Ambrisentan
Regulatory sources consulted
Approved indications
- Spain: treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension in adults and patients aged 8 to under 18 years, WHO functional class II to III, including combination treatment. Pediatric efficacy has been shown in idiopathic, familial and repaired congenital PAH, and PAH associated with connective-tissue disease.
Contraindications
Absolute
- Pregnancy, breastfeeding, or females of reproductive potential without reliable contraception.
- Severe hepatic impairment, elevated baseline aminotransferases, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, or hypersensitivity to ambrisentan, soy, or peanut.
Clinical warnings
- Boxed warning · Teratogenic risk: confirm a negative pregnancy test before starting, perform monthly tests, and use reliable contraception. — AEMPS CIMA registro 85001; DailyMed label
- Major warning · Monitor for liver injury, anemia, and fluid retention or peripheral edema; fluid retention may require heart-failure evaluation and discontinuation. — AEMPS CIMA registro 85001
Drug interactions
- ModerateCyclosporine A
Mechanism: Cyclosporine increases ambrisentan exposure.
Recommendation: Limit ambrisentan to 5 mg once daily and monitor closely.
https://cima.aemps.es/cima/dochtml/ft/85001/FT_85001.html
Adverse events
Common (≥1%)
Peripheral edema · Headache · Anemia · Nausea · Diarrhea
Rare but serious
Liver injury · Autoimmune hepatitis · Anemia requiring transfusion · Heart failure due to fluid retention
Pregnancy and lactation
FDA category: Contraindicado en embarazo y lactancia
Ambrisentan is teratogenic in animals and is contraindicated during pregnancy and breastfeeding; perform monthly pregnancy tests and use reliable contraception.
Recent literature (PubMed)
Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a subtype of pulmonary hypertension (PH), characterized by pulmonary arterial remodeling. The prevalence of PAH is approximately 10.6 cases per 1 million adults in the US. Untreated, PAH progresses to right heart failure and death. Pulmonary hypertension is defined by a mean pulmonary artery pressure greater than 20 mm Hg and is classified into 5 clinical groups based on etiology, pathophysiology, and treatment. Pulmonary arterial hypertension is 1 of the 5 groups of PH and is hemodynamically defined by right heart catheterization demonstrating a mean pulmonary artery pressure greater than 20 mm Hg, a pulmonary artery wedge pressure of 15 mm Hg or lower, and a pulmonary vascular resistance of 3 Wood units or greater. Pulmonary arterial hypertension is further divided into subgroups based on underlying etiology, consisting of idiopathic PAH, heritable PAH, drug- and toxin-associated PAH, pulmonary veno-occlusive disease, PAH in long-term responders to calcium channel blockers, and persistent PH of the newborn, as well as PAH associated with other medical conditions including connective tissue disease, HIV, and congenital heart disease. Early presenting symptoms are nonspecific and typically consist of dyspnea on exertion and fatigue. Currently approved therapy for PAH consists of drugs that enhance the nitric oxide-cyclic guanosine monophosphate biological pathway (sildenafil, tadalafil, or riociguat), prostacyclin pathway agonists (epoprostenol or treprostinil), and endothelin pathway antagonists (bosentan and ambrisentan). With these PAH-specific therapies, 5-year survival has improved from 34% in 1991 to more than 60% in 2015. Current treatment consists of combination drug therapy that targets more than 1 biological pathway, such as the nitric oxide-cyclic guanosine monophosphate and endothelin pathways (eg, ambrisentan and tadalafil), and has shown demonstrable improvement in morbidity and mortality compared with the previ
The evidence for the treatment of connective tissue disease-associated pulmonary arterial hypertension (CTD-PAH) mostly depends on subgroup or post hoc analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Thus, we performed a meta-analysis of RCTs that reported outcomes for CTD-PAH. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for CTD-PAH treatment. The selected outcomes were functional class (FC) change, survival rates, 6-min walk distance (6-MWD), clinical worsening (CW), N-terminal prohormone BNP (NT-proBNP), pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR), mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP), right atrial pressure (RAP), and cardiac index (CI). The meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020153560). Twelve RCTs conducted with 1837 patients were included. The diagnoses were systemic sclerosis in 59%, SLE in 20%, and other CTDs in 21%. The pharmacological interventions were epoprostenol, treprostinil, sildenafil, tadalafil, bosentan, macitentan, ambrisentan, riociguat, and selexipag. There was a significant difference between interventions and placebo in FC, 6MWD, CW, PVR, RAP, and CI that favored intervention. Our analysis showed a 39% reduction in the CW risk with PAH treatment. The short-term survival rates and mean serum NT-proBNP changes were similar between the study and control groups. Treatment for CTD-PAH had favorable effects on clinical and hemodynamic outcomes but not on survival and NT-proBNP levels. Different from the previous meta-analyses that focused on 6-MWD, time to clinical worsening, and CW as outcomes, this meta-analysis additionally reports the pooled analysis of change in FC, hemodynamic measurements (RAP, PVR, CI), and NT-proBNP, some of which have prognostic value for PAH.
Randomized controlled trials(RCTs) of multiple drugs for Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis(IPF) have been reported and achieved a certain degree of efficacy, however, the difference in safety and efficacy of them for IPF is not yet well understood. The aim of this network meta-analysis is to assess their safety and efficacy in the treatment of IPF and differences in this safety and efficacy comprehensively. The PubMed, EMbase, CENTRAL and MEDLINE were retrieved to find out the RCTs of drugs in the treatment of IPF. The retrieval date is from construction to November 10, 2022. Stata 14.0 and RevMan 5.3 was used for statistical analysis. CRD42023385689. Twenty-four studies with a total of 6208 patients were finally included, including RCTs of 13 drugs. The results of safety showed that there' s no difference in the incidence of SAEs of 13 drugs treated with IPF compared to placebo (P>0.05), and it's also found that Warfarin had a higher all-cause mortality for IPF than placebo (OR = 5.63, 95% CI [1.54 to 20.55]). SUCRA' s scatterplot showed that Pirfenidone, Nintedanib, Sildenafil and Imatinib were lower than placebo, and Warfarin, Ambrisentan and N-acetylcysteine were higher than placebo. The results of effectiveness showed that Nintedanib (MD = -0.08, 95% CI [-0.12 to -0.04]) improved FVC (L)absolute change from baseline in patients better than placebo, and Nintedanib (OR=1.81, 95% CI [1.23 to 2.66]), Pirfenidone (OR=1.85, 95%CI [1.26 to 2.71]) and Pamrevlumab (OR=4.11, 95% CI [1.25 to 13.58]) improved the proportion of patients with a decline in FVC ≥10% predicted better than placebo. SUCRA' s scatterplot showed that Pamrevlumab, Pirfenidone and Nintedanib were lower than placebo, and Warfarin and Ambrisentan were higher than placebo. Compared with other drugs, Nintedanib and Pirfenidone can significantly slow the decline of lung function in patients with IPF, and the safety is higher. Therefore, they can be further promoted in clinical practice. Warfarin and Ambrisent
The aim is to showcase the effectiveness and safety of bosentan or ambrisentan in individuals diagnosed with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and offer fresh evidence for the management of this condition. For this research, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials by searching various databases, including the Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica Database, PubMed, and Web of Science. The retrieval was conducted until November 2021. We analyzed the variances in 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), death, diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO), forced vital capacity (FVC), hospitalization, IPF worsening, mean pulmonary arterial pressure, serious adverse events (SAEs), Short Form-36 improved, and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire between the treatment and control groups. A sum of six studies involving 1,928 participants were found to meet the inclusion criteria. The quality of evidence was high. The control group had significantly higher values for 6MWD, DLCO, and FVC compared to the ambrisentan treatment group. The rates of hospitalization and IPF worsening were considerably greater in comparison with the control group. The bosentan group exhibited significantly reduced rates of hospitalization and IPF worsening in comparison with the control group. Both drugs did not cause any raising in death or SAEs when in comparison with the control group. The findings of this research validate the effectiveness and safety of bosentan for treating IPF patients. This medication can enhance the quality of life for individuals with IPF without causing any significant increase in SAEs. However, it does not have a notable influence on the long-term prognosis. The findings of this research do not endorse the utilization of ambrisentan in individuals diagnosed with IPF.