Sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction with end-stage of renal disease

Effects of Sacubitril/Valsartan on resistant hypertension and myocardial work in hemodialysis patients

Growing evidences have confirmed the effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan (SV) on antihypertension and cardiac protection in general population. However, there was no prospective study about the effect and safety of SV on resistant hypertension and myocardial work in hemodialysis patients. In this single‐center, prospective, before‐after study, enrolled patients were endured with resistant hypertension for more than 6 months. Participants were initially instructed to take SV 50 mg twice daily, and the dosage was gradually increased up to 100 mg twice daily. The primary outcomes were blood pressure (BP) control, N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP), myocardial work (MW), fatigue and life quality. In addition, the adverse events were also recorded in this cohort. A total of 18 patients (34–64 years old) was finally enrolled and completed in this study. The SV‐based regimen provided significantly mean sitting systolic BP (msSBP) and mean sitting diastolic BP (msDBP) reductions from baseline (‐20.7/‐8.3 mm Hg), respectively. The cardiac remodeling parameters were partially improved. Compared to the baseline, NT‐proBNP was significantly reduced at week 4 (8119.50 [3710.75, 29300] pg/ml to 7216.50 [4124.75, 17455.00] pg/ml, p = .046), which was much lower at week 12 (3130.50 [2244.50, 9565.70] pg/ml, p = .037). Global MW index was higher at week 12 compared to the baseline (p = .026). MW efficiency was also improved accordingly compared to the baseline, even though the statistical difference was not significant (p = .226). Life quality and fatigue were improved at week 12 compared to the baseline (all p = .000). There was no serious adverse events were observed. SV safely and effectively controlled resistant hypertension and improved MW as well as life quality in hemodialysis patients.

Treatment of advanced heart failure

Background: The development of medical and device treatment of heart failure (HF) has improved the survival and quality of life in HF patients. However, not all HF patients respond well to these up-to-date HF treatments. We have termed these non-responders as advanced HF patients. The definition, diagnosis, and treatment of advanced HF are discussed in this review article.Current Concepts: After current guideline-directed treatments, advanced HF patients can experience aggravation and decompensation, usually resulting in hospitalization for the symptoms and volume control. Recurrent decompensation or hospitalization can cause a vicious cycle between the heart and other vital organs, such as the kidney and liver. Current and up-to-date guidelines recommend treatments, including heart transplant, left ventricular assist device (LVAD), and hospice care, for advanced HF. Given the limitation of heart transplant donors, LVAD can be used as a bridge to transplant, in addition to destination therapy. Updated LVAD system can reduce pump-related thrombosis, stroke, and bleeding.Discussion and Conclusion: Current guidelines suggest early recognition of advanced HF and referral to advanced HF specialists. Despite advances in the treatments of advanced HF, unmet needs for further improving clinical outcomes and quality of life exist.

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Maintenance Hemodialysis Patients with Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) is one of the main comorbidities in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis (HD). Sacubitril/valsartan (SAC/VAL) is widely used in HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or HF mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF). However, the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic properties of SAC/VAL in HD patients with HF remain uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to analyze the efficacy and PK properties of SAC/VAL in HD patients with HFrEF or HFmrEF.

METHODS

HD patients with HFrEF or HFmrEF were treated with SAC/VAL 50 or 100 mg twice a day (BID) and the concentrations of valsartan and LBQ657 (active metabolite of SAC) were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry during HD and on the days between HD sessions (interval days). N-terminal-pro B-type natriuretic peptide and high-sensitivity troponin T were measured, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was evaluated by echocardiography.

RESULTS

The mean maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax) of LBQ657 and VAL on the interval days were 15.46 ± 6.01 and 2.57 ± 1.23 mg/L, respectively. Compared with previous values in patients with severe renal impairment and healthy volunteers, these levels both remained within the safe concentration ranges during treatment with SAC/VAL 100 mg BID. Moreover, SAC/VAL significantly improved LVEF in HD patients with HFrEF or HFmrEF (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

HD did not remove the SAC metabolite LBQ657 or VAL in patients with HF. However, SAC/VAL 100 mg BID was safe and effective in patients undergoing HD.

Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor in patients with heart failure and chronic kidney disease

Despite significant advances in the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), there remains an enormous health problem with high morbidity and mortality over the last few decades. The neprilysin inhibitor enhances the activity of natriuretic peptides, producing vasodilation, natriuresis, and diuresis. Angiotensin receptor blockers inhibit the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. Sacubitril/valsartan, a first-in-class angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), has been shown to improve cardiovascular outcomes in HFrEF and delay the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in patients with HFrEF. The PARADIGM-HF study showed a reduction in diuretic need in the ARNI group. While the use of diuretics is effective in volume control in patients with HFrEF, their use has the potential to adversely affect renal function. Therefore, ARNI therapy could benefit patients with heart failure and CKD by reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and possibly retarding the progression of CKD, although more clinical evidence is required in patients with severe CKD and end-stage renal disease.

Sacubitril/valsartan in chronic kidney disease: From pharmacological mechanism to clinical application

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an irreversible, progressive disease characterized by persistent kidney damage, and significantly increased risks of cardiovascular event. However, therapeutic strategies to prevent or slow the progression of CKD remain limited. Sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696), the representative of the first novel angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, has been incorporated into clinical practice guidelines for improving outcomes as a milestone in patients with heart failure. Considering the complex and close relationship between CKD and heart failure, LCZ696 may be beneficial in the treatment of CKD. This review summarizes the pharmacological mechanism and clinical application of LCZ696 in patients with CKD, including its effect on cardiovascular risk and renal outcome, together with potential adverse events. Additionally, due to the influence of serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate on LCZ696 in patients with heart failure, we also discussed the effects of LCZ696 in patients with advanced CKD and end-stage renal disease. It should be noted that, current clinical studies on LCZ696 are mostly carried out in patients with heart failure, and renal indicators are selected as secondary outcomes. Therefore, more researches should be conducted in patients with CKD alone in the future, to determine the efficacy and safety of LCZ696 in patients with CKD.

Clinical evidence of initiating a very low dose of sacubitril/valsartan: a prospective observational analysis

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.

Sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction with end-stage of renal disease

Aims

Sacubitril/valsartan (SV) reduced heart failure hospitalization and cardiovascular mortality compared with enalapril in the Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ACE‐I to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure trial. However, this trial excluded patients with end stage of renal disease (ESRD); thus, the efficacy and safety of SV in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with ESRD remains uncertain.

Methods and results

We retrospectively analysed the clinical and laboratory data of 501 HFrEF patients who administered with SV from March 2017 to April 2019 in a single tertiary university hospital. A total of 23 HFrEF patients with ESRD on dialysis [58.3% non‐ischaemic heart failure; left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF): 29.7 ± 4.4%] were included in this study. At baseline and follow‐up visit, we evaluated cardiovascular biomarkers such as high‐sensitive troponin T (hsTnT), soluble ST2 (sST2), echocardiographic parameters, and clinical and adverse events. The mean dose of SV was 90 ± 43 mg/day at baseline and 123 ± 62 mg/day at last follow‐up (follow‐up duration: median 132 days). The level of hsTnT was significantly reduced from 236.2 ± 355.3 to 97.0 ± 14.0 pg/mL (P = 0.002), and the sST2 level was significantly reduced from 40.4 ± 44.0 to 19.6 ± 14.1 ng/mL (P = 0.005). LVEF was significantly improved from 29.7 ± 4.4% to 40.8 ± 10.4% (P = 0.002). During the follow‐up, up‐titration, down‐titration, and maintenance of SV dosing were observed in 7 (30%), 5 (21.7%), and 11 patients (47.8%), respectively. SV down‐titration group had adverse events including symptomatic hypotension (systolic blood pressure <100 mmHg) (n = 4) and dizziness (n = 1), but they did not discontinue SV therapy.

Conclusions

We found that SV could safely reduce the hsTnT and sST2 levels and improve LVEF in HFrEF patients with ESRD. As far as we know, this is the first study to show the efficacy and safety of SV in HFrEF with ESRD on dialysis. Larger prospective, long‐term follow‐up study should be warranted.