinical settings are needed. These analyses of the ongoing, multicenter, prospective EXPOSURE (EUPAS19085) study describe characteristics, treatment patterns, tolerability, and outcomes of PAH-CTD patients initiating selexipag in Europe/Canada. All analyses were descriptive, with idiopathic PAH patients who typically display better prognosis included for context. Six hundred ninety-eight selexipag-treated patients had follow-up information; 178 (26%) had PAH-CTD. The median age was 68 years, patients were predominantly female (88%), and with WHO functional class III symptoms (63%); the median time since diagnosis was 1.7 years. There were 5% patients at low, 25% intermediate-low, 40% intermediate-high, and 30% high risk of 1-year mortality, according to the ESC/ERS 4-strata risk score. Most (80%) initiated selexipag as a triple oral therapy, and most of these (62%) remained on triple therapy 6 months post-baseline. Over a median (Q1-Q3) selexipag exposure period of 8.6 (2.5-17.2) months, 79 (44%) patients discontinued selexipag; 36 (20%) due to tolerability/adverse events. Sixty (34%) patients were hospitalized at least once; 120 hospitalizations occurred, with 49 (48%) deemed PAH-related. Survival at 1 year was 85%, and at 2 years was 71%; 29 (16%) patients died. These results describe the use of combination therapy with selexipag for patients with PAH-CTD. These findings suggest an opportunity to optimize the benefits of selexipag among patients with PAH-CTD by moving from escalating after years in response to clinical deterioration to escalating sooner to prevent clinical deterioration.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".