Skip to content

Measuring Outcomes In Patients With Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Not on Active Treatment (MOTION)

A Phase IV, Prospective, Single-Arm, Open-Label Study to Measure Outcomes in Patients With Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Not on Active Treatment

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02191137
Enrollment
75
Registered
2014-07-16
Start date
2014-09-23
Completion date
2016-07-16
Last updated
2017-10-13

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Hypertension, Pulmonary

Keywords

Pulmonary Hypertension,Riociguat,Living with Pulmonary Hypertension Questionnaire

Brief summary

The MOTION study was a prospective, Phase IV study for patients with Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension (PAH). The study was designed to further explore patient-reported outcomes in PAH subjects who were not on active treatment and living in the United States. In addition, the study explored the use of new telemetric technology (Accelerator band) to evaluate if this technology correlates with improvements in 6 Minute Walking Distance 6MWD in patients with PAH.

Interventions

DRUGRiociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)

Participants received therapy with riociguat during a 10-week titration phase. The starting dose for riociguat for all patients was 0.5 milligram (mg) three times a day (TID). The dose of riociguat was increased every 2 weeks in 0.5 mg increments to 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 mg until patients reached their individual optimal dose based on their systolic blood pressure and well-being. After reaching their optimal dose, patients then entered a maintenance phase and remained on this dose for an additional 14 weeks. End of treatment was reached at Visit 10 after 24 weeks of treatment with riociguat.

Sponsors

Bayer
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Male or female patients, 18 to 80 years of age at Visit 0 * Women of childbearing potential must have a negative pre-treatment pregnancy test, negative monthly pregnancy test, and must use reliable methods of contraception according to the Risk Evaluation Mitigation Strategies (REMS) guidance * Symptomatic pulmonary arterial hypertension, World Health Organization Group 1 with a pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) \>300 dyn\*sec\*cm-5, mean pulmonary artery pressure (PAP mean) ≥25 mmHg, and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) ≤15 mmHg as assessed by right heart catheterization within 6 months prior to Screening (Visit 0) * PAH of the following types: Idiopathic (IPAH) Familial (FPAH) Associated with PAH (APAH) due to: Connective tissue disease Congenital heart disease, but only if patient underwent surgical repair more than one year before enrollment Anorexigen or amphetamine use Portal hypertension with liver cirrhosis * Not treated with PAH-specific pulmonary medications within 14 days of Screening (Visit 0) * 6MWD between 150 meters and 450 meters

Exclusion criteria

* Patients who are pregnant * Patients currently on nitrate and/or nitric oxide (NO) donor therapy; patients currently taking phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5) inhibitors (such as sildenafil, tadalafil, vardenafil) and non-specific PDE inhibitors (theophylline, dipyridamole) * Non-WHO group 1 Pulmonary Hypertension * Severe restrictive lung disease * History of uncontrolled high blood pressure or hypotension * A medical disorder, condition, or history that in the opinion of the Investigator would impair their ability to participate or complete this study * Active state of hemoptysis or pulmonary hemorrhage, including those events managed by bronchial artery embolization

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change From Baseline to Week 24 in the Living With Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) Questionnaire Total ScoreBaseline to Week 24The Living with Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) questionnaire with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 (best) to 105 (worst) is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the LPH Total Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)Week 16 to Week 24The Living with Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) questionnaire with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 (best) to 105 (worst) is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions.
Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the LPH Physical Dimension ScoreBaseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24The LPH derived from the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 to 105 is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. A physical dimension score (range 0-40, 8 items) and an emotional dimension score (range 0-25, 5 items) can also be calculated. For all LPH scores, a higher score indicates that patients are more affected by their medical condition. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.
Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the LPH Physical Dimension Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)Week 16 to Week 24The LPH derived from the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 to 105 is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. A physical dimension score (range 0-40, 8 items) and an emotional dimension score (range 0-25, 5 items) can also be calculated. For all LPH scores, a higher score indicates that patients are more affected by their medical condition.
Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the LPH Emotional Dimension ScoreBaseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24The LPH derived from the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 to 105 is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. A physical dimension score (range 0-40, 8 items) and an emotional dimension score (range 0-25, 5 items) can also be calculated. For all LPH scores, a higher score indicates that patients are more affected by their medical condition. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.
Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the LPH Emotional Dimension Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)Week 16 to Week 24The LPH derived from the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 to 105 is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. A physical dimension score (range 0-40, 8 items) and an emotional dimension score (range 0-25, 5 items) can also be calculated. For all LPH scores, a higher score indicates that patients are more affected by their medical condition.
Percentage of Patients With a Minimal Clinically Significant Important Difference (MCID) From Baseline in LPH Total Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24For LPH total score, the MCID was an 11-point decrease from baseline. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.
Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Baseline in LPH Physical Dimension Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24For the physical and emotional dimension scores, the MCID was a 4-point decrease. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.
Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Baseline in LPH Emotional Dimension Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24For the physical and emotional dimension scores, the MCID was a 4-point decrease. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.
Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Week 16 in LPH Total Score at Week 24 (Completers Analysis Set Only)Week 16 to Week 24For LPH total score, the MCID was an 11-point decrease.
Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Week 16 in Physical Dimension Score at Week 24 (Completers Analysis Set Only)Week 16 to Week 24For the physical and emotional dimension scores, the MCID was a 4-point decrease.
Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Week 16 in Emotional Dimension Score at Week 24 (Completers Analysis Set Only)Week 16 to Week 24For the physical and emotional dimension scores, the MCID was a 4-point decrease.
Change From Baseline to Weeks 4 and 16 in the LPH Total ScoreBaseline to Week 4 and Week 16The Living with Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) questionnaire with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 (best) to 105 (worst) is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.
Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Percentage of Productivity LossBaseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24The WLQ is an 8-item questionnaire that measures the degree to which employed individuals are experiencing limitations on-the-job due to their health problems, and health-related productivity loss (Presenteeism). The WLQ's terms are aggregated into four scales (i.e. Time Management, Physical demands, Mental-interpersonal demands, Output demands). Using an algorithm, WLQ scale scores can be converted into an estimate of productivity loss. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.
Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands, and Output Demands Scores (Completers Analysis Set Only)Week 16 to Week 24The Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) is an 8-item questionnaire that measures the degree to which employed individuals are experiencing limitations on-the-job due to their health problems, and health-related productivity loss (Presenteeism). The WLQ's terms are aggregated into four scales (i.e. Time Management, Physical demands, Mental-interpersonal demands, Output demands). Scale score range from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time) and represent the reported amount of time in the prior two weeks respondents were limited on-the-job.
Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WLQ Percentage of Productivity Loss (Completers Analysis Set Only)Week 16 to Week 24The WLQ is an 8-item questionnaire that measures the degree to which employed individuals are experiencing limitations on-the-job due to their health problems, and health-related productivity loss (Presenteeism). The WLQ's terms are aggregated into four scales (i.e. Time Management, Physical demands, Mental-interpersonal demands, Output demands). Using an algorithm, WLQ scale scores can be converted into an estimate of productivity loss.
Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score and Mental Component Summary (MCS) ScoreBaseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24SF-12v2® Health Survey is a 12-item questionnaire to measure functional health and well-being from the patient's point of view. Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.
Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the SF-12 PCS Score and MCS Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)Week 16 to Week 24SF-12v2® Health Survey is a 12-item questionnaire to measure functional health and well-being from the patient's point of view. Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health.
Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassBaseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24Functional class was determined by the WHO classification: I: Patients with PH (pulmonary hypertension) but without resulting limitation of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope. II: Patients with PH resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity causes undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope. III: Patients with PH resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary activity causes undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope. IV: Patients with PH with inability to carry out any physical activity without symptoms. These patients manifest signs of right-heart failure. Dyspnea and/or fatigue may even be present at rest. Discomfort is increased by any physical activity. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.
Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WHO Functional Class (Completers Analysis Set Only)Week 16 to Week 24Functional class was determined by the WHO classification: I: Patients with PH (pulmonary hypertension) but without resulting limitation of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope. II: Patients with PH resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity causes undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope. III: Patients with PH resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary activity causes undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope. IV: Patients with PH with inability to carry out any physical activity without symptoms. These patients manifest signs of right-heart failure. Dyspnea and/or fatigue may even be present at rest. Discomfort is increased by any physical activity.
Change From Baseline to Weeks 16 and 24 in the Modified Borg Dyspnea ScaleWeek 16 to Week 24The Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale assessed the intensity of the patient's dyspnea from 0 (best) to 10 (worst). In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.
Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale (Completers Analysis Set Only)Week 16 to Week 24The Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale assessed the intensity of the patient's dyspnea from 0 (best) to 10 (worst).
Change From Baseline to Weeks 16 and 24 in the 6MWDWeek 16 to Week 24Six-minute walk distance (6MWD) was conducted to test the physical limitations of the patient by assessing the patient's exercise capacity. The distance walked by the patient in 6 minutes was measured. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.
Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the 6MWD (Completers Analysis Set Only)Week 16 to Week 24Six-minute walk distance (6MWD) was conducted to test the physical limitations of the patient by assessing the patient's exercise capacity. The distance walked by the patient in 6 minutes was measured.
Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresBaseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24The Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) is an 8-item questionnaire that measures the degree to which employed individuals are experiencing limitations on-the-job due to their health problems, and health-related productivity loss (Presenteeism). The WLQ's terms are aggregated into four scales (i.e. Time Management, Physical demands, Mental-interpersonal demands, Output demands). Scale score range from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time) and represent the reported amount of time in the prior two weeks respondents were limited on-the-job. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Countries

Puerto Rico, United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

A total of 97 patients signed informed consent; 22 patients did not complete screening (20 patients were screen failures and 2 patients withdrew from the study). Of 75 patients who received therapy with riociguat, 65 patients completed study treatment and entered follow-up, and 60 patients completed the study.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)
Participants received therapy with riociguat during a 10-week titration phase. The starting dose for riociguat for all patients was 0.5 milligram (mg) three times a day (TID). The dose of riociguat was increased every 2 weeks in 0.5 mg increments to 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 mg until patients reached their individual optimal dose based on their systolic blood pressure and well-being. After reaching their optimal dose, patients then entered a maintenance phase and remained on this dose for an additional 14 weeks. End of treatment was reached at Visit 10 after 24 weeks of treatment with riociguat.
75
Total75

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000
Follow-upAdverse Event1
Follow-upLost to Follow-up2
Follow-upOngoing/unknown2
TreatmentAdverse Event2
TreatmentDeath4
TreatmentOther1
TreatmentWithdrawal by Subject3

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicRiociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)
Age, Continuous61.7 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.4
Living with Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH)
Emotional dimension score
10.20 Scores
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.8
Living with Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH)
Physical dimension score
22.83 Scores
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.7
Living with Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH)
Total score
46.03 Scores
STANDARD_DEVIATION 24.57
Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale4.47 Scores
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.74
Sex: Female, Male
Female
66 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
9 Participants
Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) questionnaire
Mental component summary
47.453 Scores
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.213
Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) questionnaire
Physical component summary
36.660 Scores
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.577
Six-minute walk distance (6MWD)310.259 Meters
STANDARD_DEVIATION 89.578
WHO functional class
I
9.3 Percentage of participants
WHO functional class
II
30.7 Percentage of participants
WHO functional class
III
58.7 Percentage of participants
WHO functional class
IV
1.3 Percentage of participants
WLQ: Percentage of Productivity loss8.85 Percentage
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.62
Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ)
Mental-interpersonal demands scale
28.66 Percentage
STANDARD_DEVIATION 25.22
Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ)
Output demands scale
36.52 Percentage
STANDARD_DEVIATION 31.51
Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ)
Physical demands scale
33.47 Percentage
STANDARD_DEVIATION 28.25
Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ)
Time management scale
36.42 Percentage
STANDARD_DEVIATION 30.82

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
61 / 75
serious
Total, serious adverse events
21 / 75

Outcome results

Primary

Change From Baseline to Week 24 in the Living With Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) Questionnaire Total Score

The Living with Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) questionnaire with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 (best) to 105 (worst) is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 24

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 66 patients were evaluable for LPH total score at Week 24.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Week 24 in the Living With Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) Questionnaire Total Score-10.99 ScoresStandard Deviation 22.51
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Weeks 16 and 24 in the 6MWD

Six-minute walk distance (6MWD) was conducted to test the physical limitations of the patient by assessing the patient's exercise capacity. The distance walked by the patient in 6 minutes was measured. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 67 patients were evaluable for 6MWD at week 24.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 16 and 24 in the 6MWDWeek 16 (N=66)2.362 MetersStandard Deviation 75.506
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 16 and 24 in the 6MWDWeek 24 (N=67)-2.921 MetersStandard Deviation 59.247
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Weeks 16 and 24 in the Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale

The Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale assessed the intensity of the patient's dyspnea from 0 (best) to 10 (worst). In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 58 patients were evaluable for Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale at week 24.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 16 and 24 in the Modified Borg Dyspnea ScaleWeek 24 (N=58)-0.91 ScoresStandard Deviation 3.44
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 16 and 24 in the Modified Borg Dyspnea ScaleWeek 16 (N=57)-0.70 ScoresStandard Deviation 3.23
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the LPH Emotional Dimension Score

The LPH derived from the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 to 105 is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. A physical dimension score (range 0-40, 8 items) and an emotional dimension score (range 0-25, 5 items) can also be calculated. For all LPH scores, a higher score indicates that patients are more affected by their medical condition. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 75 patients were evaluable for LPH emotional dimension score at week 16 or before.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the LPH Emotional Dimension ScoreWeek 4 (N=72)-2.22 ScoresStandard Deviation 5.7
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the LPH Emotional Dimension ScoreWeek 16 or Last Before (N=75)-1.44 ScoresStandard Deviation 7.32
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the LPH Emotional Dimension ScoreWeek 24 (N=66)-2.33 ScoresStandard Deviation 6.9
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the LPH Physical Dimension Score

The LPH derived from the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 to 105 is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. A physical dimension score (range 0-40, 8 items) and an emotional dimension score (range 0-25, 5 items) can also be calculated. For all LPH scores, a higher score indicates that patients are more affected by their medical condition. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Time frame: Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 75 patients were evaluable for LPH physical dimension score at week 16 or before.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the LPH Physical Dimension ScoreWeek 4 (N=72)-3.77 ScoresStandard Deviation 8.25
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the LPH Physical Dimension ScoreWeek 16 or Last Before (N=75)-3.97 ScoresStandard Deviation 9.94
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the LPH Physical Dimension ScoreWeek 24 (N=65)-6.10 ScoresStandard Deviation 9.38
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score and Mental Component Summary (MCS) Score

SF-12v2® Health Survey is a 12-item questionnaire to measure functional health and well-being from the patient's point of view. Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 73 patients were evaluable for PCS and MCS at Week 4.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score and Mental Component Summary (MCS) ScorePCS Week 4 (N=73)1.009 ScoresStandard Deviation 6.474
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score and Mental Component Summary (MCS) ScorePCS Week 16 (N=69)0.036 ScoresStandard Deviation 7.059
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score and Mental Component Summary (MCS) ScorePCS Week 24 (N=67)1.230 ScoresStandard Deviation 8.401
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score and Mental Component Summary (MCS) ScoreMCS Week 4 (N=73)1.955 ScoresStandard Deviation 9.262
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score and Mental Component Summary (MCS) ScoreMCS Week 16 (N=69)1.869 ScoresStandard Deviation 7.605
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) Score and Mental Component Summary (MCS) ScoreMCS Week 24 (N=67)2.883 ScoresStandard Deviation 10.073
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional Class

Functional class was determined by the WHO classification: I: Patients with PH (pulmonary hypertension) but without resulting limitation of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope. II: Patients with PH resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity causes undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope. III: Patients with PH resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary activity causes undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope. IV: Patients with PH with inability to carry out any physical activity without symptoms. These patients manifest signs of right-heart failure. Dyspnea and/or fatigue may even be present at rest. Discomfort is increased by any physical activity. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 75 patients were evaluable for WHO Function Class at Week 16 or Last Before.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassWeek 4 (-1 Change in WHO Class), N=729.7 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassWeek 4 (0 Change in WHO Class), N=7287.5 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassWeek 4 (+1 Change in WHO Class), N=722.8 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassWeek 4 (+2 Change in WHO Class), N=720 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassWeek 16 or LastBefore (-1 Change in WHOClass),N=7518.7 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassWeek 16 or LastBefore (0 Change in WHOClass),N=7566.7 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassWeek 16 or LastBefore (+1 Change in WHOClass),N=7512.0 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassWeek 16 or LastBefore (+2 Change in WHOClass),N=752.7 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassWeek 24 (-1 Change in WHO Class), N=6728.4 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassWeek 24 (0 Change in WHO Class), N=6764.2 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassWeek 24 (+1 Change in WHO Class), N=676.0 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WHO Functional ClassWeek 24 (+2 Change in WHO Class), N=671.5 Percentage of participants
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Percentage of Productivity Loss

The WLQ is an 8-item questionnaire that measures the degree to which employed individuals are experiencing limitations on-the-job due to their health problems, and health-related productivity loss (Presenteeism). The WLQ's terms are aggregated into four scales (i.e. Time Management, Physical demands, Mental-interpersonal demands, Output demands). Using an algorithm, WLQ scale scores can be converted into an estimate of productivity loss. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 37 patients were evaluable for WLQ percentage of productivity loss at week 4.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Percentage of Productivity LossWeek 4 Productivity loss (%), N=37-1.07 PercentageStandard Deviation 4.68
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Percentage of Productivity LossWeek 16 Productivity loss (%), N=300.54 PercentageStandard Deviation 4.85
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Percentage of Productivity LossWeek 24 Productivity loss (%), N=27-0.53 PercentageStandard Deviation 5.82
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands Scores

The Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) is an 8-item questionnaire that measures the degree to which employed individuals are experiencing limitations on-the-job due to their health problems, and health-related productivity loss (Presenteeism). The WLQ's terms are aggregated into four scales (i.e. Time Management, Physical demands, Mental-interpersonal demands, Output demands). Scale score range from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time) and represent the reported amount of time in the prior two weeks respondents were limited on-the-job. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 52 patients were evaluable for WLQ at week 4.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresWeek 4 Time management score, N=454.17 ScoresStandard Deviation 25.28
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresWeek 4 Physical demands score, N=520.96 ScoresStandard Deviation 25.35
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresWeek 4 Mental-interpersonal demands score, N=48-8.59 ScoresStandard Deviation 25.29
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresWeek 4 Output demands score, N=40-6.88 ScoresStandard Deviation 27
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresWeek 16 Time management score, N=450.56 ScoresStandard Deviation 26.24
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresWeek 16 Physical demands score, N=497.40 ScoresStandard Deviation 26.26
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresWeek 16 Mental-interpersonal demands score, N=46-6.52 ScoresStandard Deviation 24.82
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresWeek 16 Output demands score, N=402.81 ScoresStandard Deviation 25.71
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresWeek 24 Time management score, N=42-2.68 ScoresStandard Deviation 26.41
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresWeek 24 Physical demands score, N=432.33 ScoresStandard Deviation 21.17
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresWeek 24 Mental-interpersonal demands score, N=41-2.13 ScoresStandard Deviation 25.91
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4, 16, and 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands and Output Demands ScoresWeek 24 Output demands score, N=34-2.57 ScoresStandard Deviation 25.71
Secondary

Change From Baseline to Weeks 4 and 16 in the LPH Total Score

The Living with Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) questionnaire with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 (best) to 105 (worst) is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 4 and Week 16

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 72 patients were evaluable for LPH total score at Week 4.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4 and 16 in the LPH Total ScoreWeek 4 (N=72)-7.65 ScoresStandard Deviation 18.3
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Baseline to Weeks 4 and 16 in the LPH Total ScoreWeek 16 (N=68)-6.98 ScoresStandard Deviation 20.85
Secondary

Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the 6MWD (Completers Analysis Set Only)

Six-minute walk distance (6MWD) was conducted to test the physical limitations of the patient by assessing the patient's exercise capacity. The distance walked by the patient in 6 minutes was measured.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 57 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for 6MWD at week 24.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the 6MWD (Completers Analysis Set Only)-7.932 MetersStandard Deviation 71.542
Secondary

Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the LPH Emotional Dimension Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)

The LPH derived from the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 to 105 is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. A physical dimension score (range 0-40, 8 items) and an emotional dimension score (range 0-25, 5 items) can also be calculated. For all LPH scores, a higher score indicates that patients are more affected by their medical condition.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 58 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for LPH emotional dimension score at Week 24.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the LPH Emotional Dimension Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)-0.11 ScoresStandard Deviation 5.5
Secondary

Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the LPH Physical Dimension Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)

The LPH derived from the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 to 105 is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions. A physical dimension score (range 0-40, 8 items) and an emotional dimension score (range 0-25, 5 items) can also be calculated. For all LPH scores, a higher score indicates that patients are more affected by their medical condition.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 57 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for LPH physical dimension score at Week 24.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the LPH Physical Dimension Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)-0.86 ScoresStandard Deviation 7.2
Secondary

Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the LPH Total Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)

The Living with Pulmonary Hypertension (LPH) questionnaire with Heart Failure questionnaire comprises 21 items, responded to on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 'No' to 5 'Very much'. A total score ranging from 0 (best) to 105 (worst) is calculated by summing the responses to all 21 questions.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 58 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for LPH total score at Week 24.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the LPH Total Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)-1.66 ScoresStandard Deviation 15.13
Secondary

Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale (Completers Analysis Set Only)

The Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale assessed the intensity of the patient's dyspnea from 0 (best) to 10 (worst).

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 57 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale at Week 24.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the Modified Borg Dyspnea Scale (Completers Analysis Set Only)-0.19 ScoresStandard Deviation 3.75
Secondary

Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the SF-12 PCS Score and MCS Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)

SF-12v2® Health Survey is a 12-item questionnaire to measure functional health and well-being from the patient's point of view. Physical and Mental Health Composite Scores (PCS & MCS) are computed using the scores of twelve questions and range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health measured by the scales and 100 indicates the highest level of health.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 58 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for PCS and MCS at Week 24.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the SF-12 PCS Score and MCS Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)PCS1.383 ScoresStandard Deviation 6.81
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the SF-12 PCS Score and MCS Score (Completers Analysis Set Only)MCS0.437 ScoresStandard Deviation 8.378
Secondary

Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WHO Functional Class (Completers Analysis Set Only)

Functional class was determined by the WHO classification: I: Patients with PH (pulmonary hypertension) but without resulting limitation of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope. II: Patients with PH resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity causes undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope. III: Patients with PH resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary activity causes undue dyspnea or fatigue, chest pain, or near syncope. IV: Patients with PH with inability to carry out any physical activity without symptoms. These patients manifest signs of right-heart failure. Dyspnea and/or fatigue may even be present at rest. Discomfort is increased by any physical activity.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 57 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for WHO Function Class at Week 24.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WHO Functional Class (Completers Analysis Set Only)-2 Change in WHO Class1.8 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WHO Functional Class (Completers Analysis Set Only)-1 Change in WHO Class15.8 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WHO Functional Class (Completers Analysis Set Only)0 Change in WHO Class70.2 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WHO Functional Class (Completers Analysis Set Only)+1 Change in WHO Class10.5 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WHO Functional Class (Completers Analysis Set Only)+2 Change in WHO Class1.8 Percentage of participants
Secondary

Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WLQ Percentage of Productivity Loss (Completers Analysis Set Only)

The WLQ is an 8-item questionnaire that measures the degree to which employed individuals are experiencing limitations on-the-job due to their health problems, and health-related productivity loss (Presenteeism). The WLQ's terms are aggregated into four scales (i.e. Time Management, Physical demands, Mental-interpersonal demands, Output demands). Using an algorithm, WLQ scale scores can be converted into an estimate of productivity loss.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 40 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for WLQ percentage of productivity loss at week 24.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WLQ Percentage of Productivity Loss (Completers Analysis Set Only)0.19 PercentageStandard Deviation 4.17
Secondary

Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands, and Output Demands Scores (Completers Analysis Set Only)

The Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) is an 8-item questionnaire that measures the degree to which employed individuals are experiencing limitations on-the-job due to their health problems, and health-related productivity loss (Presenteeism). The WLQ's terms are aggregated into four scales (i.e. Time Management, Physical demands, Mental-interpersonal demands, Output demands). Scale score range from 0 (limited none of the time) to 100 (limited all of the time) and represent the reported amount of time in the prior two weeks respondents were limited on-the-job.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 40 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for WLQ at Week 24.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands, and Output Demands Scores (Completers Analysis Set Only)Time management score, N=39-0.32 ScoresStandard Deviation 25.73
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands, and Output Demands Scores (Completers Analysis Set Only)Physical demands score, N=40-1.56 ScoresStandard Deviation 24.22
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands, and Output Demands Scores (Completers Analysis Set Only)Mental-interpersonal demands score, N=385.92 ScoresStandard Deviation 19.87
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Change From Week 16 to Week 24 in the WLQ Time Management, Physical Demands, Mental-Interpersonal Demands, and Output Demands Scores (Completers Analysis Set Only)Output demands score, N=34-4.78 ScoresStandard Deviation 24.43
Secondary

Percentage of Patients With a Minimal Clinically Significant Important Difference (MCID) From Baseline in LPH Total Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24

For LPH total score, the MCID was an 11-point decrease from baseline. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 72 patients were evaluable for LPH total score at week 4.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Percentage of Patients With a Minimal Clinically Significant Important Difference (MCID) From Baseline in LPH Total Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24Week 4 (N=72)38.9 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Percentage of Patients With a Minimal Clinically Significant Important Difference (MCID) From Baseline in LPH Total Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24Week 16 (N=68)45.6 Percentage of participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Percentage of Patients With a Minimal Clinically Significant Important Difference (MCID) From Baseline in LPH Total Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24Week 24 (N=66)47.0 Percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Baseline in LPH Emotional Dimension Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24

For the physical and emotional dimension scores, the MCID was a 4-point decrease. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 72 patients were evaluable for LPH emotional dimension score at week 4.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Baseline in LPH Emotional Dimension Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24Week 16 (N=68)39.7 Percentage of Participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Baseline in LPH Emotional Dimension Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24Week 4 (N=72)31.9 Percentage of Participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Baseline in LPH Emotional Dimension Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24Week 24 (N=66)33.3 Percentage of Participants
Secondary

Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Baseline in LPH Physical Dimension Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24

For the physical and emotional dimension scores, the MCID was a 4-point decrease. In the below table, N signifies subjects who were evaluable for the specific parameter at that timepoint.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 4, Week 16 and Week 24

Population: The ITT analysis set was synonymous with the Safety analysis set definition which included all patients who received at least 1 dose of test drug. 72 patients were evaluable for LPH physical dimension score at week 4.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Baseline in LPH Physical Dimension Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24Week 4 (N=72)45.8 Percentage of Participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Baseline in LPH Physical Dimension Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24Week 16 (N=68)51.5 Percentage of Participants
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Baseline in LPH Physical Dimension Score at Weeks 4, 16, and 24Week 24 (N=65)60.0 Percentage of Participants
Secondary

Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Week 16 in Emotional Dimension Score at Week 24 (Completers Analysis Set Only)

For the physical and emotional dimension scores, the MCID was a 4-point decrease.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 58 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for LPH emotional dimension score at Week 24.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Week 16 in Emotional Dimension Score at Week 24 (Completers Analysis Set Only)17.2 Percentage of Participants
Secondary

Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Week 16 in LPH Total Score at Week 24 (Completers Analysis Set Only)

For LPH total score, the MCID was an 11-point decrease.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 58 patients in Completer analysis set were evaluable for LPH total score at Week 24.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Week 16 in LPH Total Score at Week 24 (Completers Analysis Set Only)24.1 Percentage of Participants
Secondary

Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Week 16 in Physical Dimension Score at Week 24 (Completers Analysis Set Only)

For the physical and emotional dimension scores, the MCID was a 4-point decrease.

Time frame: Week 16 to Week 24

Population: The Completers analysis set included patients valid for Safety/ITT analysis sets who had an LPH score at baseline (Visit 1), Week 4, Week 16, and Week 24. 57 patients were evaluable for LPH physical dimension score at week 24.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Riociguat (Adempas, BAY63-2521)Percentage of Patients With an MCID From Week 16 in Physical Dimension Score at Week 24 (Completers Analysis Set Only)29.8 Percentage of Participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 11, 2026