-
1.
Effect of Treatment With Sacubitril/Valsartan in Patients With Advanced Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Mann, DL, Givertz, MM, Vader, JM, Starling, RC, Shah, P, McNulty, SE, Anstrom, KJ, Margulies, KB, Kiernan, MS, Mahr, C, et al
JAMA cardiology. 2022;(1):17-25
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
IMPORTANCE The use of sacubitril/valsartan is not endorsed by practice guidelines for use in patients with New York Heart Association class IV heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction because of limited clinical experience in this population. OBJECTIVE To compare treatment with sacubitril/valsartan treatment with valsartan in patients with advanced heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction and recent New York Heart Association class IV symptoms. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted; a total of 335 patients with advanced heart failure were included. The trial began on March 2, 2017, and was stopped early on March 23, 2020, owing to COVID-19 risk. INTERVENTION Patients were randomized to receive sacubitril/valsartan (target dose, 200 mg twice daily) or valsartan (target dose, 160 mg twice daily) in addition to recommended therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The area under the curve (AUC) for the ratio of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) compared with baseline measured through 24 weeks of therapy. RESULTS Of the 335 patients included in the analysis, 245 were men (73%); mean (SD) age was 59.4 (13.5) years. Seventy-two eligible patients (18%) were not able to tolerate sacubitril/valsartan, 100 mg/d, during the short run-in period, and 49 patients (29%) discontinued sacubitril/valsartan during the 24 weeks of the trial. The median NT-proBNP AUC for the valsartan treatment arm (n = 168) was 1.19 (IQR, 0.91-1.64), whereas the AUC for the sacubitril/valsartan treatment arm (n = 167) was 1.08 (IQR, 0.75-1.60). The estimated ratio of change in the NT-proBNP AUC was 0.95 (95% CI 0.84-1.08; P = .45). Compared with valsartan, treatment with sacubitril/valsartan did not improve the clinical composite of number of days alive, out of hospital, and free from heart failure events. Aside from a statistically significant increase in non-life-threatening hyperkalemia in the sacubitril/valsartan arm (28 [17%] vs 15 [9%]; P = .04), there were no observed safety concerns. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The findings of this trial showed that, in patients with chronic advanced heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction, there was no statistically significant difference between sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan with respect to reducing NT-proBNP levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02816736.
-
2.
Association between ethnicity and degree of improvement in cardiac function following initiation of sacubitril/valsartan.
Holm, N, Bromage, DI, Cannata, A, DeCourcey, J, Bhatti, P, Huang, M, McDonagh, TA
Journal of cardiovascular medicine (Hagerstown, Md.). 2022;(1):37-41
Abstract
AIMS: The aim of this study was to determine the degree of short-term improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), haemodynamics, NT-proBNP and quality of life following initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in black patients when compared with white patients. METHODS This was a retrospective, observational, single-centre, hypothesis-generating study of patients with symptomatic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) treated with guideline recommended therapy, who were transitioned from an ACE inhibitor (ACE-I) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) to sacubitril/valsartan. RESULTS Our analysis included 83 patients (mean age 57 years) with echocardiography performed before and after transition from ACE-I/ARB to sacubitril/valsartan, after excluding patients with concomitant Cardiac resynchronization therapy implantation. Overall, sacubitril/valsartan was associated with LVEF improvement from 28.8% ± 0.7 to 32.0% ± 1.1% (P = 0.0002), but no reverse remodelling was observed. The association with LVEF improvement was only observed in white patients (n = 46, P = 0.0006), but not in black patients (n = 37, P = 0.1728), and appeared to be associated with reduced blood pressure (baseline vs. 2-week blood pressure 116.5 ± 13.9 vs. 109.4 ± 14.3 mmHg, respectively, in white patients, P = 0.0449). Fifteen patients (18.1%) became ineligible for primary prevention Implantable cardioverter defibrillator implantation. CONCLUSION Sacubitril/valsartan was associated with improved LVEF, NT-proBNP concentrations and quality of life in patients with symptomatic HFrEF on guideline recommended therapy. However, in our cohort, improvement of LVEF and quality of life might be attenuated in black patients, which warrants further investigation.
-
3.
Role of sacubitril-valsartan in the prevention of atrial fibrillation occurrence in patients with heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Liu, X, Liu, H, Wang, L, Zhang, L, Xu, Q
PloS one. 2022;(1):e0263131
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are often coexisting. They have common risk factors and pathophysiologic mechanisms. Sacubitril/valsartan has shown efficacy and tolerability in patients with HF. Thus, the study was performed to evaluate the impact of sacubitril/valsartan on AF occurrence in patients with HF. METHODS The Embase and PubMed were searched from their inception date to June 2021 for all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan in HF. The outcome of interest was the AF occurrence during the follow-up. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. RESULTS Six trials involving a total of 15,512 patients were included (7,750 randomized to sacubitril/valsartan and 7,762 to control). All trials were randomized, double-blind, and active-control. There was no significant difference in the prevention of AF occurrence between the sacubitril/valsartan group and the control group (enalapril or valsartan) in patients with HF (RR 1.07, 95%CI 0.95 to 1.19; I2 4%). CONCLUSIONS Sacubitril/valsartan was similar to either enalapril or valsartan in preventing the occurrence of AF in patients with HF.
-
4.
The Efficacy and Safety of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Heart Failure Patients: A Review.
Zhang, R, Sun, X, Li, Y, He, W, Zhu, H, Liu, B, Zhang, A
Journal of cardiovascular pharmacology and therapeutics. 2022;:10742484211058681
Abstract
Heart failure (HF) is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Sacubitril/valsartan, an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, has been approved for the treatment of HF. At present, there have been few systematic and detailed reviews discussing the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in HF. In this review, we first introduced the pharmacological mechanisms of sacubitril/valsartan, including the reduction in the degradation of natriuretic peptides in the natriuretic peptide system and inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system. Then, we summarized the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan in HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) including the reduction in risks of mortality and hospitalization, reversal of cardiac remodeling, regulation of biomarkers of HF, improvement of the quality of life, antiarrhythmia, improving renal dysfunction and regulation of metabolism. Finally, we discussed the safety and tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan in the treatment of HFrEF or HFpEF. Compared with ACEIs/ARBs or placebo, sacubitril/valsartan showed good safety and tolerability, although the risk of hypotension might be high. In conclusion, the overwhelming majority of studies show that sacubitril/valsartan is effective and safe in the treatment of HFrEF patients but that it has little benefit in HFpEF patients. Sacubitril/valsartan will probably be a promising anti-HF drug in the near future.
-
5.
Meta-Analysis of Dedicated Heart Failure Trials Evaluating the Effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan on Major Cardiac Rhythm Disorders.
Patoulias, D, Papadopoulos, C, Toumpourleka, M, Tranidou, A, Boulmpou, A, Doumas, M
The American journal of cardiology. 2021;:120-122
-
6.
Clinical evidence of initiating a very low dose of sacubitril/valsartan: a prospective observational analysis.
Kim, H, Oh, J, Lee, S, Ha, J, Yoon, M, Chun, KH, Lee, CJ, Park, S, Lee, SH, Kang, SM
Scientific reports. 2021;(1):16335
Abstract
Sacubitril/valsartan is superior to enalapril in reducing the risks of cardiovascular death and preventing hospitalization in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, patients often do not receive sacubitril/valsartan because of concerns about hypotension. We examined the feasibility of initiating sacubitril/valsartan at a very low dose (VLD) in potentially intolerant patients with HFrEF and subsequent dose up-titration, treatment persistence and outcomes. We analyzed 206 patients with HFrEF grouped according to starting sacubitril/valsartan dose. The VLD group (n = 106) commenced 25 mg twice daily, and the standard-dose (SD) group (n = 100) started on ≥ 50 mg twice daily. Baseline systolic blood pressure was 103 ± 12 mmHg vs. 119 ± 14 mmHg in the SD group (P < 0.001). The maximal target dose achievement rate was higher in the SD group (27.0% vs 9.4%, p = 0.001) and the VLD group experienced more dose up-titrations and fewer down-titrations than the SD group. The VLD group had a decrease in N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) similar to the SD group and a similar increase in left ventricular ejection fraction. There were no significant differences in symptomatic hypotension, worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, cardiovascular mortality, and rehospitalization due to HF between the two groups during follow-up period. In patients considered by the treating physician likely to be intolerant of sacubitril/valsartan, initiation with 25 mg twice daily was generally possible and patients remained in therapy, with similar decreases in NT-proBNP and increases in left ventricular ejection fraction to those observed in patients receiving SD sacubitril/valsartan.
-
7.
Efficacy and Safety of Sacubitril/Valsartan in High-Risk Patients in the PIONEER-HF Trial.
Berg, DD, Samsky, MD, Velazquez, EJ, Duffy, CI, Gurmu, Y, Braunwald, E, Morrow, DA, DeVore, AD
Circulation. Heart failure. 2021;(2):e007034
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND In patients stabilized during hospitalization for acute decompensated heart failure (HF), initiation of sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril decreased the risk of cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for HF without increasing the risk of adverse events. It is unknown whether potentially high-risk subpopulations have a similar risk-benefit profile. METHODS PIONEER-HF (Comparison of Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Enalapril on Effect on NT-proBNP [N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide] in Patients Stabilized From an Acute HF Episode) was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial of in-hospital initiation of sacubitril/valsartan (n=440) versus enalapril (n=441) in patients stabilized during hospitalization for acute decompensated HF. The composite of cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for HF was adjudicated. Safety outcomes included worsening renal function, symptomatic hypotension, and hyperkalemia. We evaluated heterogeneity in the effect of sacubitril/valsartan on these efficacy and safety outcomes in selected subgroups of clinical concern: patients with baseline systolic blood pressure ≤118 mm Hg (median; n=448), baseline NT-proBNP >2701 pg/mL (median; n=395), estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/minute per 1.73 m2 (n=455), ≥1 additional hospitalization for HF within the prior year (n=343), admission to the ICU during the index hospitalization (n=96), inotrope use during the index hospitalization (n=68), and severe congestion (n=219). RESULTS The relative risk reduction in cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for HF with sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril was consistent across all high-risk subgroups (P interaction=non-significant [NS] for each). The risks of worsening renal function, symptomatic hypotension, and hyperkalemia with sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril were also consistent in each high- versus low-risk subgroup (P interaction=NS for each). CONCLUSIONS In high-risk subpopulations admitted for acute decompensated HF, treatment with sacubitril/valsartan after initial stabilization conferred a consistent reduction in cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for HF and was well tolerated.
-
8.
Cardiac and Noncardiac Disease Burden and Treatment Effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan: Insights From a Combined PARAGON-HF and PARADIGM-HF Analysis.
Rohde, LE, Claggett, BL, Wolsk, E, Packer, M, Zile, M, Swedberg, K, Rouleau, J, Pfeffer, MA, Desai, AS, Lund, LH, et al
Circulation. Heart failure. 2021;(3):e008052
Abstract
BACKGROUND The net clinical benefit of cardiac disease-modifying drugs might be influenced by the interaction of different domains of disease burden. We assessed the relative contribution of cardiac, comorbid, and demographic factors in heart failure (HF) and how their interplay might influence HF prognosis and efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction. METHODS We combined data from 2 global trials that evaluated the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan compared with a renin-angiotensin antagonist in symptomatic HF patients (PARADIGM-HF [Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With an Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure; n=8399] and PARAGON-HF [Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor With Angiotensin Receptors Blockers Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction; n=4796]). We decomposed the previously validated Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure risk score into cardiac (left ventricular ejection fraction, New York Heart Association class, blood pressure, time since HF diagnosis, HF medications), noncardiac comorbid (body mass index, creatinine, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, smoking), and demographic (age, gender) categories. Based on these domains, an index representing the balance of cardiac to noncardiac comorbid burden was created (cardiac-comorbid index). Clinical outcomes were time to first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular deaths and all-cause mortality. RESULTS Higher scores of the cardiac domain were observed in PARADIGM-HF (10 [7-13] versus 5 [3-6], P<0.001) and higher scores of the demographic domain in PARAGON-HF (10 [8-13] versus 5 [2-9], P<0.001). In PARADIGM-HF, the contribution of the cardiac domain to clinical outcomes was greater than the noncardiac domain (P<0.001), while in PARAGON-HF the attributable risk of the comorbid and demographic categories predominated. Individual scores from each sub-domain were linearly associated with the risk of clinical outcomes (P<0.001). Beneficial effects of sacubitril/valsartan were observed in patients with preponderance of cardiac over noncardiac comorbid burden (cardiac-comorbid index >5 points), suggesting a significant treatment effect modification (interaction P<0.05 for both outcomes). CONCLUSIONS Domains of disease burden are clinically relevant features that influence the prognosis and treatment of patients with HF. The therapeutic benefits of sacubitril/valsartan vary according to the balance of components of disease burden, across different ranges of left ventricular ejection fraction.
-
9.
Effect of SAcubitril/Valsartan on left vEntricular ejection fraction and on the potential indication for Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator in primary prevention: the SAVE-ICD study.
Guerra, F, Ammendola, E, Ziacchi, M, Aspromonte, V, Pellegrino, PL, Del Giorno, G, Dell'Era, G, Pimpini, L, Santoro, F, Floris, R, et al
European journal of clinical pharmacology. 2021;(12):1835-1842
Abstract
PURPOSE Sacubitril/valsartan has been associated with a positive reverse left ventricular remodelling in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). These patients may also benefit from an ICD implant. We aimed to assess EF improvement after 6 months of treatment with sacubitril/valsartan, evaluating when ICD as primary prevention was no longer indicated. METHODS Multicentre, observational, prospective study enrolling all consecutive patients with HFrEF and EF ≤ 35% with an ICD as primary prevention and starting treatment with sacubitril/valsartan (NCT03935087). Resynchronization therapy and patients experiencing appropriate ICD therapies before sacubitril/valsartan were excluded. RESULTS Two-hundred-and-thirty patients were enrolled (73.9% males, mean age 64.3 ± 12.1 years) After 6 months of treatment, a reduction in left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes was noted and LVEF increased from 28.3 ± 5.6% to 32.2 ± 6.5% (p < 0.001). At 6 months, a non-ischemic aetiology of cardiomyopathy and a final dose of sacubitril/valsartan > 24/26 mg twice daily were associated with a higher probability of an absolute increase of > 5% in LVEF. A total of 5.3% of primary prevention patients still had an arrhythmic event in the first 6 months after treatment with sacubitril/valsartan started. CONCLUSIONS Sacubitril/valsartan improves systolic function in HFrEF, mainly due to reverse left ventricular remodelling. Improvement in EF after 6 months of treatment could help prevent ICD implantation in nearly one out of four patients, with important clinical and economic implications. However, the risk of sudden cardiac death in this recovered HFrEF population has not been thoroughly studied, and the present data should be interpreted only as hypothesis-generating.
-
10.
Novel doses of sacubitril/valsartan in patients unable to tolerate traditional therapy: Effects on N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide levels.
Pandey, AC, Jer, D, Kuo, RS, Yoo, DH, Christophy, A, Mohan, RC, Srivastava, AV, Heywood, JT
Clinical cardiology. 2021;(1):85-90
Abstract
BACKGROUND Widespread use of angiotensin receptor blocker and neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) remains low, and many patients are unable to tolerate the medication due to hypotension at the currently recommended starting dose. HYPOTHESIS The aim of this study is to assess if lower than standard doses of ARNI, sacubitril/valsartan (S/V), significantly reduces NT-proBNP and leads to any change in diuretic dose, serum potassium, or creatinine. METHODS In a retrospective study of 278 patients who were started on a low dose S/V at a single medical center, 45 patients were selected for the study cohort. Patients were subcategorized to Group 1 (n = 10): very low dose S/V (half a tab of 24/26 mg BID), Group 2 (n = 10): very low dose titrated to low dose S/V, and Group 3 (n = 25): low dose S/V (24/26 mg BID). NT-proBNP, diuretic dose, serum potassium, and creatinine were compared before and after initiation of S/V. RESULTS Among all groups, there was a significant reduction in NT-proBNP level (Group 1: p < .01, Group 2: p < .01, and Group 3: p < .001). In addition, there was a significant reduction in diuretic dose across all groups combined (furosemide 53 mg/day vs. 73 mg/day; p = .03), with 17.8% (8/45) patients being able to discontinue their diuretic completely. There was no significant change in potassium or creatinine. CONCLUSIONS Lower than standard dose of S/V significantly reduces NT-proBNP and diuretic requirement without change in potassium or creatinine, which provides hope that patients who cannot tolerate standard doses of S/V due to hypotension may be able to receive the benefits of S/V therapy.