Bosentan, an endothelin receptor antagonist (ERA), has potential anti-atherosclerotic properties. We investigated the complementary effects of bosentan and atorvastatin on the progression and composition of the atherosclerotic lesions in diabetic mice. Forty-eight male ApoE-/- mice were fed high-fat diet (HFD) for 14 weeks. At week 8, diabetes was induced with streptozotocin, and mice were randomized into four groups: (1) control/COG: no intervention; (2) ΒOG: bosentan 100 mg/kg/day per os; (3) ATG: atorvastatin 20 mg/kg/day per os; and (4) BO + ATG: combined administration of bosentan and atorvastatin. The intra-plaque contents of collagen, elastin, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), tumor necrosis factor-a (TNF-a), matrix metalloproteinases (MMP-2, -3, -9), and TIMP-1 were determined. The percentage of lumen stenosis was significantly lower across all treated groups: BOG: 19.5 ± 2.2%, ATG: 12.8 ± 4.8%, and BO + ATG: 9.1 ± 2.7% compared to controls (24.6 ± 4.8%, p < 0.001). The administration of both atorvastatin and bosentan resulted in significantly higher collagen content and thicker fibrous cap versus COG (p < 0.01). All intervention groups showed lower relative intra-plaque concentrations of MCP-1, MMP-3, and MMP-9 and a higher TIMP-1concentration compared to COG (p < 0.001). Importantly, latter parameters presented lower levels when bosentan was combined with atorvastatin compared to COG (p < 0.05). Bosentan treatment in diabetic, atherosclerotic ApoE-/- mice delayed the atherosclerosis progression and enhanced plaques\' stability, showing modest but additive effects with atorvastatin, which are promising in atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases.

UNASSIGNED: Bosentan, ambrisentan, and macitentan are endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs), currently available in Australia for treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). This study assessed the comparative adherence of these ERAs for PAH in Australian patients.
UNASSIGNED: This retrospective, observational study used data for adults with PAH from the Services Australia 10% Pharmaceuticals Benefits Scheme (PBS) dataset (01/2006-10/2020). The primary outcome was treatment adherence (i.e. receiving ≥80% of ERA doses over 12 months). Secondary outcomes were time to treatment change (add-on or switch) and overall survival.
UNASSIGNED: The study included 436 patients who took bosentan (n = 200), ambrisentan (n = 69), or macitentan (n = 167). Treatment adherence was significantly greater in patients who received macitentan (65.3%) versus ambrisentan (56.5%) and bosentan (58.0%), with odds ratios (ORs; 95% CI) of 0.51 (0.30-0.88; p = 0.016) for bosentan versus macitentan and 0.48 (0.24-0.96; p = 0.037) for ambrisentan versus macitentan. The median time to treatment change was 47.2 and 43.4 months for bosentan and ambrisentan, respectively (not calculated for macitentan because of insufficient duration of data).
UNASSIGNED: Real-world data for Australian patients with PAH showed that treatment adherence for ERAs was suboptimal. Adherence was higher for macitentan compared with ambrisentan and bosentan.

BACKGROUND: The data on bosentan were lacking for the treatment of exercise-induced elevation of pulmonary artery pressure (eePAP) or less severe PH in COPD. This study was conducted to investigate long-term efficacy and safety of bosentan for the treatment of eePAP or less severe PH in COPD.
METHODS: COPD patients diagnosed at this hospital as having COPD (WHO functional class II, III or IV) with eePAP or less severe PH whose respiratory symptoms were stable but remained and gradually progressed even after COPD therapy were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either bosentan or no PH treatment for two years and assessed at baseline and every 6 months for respiratory failure, activities of daily living (ADL), lung and heart functions by right heart catheterization (RHC), and other parameters.
RESULTS: A total of 29 patients who underwent RHC for detail examination were enrolled in the current study between August 2010 and October 2018.No death occurred in drug-treated group (n = 14) for 2 years; 5 patients died in untreated group (n = 15). Significant differences were noted between the 2 group in hospital-free survival (686.00 ± 55.87 days vs. 499.94 ± 53.27 days; hazard ratio [HR], 0.18; P = 0.026) and overall survival (727 days vs. 516.36 ± 55.38 days; HR, 0.095; P = 0.030) in all causes of death analysis, but not in overall survival in analysis of respiratory-related death. Bosentan was not associated with increased adverse events including requiring O2 inhalation.
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggested that the prognosis for COPD patients with eePAP or less severe PH presenting with respiratory symptoms was very poor and that bosentan tended to improve their prognosis and suppress ADL deterioration without worsening respiratory failure.
BACKGROUND: This study was registered with UMIN-CTR Clinical Trial as UMIN000004749 . First trial registration at 18/12/2010.

Endothelin receptor antagonist (ERA) and phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor (PDE5i) combination therapy is recommended for low-/intermediate-risk pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) patients. A fixed-dose combination of the ERA macitentan and PDE5i tadalafil (M/T FDC) in a once-daily, single tablet would simplify treatment.
The multicenter, double-blind, adaptive phase 3 A DUE study investigated the efficacy and safety of M/T FDC vs macitentan 10 mg and vs tadalafil 40 mg monotherapies in PAH patients, including treatment-naïve and prior ERA or PDE5i monotherapy-treated patients.
World Health Organization functional class II-III patients were randomized to M/T FDC, macitentan, or tadalafil depending on their PAH treatment (treatment-naïve, ERA, or PDE5i monotherapy) at baseline. The primary endpoint was change in pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) at week 16.
In total, 187 patients were randomized to single-tablet M/T FDC (n = 108), macitentan (n = 35), or tadalafil (n = 44). PVR reduction with M/T FDC was significantly greater vs macitentan (29%; geometric mean ratio 0.71; 95% CL: 0.61-0.82; P < 0.0001) and vs tadalafil (28%; geometric mean ratio 0.72; 95% CL: 0.64-0.80; P < 0.0001). Three patients died in the M/T FDC arm (judged unrelated to treatment). Adverse events (AEs) leading to discontinuation, serious AEs, and those of special interest (anemia, hypotension, and edema) were more frequent with M/T FDC.
Macitentan and tadalafil FDC significantly improved PVR vs monotherapies in PAH patients, with a safety and tolerability profile consistent with the individual components. The A DUE study supports M/T FDC as a once-daily, single-tablet combination for initial therapy and escalation to double combination therapy in patients with PAH. (Clinical Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Macitentan and Tadalafil Monotherapies With the Corresponding Fixed-dose Combination Therapy in Subjects With Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension [PAH]) [A DUE]; NCT03904693).

Liver injury is the hallmark adverse reaction of endothelin receptor antagonist (ERA). Since the first drug, bosentan has been widely used in clinical practice, hepatotoxicity has been accompanied by the history of ERA. The new ERA has been proven to have a lower liver risk but the current research findings are inconsistent. ERA-based targeted drug combinations are commonly used in the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension, where the risk of liver injury is difficult to estimate.
This study aimed to compare the correlation between ERA and different ERA combination regimens with liver injury in the real world.
This is a retrospective study using data from the Adverse Event Reporting System (Food and Drug Administration AERS, FAERS).
The study used proportional imbalance and Bayesian analysis to mine FAERS data from January 2004 to December 2022 to determine the association of three ERAs with liver injury and to further mine the risk of liver injury due to the combination of ERAs with other targeted drugs. In addition, we analyzed the onset time, mortality, and hospitalization rate of liver injury caused by different ERA combination regimens.
We screened out 3581 ERA-related liver injury events, of which bosentan (59.82%) had the largest number of cases. The patients with liver injury were mainly female (60.63%), and the age was concentrated between 61 and 75 years (26.75%). According to different signal mining methods, reporting odds ratio (ROR; 3.38, 95% confidence interval = 3.23-3.53), proportional reporting ratio (PRR; 3.22, χ2 = 37.84), Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN; 1.68, 95% confidence interval = 1.61), multi-item gamma Poisson shrinker (MGPS; 3.21, 95% confidence interval = 3.09), bosentan had the strongest association with liver injury compared to ambrisentan and macitentan. Furthermore, bosentan + sildenafil [ROR (2.52, 95% confidence interval = 2.23-2.84), PRR (2.44, χ2 = 15.92), BCPNN (1.29, 95% confidence interval = 1.14), MGPS (2.44, 95% confidence interval = 2.21)], bosentan + epoprostenol [ROR (5.39, 95% confidence interval = 4.29-6.77), PRR (4.94, χ2 = 65.18), BCPNN (2.30, 95% confidence interval = 1.83), MGPS (4.94, 95% confidence interval = 4.08)], bosentan + iloprost [ROR (2.70, 95% confidence interval = 2.11-3.45), PRR (2.61, χ2 = 31.03), BCPNN (1.38, 95% confidence interval = 1.08), MGPS (2.61, 95% confidence interval = 2.12)] had a higher risk of liver injury caused by the three ERA combination regimens. The median time to onset of hepatotoxicity associated with all ERA combination regimens was 259 days (interquartile range: 58-716.5 days). Finally, the hospitalization rate for patients experiencing hepatotoxicity with ERA combination regimens was 47.86% and the mortality rate was 12.67%.
By mining the FAERS, we analyzed and compared the risk of liver injury related to different ERA and ERA combination regimens, and the onset time and adverse reaction outcomes of all ERA combination regimens. According to the results of the study, bosentan had the highest risk of liver injury and the combination regimens bosentan + sildenafil, bosentan + epoprostenol, and bosentan + iloprost had a stronger risk of liver injury. From the early stages of treatment, we need to regularly monitor the liver function of patients, especially for females and the elderly, and discontinue the suspected drug as soon as the liver injury occurs.

BACKGROUND: Real-world data on the comparative effectiveness of endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs; macitentan, bosentan, ambrisentan) for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), particularly in Asian countries, are scarce. We evaluated the persistence of these ERAs before and after macitentan approval in Japan (2015).
METHODS: We used real-world data from the Japanese Medical Data Vision administrative claims database between April 2008 and November 2020. Patients with PAH were identified from the dataset. Persistence to ERA treatment before and after approval of macitentan in Japan was defined as the time between start of the index ERA and treatment discontinuation or death. Propensity score adjustment was applied to minimize confounding effects among treatment groups.
RESULTS: In the pre-macitentan approval cohort, 153 and 51 patients received bosentan and ambrisentan, respectively. In the post-macitentan approval cohort, 331, 284, and 91 patients received macitentan, bosentan, and ambrisentan, respectively. Unadjusted median persistence for ambrisentan- and bosentan-treated patients was 19 and 10 months, respectively (adjusted HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.61-1.24]; P = 0.434 [bosentan as reference]). In the post-macitentan approval cohort, unadjusted median persistence was 18 months for macitentan-treated patients versus 6 and 8 months for ambrisentan- and bosentan-treated patients, respectively. Adjusted HRs for ambrisentan and bosentan were 1.48 (95% CI 1.12-1.95; P = 0.006) and 1.63 (95% CI 1.30-2.04; P < 0.001 [macitentan as reference]), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Real-world data for Japanese patients with PAH showed that persistence was significantly higher for macitentan, versus ambrisentan and bosentan, since its approval.

Phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5i) have been evaluated as a novel treatment for Alzheimer\'s disease and related dementias (ADRD), but two recent cohort studies have offered opposing conclusions.
We performed an unmatched case-control study using electronic medical records from a large healthcare system to evaluate the association of PDE5i use and ADRD in patients ≥65 years old.
Odds of PDE5i exposure were 64.2%, 55.7%, and 54.0% lower in patients with ADRD than controls among populations with erectile dysfunction, benign prostatic hyperplasia, and pulmonary hypertension, respectively. We observed odds ratios less than unity among males and females and with exposure to the PDE5i sildenafil (Viagra®) and tadalafil (Cialis®). We also evaluated the odds of exposure to two other common treatments for pulmonary hypertension: endothelin receptor antagonists (ERA) and calcium channel blockers (CCB). The odds of ERA exposure were 63.2% lower, but the odds of CCB exposure were 30.7% higher, in patients with ADRD than controls among the population with pulmonary hypertension.
Our results reconcile the opposing conclusions from the previous observational studies and support further research into using PDE5i for prevention and treatment of ADRD.

Pain is prevalent among patients with diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD). The management of chronic pain in these patients is limited by nephrotoxicity of commonly used drugs including non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids. Since previous studies implicated endothelin-1 in pain nociception, our post hoc analysis of the SONAR trial assessed the association between the endothelin receptor antagonist atrasentan and pain and prescription of analgesics. SONAR was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial that recruited participants with type 2 diabetes and CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate 25-75 ml/min/1.73 m2; urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio 300-5000 mg/g). Participants were randomized to receive atrasentan or placebo (1834 each arm). The main outcome was pain-related adverse events (AEs) reported by investigators. We applied Cox regression to assess the effect of atrasentan compared to placebo on the risk of the first reported pain-related AE and, secondly, first prescription of analgesics. We used the Anderson-Gill method to assess effects on all (first and subsequent) pain-related AEs. During 2.2-year median follow-up, 1183 pain-related AEs occurred. Rates for the first pain-related event were 138.2 and 170.2 per 1000 person-years in the atrasentan and placebo group respectively (hazard ratio 0.82 [95% confidence interval 0.72-0.93]). Atrasentan also reduced the rate of all (first and subsequent) pain-related AEs (rate ratio 0.80 [0.70-0.91]). These findings were similar after accounting for competing risk of death (sub-hazard ratio 0.81 [0.71-0.92]). Patients treated with atrasentan initiated fewer analgesics including NSAIDs and opioids compared to placebo during follow-up (hazard ratio = 0.72 [0.60-0.88]). Thus, atrasentan was associated with reduced pain-related events and pain-related use of analgesics in carefully selected patients with type 2 diabetes and CKD.

Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) affects a wide range of people globally and has a poor prognosis despite many advancements in available treatment options. Among the available treatments, endothelin receptor antagonists (ERA) are among the most widely used drugs. These drugs have been evaluated in scientific trials. We included free full texts in the English language from the last ten years and reviewed them. We are writing this review to amalgamate the pharmacological aspects and the previous studies on ERAs to demonstrate a comprehensive overview of the current status of ERAs for PAH treatment. We focused on the structure, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy and safety of the three most widely used ERAs: Bosentan, Ambrisentan, and Macitentan. These drugs have different receptor affinities, bioavailability, excretion routes, and different levels of safety profiles. There are three available studies, the RCT, the ARIES series, and the SERAPHIN studies, for assessing the safety and efficacy of Bosentan, Ambrisentan, and Macitentan, respectively. All the studies and some additional studies for combination therapy have proven all three drugs effective in treating PAH. The side effects (SE) varied from headache and hepatic enzyme elevation to worsening the PAH status of varied severities. Although these studies provided valuable insight into the role of ERAs, there is still enough scope for more studies on ERAs, both as monotherapy and combination therapy for PAH.

Use of endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs) and riociguat, approved for treatment of pulmonary hypertension (PH), is contraindicated during pregnancy due to reported teratogenicity in animals. We aimed to investigate prescribing of these drugs in girls/women of childbearing age and to explore - as a secondary aim - the occurrence of pregnancies exposed to these drugs. Using the German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database (GePaRD, claims data from 20% of the German population) we conducted cross-sectional analyses to determine prescribing prevalence of ERAs and riociguat between 2004 and 2019 and to characterize users and prescribing patterns. In a cohort analysis, we assessed the occurrence of pregnancies exposed to these drugs in the critical time window. Overall, we identified 407 women with ≥ 1 dispensation of bosentan between 2004 and 2019; the respective number was 73 for ambrisentan, 182 for macitentan, 31 for sitaxentan, and 63 for riociguat. In nearly all years, more than 50% of the girls/women were ≤ 40 years. Age-standardized prevalence was highest for bosentan (0.04/1000) in 2012 and 2013, followed by macitentan (0.03/1000) in 2018 and 2019. We observed 10 exposed pregnancies: 5 to bosentan, 3 to ambrisentan, and 2 to macitentan. The increased prevalence of macitentan and riociguat from 2014 onwards might reflect changes in PH treatment. Even though PH is a rare disease and pregnancy should be avoided in women with PH, particularly if they use ERAs, we identified pregnancies exposed to ERAs. Multi-database studies will be needed to assess the risk of these drugs on the unborn child.