Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibition compared with enalapril on the risk of clinical progression in surviving patients with heart failure

Evaluation of pathophysiological relationships between renin-angiotensin and ACE-ACE2 systems in cardiovascular disorders: from theory to routine clinical practice in patients with heart failure

Despite the progressive improvements in diagnosis and therapy during the first 20 years of this century, the morbidity and mortality of patients with heart failure (HF) remain high, resulting in an enormous health and economic burden. Only a further improvement in understanding the pathophysiological mechanisms related to the development of cardiac injury and dysfunction can allow more innovative and personalized approaches to HF management. The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) has a critical role in cardiovascular physiology by regulating blood pressure and electrolyte balance. The RAS is mainly regulated by both angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) and type 2 angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE2). However, the balance between the various peptides and peptidases constituting the RAS/ACE pathway remains in great part unraveled in patients with HF. This review summarizes the role of the RAS/ACE axis in cardiac physiology and HF pathophysiology as well as some analytical issues relevant to the clinical and laboratory assessment of inter-relationships between these two systems. There is evidence that RAS peptides represent a dynamic network of peptides, which are altered in different HF states and influenced by medical therapy. However, the mechanisms of signal transduction have not been fully elucidated under physiological and pathophysiological conditions. Further investigations are necessary to explore novel molecular mechanisms related to the RAS, which will provide alternative therapeutic agents. Moreover, monitoring the circulating levels of active RAS peptides in HF patients may enable a personalized approach by facilitating assessment of the pathophysiological status of several cardiovascular diseases and thus better selection of therapies for HF patients.

Effect of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril on changes in heart failure therapies over time: the PARADIGM-HF trial

AIMS

Sacubitril/valsartan improves morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Whether initiation of sacubitril/valsartan limits the use and dosing of other elements of guideline-directed medical therapy for HFrEF is unknown. We examined the effects of sacubitril/valsartan, compared with enalapril, on β-blocker and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) use and dosing in a large randomized clinical trial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with full data on medication use were included. We examined β-blocker and MRA use in patients randomized to sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril through 12-month follow-up. New initiations and discontinuations of β-blocker and MRA were compared between treatment groups. Overall, 8398 (99.9%) had full medication and dose data at baseline. Baseline use of β-blocker and MRA at any dose was 87% and 56%, respectively. Mean doses of β-blocker and MRA were similar between treatment groups at baseline and at 6-month and 12-month follow-up. New initiations through 12-month follow-up were infrequent and similar in the sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril groups for β-blockers [37 (9.0%) vs. 42 (10.2%), P = 0.56] and MRA [127 (7.6%) vs. 143 (9.2%), P = 0.10]. Among patients on MRA therapy at baseline, there were fewer MRA discontinuations in patients on sacubitril/valsartan as compared with enalapril at 12 months [125 (6.2%) vs. 187 (9.0%), P = 0.001]. Discontinuations of β-blockers were not significantly different between groups in follow-up (2.2% vs. 2.6%, P = 0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan, even when titrated to target dose, did not appear to lead to greater discontinuation or dose down-titration of other key guideline-directed medical therapies, and was associated with fewer discontinuations of MRA. Use of sacubitril/valsartan (when compared with enalapril) may promote sustained MRA use in follow-up.

Potential pitfalls when interpreting plasma BNP levels in heart failure practice

B-type (or brain) natriuretic peptide (BNP) is synthesized in cardiac myocytes and released constitutively into the circulation. Pressure/volume overload, neurohumoral factors, cytokines, and ischemia enhance BNP gene expression, and then precursor proBNP is produced. It has been thought that proBNP is cleaved into active BNP molecule and inactive marker molecule NT-proBNP intracellularly by processing enzyme furin, and they are released into the circulation. However, recent studies have shown that considerable amount of uncleaved proBNP circulates in the blood. The commercially available BNP assay kits consist of two antibodies that sandwich the BNP molecule. Therefore, if proBNP is present, BNP assay kit cross-reacts to proBNP and measures it as BNP. Therefore, it should be noted that the current BNP value is proBNP plus BNP. BNP and NT-proBNP have been established as a biomarker for heart failure patients presenting dyspnea. But many pitfalls are present for interpreting the BNP value. For example, the presence of renal dysfunction, age, female sex, atrial fibrillation, inflammation, hyperthyroidism, use of sacubitril/valsartan, and macro-proBNPemia overestimate BNP value, whereas the presence of obesity, immediately after acute coronary syndrome onset, and pericardial effusion underestimate BNP value. In the management for heart failure patients, BNP plays an important role. Therefore, clinicians should note the pitfall of interpretation of BNP and we describe the mechanism involved.

Effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan on circulating catecholamine levels during a 6-month follow-up in heart failure patients. Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes?

We assessed the effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan on circulating catecholamine levels in patients with HF in an observational cohort study. We included 108 consecutive HF patients attending our HF Outpatients Clinic who were eligible to Sacubitril/Valsartan according to the PARADIGM-HF inclusion and exclusion criteria. We furthermore included 58 stable HF patients under optimal medical therapy as a control group. Norepinephrine and epinephrine were measured with immunoradiometric assays at baseline, at 3- and at 6-month time follow-up. Compared to baseline levels there was no change at three months in epinephrine (p = 0.177) or norepinephrine (p = 0.815) concentrations. At 6 months norepinephrine remained unchanged (p = 0.359). However, at 6 months we observed a significant increase in epinephrine levels compared to baseline [66 pg/mL (37-93) vs 38 pg/mL (18-74), p < 0.001]. In the control group no change was observed in epinephrine levels compared to baseline (p = 0.838). This study is the first to report on the effect of the new drug Sacubitril/Valsartan on circulating catecholamine levels in HF patients. Our data show a significant increase in epinephrine levels during a 6 month follow up in stable HF patients.

Rapid evidence-based sequencing of foundational drugs for heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction

Foundational therapy for heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction consists of a combination of an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, a beta-blocker, a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist and a sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor. However, the conventional approach to the implementation is based on a historically-driven sequence that is not strongly evidence-based, typically requires ≥6 months, and frequently leads to major gaps in treatment. We propose a rapid sequencing strategy that is based on four principles. First, since drugs act rapidly to reduce morbidity and mortality, patients should be started on all four foundational treatments within 2-4 weeks. Second, since the efficacy of each foundational therapy is independent of treatment with the other drugs, priority can be determined by considerations of relative efficacy, safety and ease-of-use. Third, low starting doses of foundational drugs have substantial therapeutic benefits, and achievement of low doses of all four classes of drugs should take precedence over up-titration to target doses. Fourth, since drugs can influence the tolerability of other foundational agents, sequencing can be based on whether agents started earlier can enhance the safety of agents started simultaneously or later in the sequence. We propose an accelerated three-step approach, which consists of the simultaneous initiation of a beta-blocker and an SGLT2 inhibitor, followed 1-2 weeks later by the initiation of sacubitril/valsartan, and 1-2 weeks later by a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. The latter two steps can be re-ordered or compressed depending on patient circumstances. Rapid sequencing is a novel evidence-based strategy that has the potential to dramatically improve the implementation of treatments that reduce the morbidity and mortality of patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction.

Therapeutic Assessment of Combination Therapy with a Neprilysin Inhibitor and Angiotensin Type 1 Receptor Antagonist on Angiotensin II-Induced Atherosclerosis, Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms, and Hypertension

Combined neprilysin (NEP) inhibition (sacubitril) and angiotensin type 1 receptor (AT1R) antagonism (valsartan) is used in the treatment of congestive heart failure and is gaining interest for other angiotensin II (AngII)-related cardiovascular diseases. In addition to heart failure, AngII promotes hypertension, atherosclerosis, and abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Similarly, NEP substrates or products have broad effects on the cardiovascular system. In this study, we examined NEP inhibition (with sacubitril) and AT1R antagonism (with valsartan) alone or in combination on AngII-induced hypertension, atherosclerosis, or AAAs in male low-density lipoprotein receptor-deficient mice. Preliminary studies assessed drug delivery via osmotic minipumps for simultaneous release of sacubitril and/or valsartan with AngII over 28 days. Mice were infused with AngII (1000 ng/kg per minute) in the absence (vehicle) or presence of sacubitril (1, 6, or 9 mg/kg per day), valsartan (0.3, 0.5, 1, 6, or 20 mg/kg per day), or the combination thereof (1 and 0.3, or 9 or 0.5 mg/kg per day of sacubitril and valsartan, respectively). Plasma AngII and renin concentrations increased 4-fold at higher valsartan doses, indicative of removal of AngII negative feedback on renin. Sacubitril doubled plasma AngII concentrations at lower doses (1 mg/kg per day). Valsartan dose-dependently decreased systolic blood pressure, aortic atherosclerosis, and AAAs of AngII-infused mice, whereas sacubitril had no effect on atherosclerosis or AAAs but reduced blood pressure of AngII-infused mice. Combination therapy with sacubitril and valsartan did not provide additive benefits. These results suggest limited effects of combination therapy with NEP inhibition and AT1R antagonism against AngII-induced hypertension, atherosclerosis, or AAAs. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The combination of valsartan (angiotensin type 1 receptor antagonist) and sacubitril (neprilysin inhibitor) did not provide benefit above valsartan alone on AngII-induced hypertension, atherosclerosis, or abdominal aortic aneurysms in low-density lipoprotein receptor-deficient male mice. These results do not support this drug combination in therapy of these AngII-induced cardiovascular diseases.

Concentration-dependent clinical and prognostic importance of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T in heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction and the influence of empagliflozin: the EMPEROR-Reduced trial

Aims

Circulating troponin is an important measure of risk in patients with heart failure, but it has not been used to determine if disease severity influences the responses to drug treatments in randomized controlled trials.

Methods and results

In the EMPEROR‐Reduced trial, patients with class II–IV heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction were randomly assigned to placebo or empagliflozin 10 mg daily and followed for the occurrence of serious heart failure and renal events. High‐sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs‐cTnT) was measured in 3636 patients (>97%) at baseline, and patients were divided into four groups based on the degree of troponin elevation. With increasing concentrations of hs‐cTnT, patients were progressively more likely to have diabetes and atrial fibrillation, to have New York Heart Association class III–IV symptoms and been hospitalized for heart failure within the prior year, and to have elevated levels of natriuretic peptides and worse renal function (P‐trend < 0.0001 for all comparisons), but importantly, the troponin groups did not differ with respect to ejection fraction. A linear relationship was observed between the logarithm of hs‐cTnT and the combined risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure (P = 0.0015). When treated with placebo, patients with the highest levels of hs‐cTnT had risks of cardiovascular death and hospitalization for heart failure that were 3–5 fold greater than those with values in the normal range. Patients with higher levels of hs‐cTnT were also more likely to experience worsening of renal function and serious adverse renal events and showed the least improvement in health status (as measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire). When compared with placebo, empagliflozin reduced the combined risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure, regardless of the baseline level of hs‐cTnT, whether the effects of treatment were analysed as hazard ratios or absolute risk reductions.

Conclusions

Elevations in hs‐cTnT reflect the clinical severity, stability and prognosis of patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, with biomarkers, comorbidities, clinical course and risks that are proportional to the magnitude of hs‐cTnT elevation. Empagliflozin exerted favourable effects on heart failure and renal outcomes, regardless of the baseline concentration of hs‐cTnT.

Medical treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: the dawn of a new era of personalized treatment?

Recent trials have shown the efficacy of new drugs for the medical therapy of heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) reduced hospitalizations for HF, HF events, and cardiovascular death in patients with HFrEF or hospitalized for HF. Iron repletion with ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) improved symptoms, functional capacity, and quality of life in chronic HFrEF patients, and decreased the risk of subsequent HF hospitalizations in subjects with acutely decompensated HF. New-generation potassium binders may allow initiation and up-titration of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RASi). Lastly, the guanylate cyclase stimulator vericiguat and the myosin activator omecamtiv mecarbil reduced the primary endpoint in two major controlled trials. These results open novel pathways for the treatment of HFrEF. This review discusses new opportunities of an individualized approach to HFrEF pharmacotherapy, where new compounds expand a spectrum of drugs that target primarily neuroendocrine activation. SGLT2i can be safely applied once daily at a fixed dose to the vast majority of patients with HFrEF, including those with moderate renal dysfunction and/or systolic blood pressure as low as 95-100 mmHg. Additional medications are suitable for more specific phenotypes, with ivabradine providing benefit in patients with sinus rhythm and heart rates ≥70 beats per minute, FCM in the presence of iron deficiency, and potassium-lowering agents to implement RASi when hyperkalaemia occurs. Vericiguat and omecamtiv mecarbil also have potential for tailored approaches towards the hemodynamic status. Thus, a new era is starting for a more personalized medical treatment of HFrEF.

Association Between Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibition, Cardiovascular Biomarkers, and Cardiac Remodeling in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) treatment is associated with reverse cardiac remodeling and reductions in biomarkers reflecting ventricular wall stress and myocardial injury, such as NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide), hs-cTnT (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T), and soluble suppressor of tumorigenicity 2 (sST2). How longitudinal changes in these biomarkers analyzed collectively are associated with cardiac remodeling in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction treated with S/V is uncertain.

METHODS

In a prospective study of S/V in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, this prespecified exploratory analysis included patients with serially collected biomarkers and echocardiographic measures of cardiac remodeling through 12 months of treatment. A multivariate latent growth curve model assessed associations between simultaneous changes in biomarkers and left ventricular ejection fraction and left atrial volume index.

RESULTS

Seven hundred fifteen out of 794 total study participants were included (mean age 65 years, 73% male). Mean baseline left ventricular ejection fraction and left atrial volume index were 29% and 40 mL/m², respectively. Adjusted geometric mean baseline concentrations for biomarkers included NT-proBNP of 649 pg/mL, hs-cTnT of 15.9 ng/L, and sST2 of 24.7 ng/mL. Following initiation of S/V, circulating concentrations of NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, and sST2 significantly decreased within 30 days and remained significantly different than baseline at all subsequent timepoints. From baseline to month 12, decreases in adjusted biomarker concentrations averaged -27.9% (95% CI, -35.1% to -20.7%; P<0.001) for NT-proBNP; -6.7% (95% CI, -8.8% to -4.7%; P<0.001) for hs-cTnT; and -1.6% (95% CI, -2.9% to -0.4%; P<0.001) for sST2. NT-proBNP concentrations were predictive of later changes in hs-cTnT. The magnitude of reductions in NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT concentrations associated with improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction and left atrial volume index. There was no association between changes in sST2 and changes in other measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Following initiation of S/V, NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, and sST2 concentrations decreased significantly. Longitudinal changes in NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT together associated with left atrial and left ventricular reverse remodeling. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02887183.

Residual alterations of cardiac and endothelial function in patients who recovered from Takotsubo cardiomyopathy

Introduction

Takotsubo cardiomyopathy (TCM) is characterized by transient left ventricle dysfunction.

Hypothesis

A residual cardiac and endothelial dysfunction is present in patients who recovered from TCM.

Methods

In this single‐center prospective study, patients with prior TCM were included and followed for 6.4 ± 1.6 years. All underwent comprehensive cardiac function assessment, including tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) and 2‐dimensional strain (2DS) echocardiography at their first visit. The number of circulating endothelial progenitor cells and levels of proangiogenic vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and its receptor (VEGF‐R) were measured. All measurements were compared with healthy controls.

Results

Forty‐two women (age 58. ±8.6 years, LVEF 58.1 ± 6.1%) comprised the TCM group. Patients post‐TCM had significantly lower early velocities E′ (6 (5.0–8.0) vs. 9 (7.0–11.0) cm/s, p = .001) by TDI and higher E/E′ ratio (p = .002), lower LV global average longitudinal strain (LGS) (−18.9 ± 3.5% vs. −21.7 ± 2.3%, p = .002) and RV LGS (−20.1 ± 3.9% vs. −23.4 ± 2.8%, p = .003) were evident. There was a trend toward a higher VEGF‐R (p = .09) along with decreased VEGF/VEGF‐R ratio representing inadequate VEGF production. In‐hospital mortality was not reported and only two non‐cardiac deaths occurred at long‐term follow‐up.

Conclusions

Altered TDI and 2DS indices suggest residual biventricular myocardial injury in post‐TCM patients with the apparent LV function recovery. Inappropriate production of VEGF and VEGF‐R were observed, suggesting a possible underlying endothelial dysfunction in these patients.

Efficacy and Safety of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Japanese Patients With Chronic Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction - Results From the PARALLEL-HF Study

BACKGROUND

In the Prospective Comparison of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) With ACEi to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) study, treatment with sacubitril/valsartan reduced the primary outcome of cardiovascular (CV) death and heart failure (HF) hospitalization compared with enalapril in patients with chronic HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). A prospective randomized trial was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in Japanese HFrEF patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In the Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEi to determine the noveL beneficiaL trEatment vaLue in Japanese Heart Failure patients (PARALLEL-HF) study, 225 Japanese HFrEF patients (New York Heart Association [NYHA] class II-IV, left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] ≤35%) were randomized (1 : 1) to receive sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg bid or enalapril 10 mg bid. Over a median follow up of 33.9 months, no significant between-group difference was observed for the primary composite outcome of CV death and HF hospitalization (HR 1.09; 95% CI 0.65-1.82; P=0.6260). Early and sustained reductions in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) from baseline were observed with sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril (between-group difference: Week 2: 25.7%, P<0.01; Month 6: 18.9%, P=0.01, favoring sacubitril/valsartan). There was no significant difference in the changes in NYHA class and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) clinical summary score at Week 8 and Month 6. Sacubitril/valsartan was well tolerated with fewer study drug discontinuations due to adverse events, although the sacubitril/valsartan group had a higher proportion of patients with hypotension.

CONCLUSIONS

In Japanese patients with HFrEF, there was no difference in reduction in the risk of CV death or HF hospitalization between sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril, and sacubitril/valsartan was safe and well tolerated.

Protection of kidney function and tissue integrity by pharmacologic use of natriuretic peptides and neprilysin inhibitors

With variable potencies atrial-, brain-type and c-type natriuretic peptides (NP)s, best documented for ANP and its analogues, promote sodium and water excretion, renal blood flow, lipolysis, lower blood pressure, and suppress renin and aldosterone secretion through interaction predominantly with cGMP-coupled NPR-A receptor. Infusion of especially ANP and its analogues up to 50 ng/kg/min in patients with high risk of acute kidney injury (cardiac vascular bypass surgery, intraabdominal surgery, direct kidney surgery) protects kidney function (GFR, plasma flow, medullary flow, albuminuria, renal replacement therapy, tissue injury) at short term and also long term and likely additively with the diuretic furosemide. This documents a pharmacologic potential for the pathway. Neprilysin (NEP, neutral endopeptidase) degrades NPs, in particular ANP, and angiotensin II. The drug LCZ696, a mixture of the neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril and the ANGII-AT1 receptor blocker valsartan, was FDA approved in 2015 and marketed as Entresto®. In preclinical studies of kidney injury, LCZ696 and NPs lowered plasma creatinine, countered hypoxia and oxidative stress, suppressed proinflammatory cytokines, and inhibited fibrosis. Few randomized clinical studies exist and were designed with primary cardiac outcomes. The studies showed that LCZ696/entresto stabilized and improved glomerular filtration rate in patients with chronic kidney disease. LCZ696 is safe to use concerning kidney function and stabilizes or increases GFR. In perspective, combined AT1 and neprilysin inhibition is a promising approach for long-term renal protection in addition to AT1 receptor blockers in acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease.

Local Action of Neprilysin Exacerbates Pressure Overload Induced Cardiac Remodeling

[Figure: see text].

Trend of perceived quality of life and functional capacity in outpatients with chronic heart failure and in treatment with sacubitril/valsartan: a real-life experience

BACKGROUND

Despite the use of optimal medical therapy, HFrEF remains a leading cause of morbidity, mortality and health care costs. The introduction of angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) had a revolutionary impact on the treatment of patients with heart failure and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS

The aim of the study was to monitor over time the perceived quality of life, the physical performance, the trend of BNP and NT-ProBNP and the NYHA functional class in patients with HFrEF during treatment with sacubitril/valsartan. We enrolled 37 patients (63 ± 10 years old, 76% men) who underwent a total of one year follow-up. All patients underwent clinical evaluation, 6MWT, blood analysis (in particular NT-pro-BNP and BNP, renal function test); Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and the NYHA functional class assessment were also performed, at the beginning of the study and after 3, 6 and 12 months of therapy.

RESULTS

We observed at each follow-up a significant improvement of KCCQ score, 6MWT, NTProBNP, BNP and of NYHA class. However, analyzing the Δ % of variation of each single parameter, the improvement was not uniform in time. We also observed that only 37% of patients tolerated the full recommended dose of sacubitril/valsartan (97/103 mg b.i.d.); of the remaining, 40% tolerated the intermediate dose (49/51 mg b.i.d.) and 23% the minimum (24/26 md b.i.d.).

CONCLUSIONS

Sacubitril/valsartan therapy improves significantly quality of life, physical effort resistance, BNP and NT-ProBNP and NYHA functional class in patients with HFrEF. Although not all the patients tolerated the maximum recommended dose, the beneficial effects were significant even at lower doses.

Rationale for and Practical Use of Sacubitril/Valsartan in the Patient's Journey with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction

Sacubitril with valsartan (sacubitril/valsartan) is a relatively novel compound that has become a milestone in the treatment of patients with chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in the last decade. Contemporary data suggest that sacubitril/valsartan is associated with improved outcomes compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers, and has a greater beneficial effect on myocardial reverse remodelling. Additionally, two recent trials have shown that sacubitril/valsartan is well-tolerated even in the acute HF setting, thus enabling a continuum of use in the patient's journey with HFrEF. This article summarises available data on the effectiveness and tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with HFrEF, and provides the clinician with practical insights to facilitate the use of this drug in every setting, with an emphasis on acute HF, hypotension, electrolyte imbalance and renal insufficiency.

Advancements in biomarkers for cardiovascular disease: diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy

Biomarkers are essential tools in the practice of cardiology. They assist with diagnosis, prognosis, and guiding therapy in many different cardiovascular diseases. Numerous biomarkers have become strongly associated with different cardiovascular conditions, such as troponin with acute coronary syndrome and natriuretic peptides with heart failure. Even though these biomarkers have been in practice for almost two decades, their uses continue to expand beyond their original roles. Additionally, many new biomarkers have been discovered with increasing utility in cardiovascular disease, including soluble suppression of tumorigenicity 2, galectin 3, and biomarkers of fibrosis, metabolism, and inflammation. How these old and new biomarkers are being expanded into clinical practice is constantly in evolution. This review will highlight some of the recent major advancements in the rapidly evolving field of biomarkers.

Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitors and the Natriuretic Peptide Axis

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to describe the effects of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) therapy on the natriuretic peptide axis (NPA), with a particular focus on B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), and C-type natriuretic peptide (CNP) to better understand the biology behind the improved outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

RECENT FINDINGS

BNP, ANP, and CNP are the three main natriuretic peptides (NP); they share a common structure and ultimately mediate their actions by activating cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP). ARNI therapy results in a decrease of N-terminal pro-BNP (NT-proBNP) and increase of BNP levels respectively. It is been questioned whether these changes may result from unique laboratory assays characteristics rather than actual biological implications. It appears to be that the prognostic accuracy of BNP for cardiovascular outcomes remains independent and comparable to that of NT-proBNP while on ARNI therapy. ANP levels also increase with ARNI therapy, but no consistent change has been described for CNP levels. There is evidence that the changes in BNP and NT-proBNP correlate with improvement in echocardiographic parameters of volume and function. The dual effect of neprilysin inhibition and angiotensin receptor blockade has substantial implications on the natriuretic peptide axis (NPA). The changes seen in BNP and NT-proBNP specifically have shown to correlate with improvement in echocardiographic parameters. Further results exploring the biologic effects of ARNI therapy on other NPs are still pending and likely will provide further insights in the mechanisms behind the improvement in cardiac function and clinical outcomes.

Combination pharmacotherapies for cardiac reverse remodeling in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Pharmacotherapies, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor II blockers (ARBs), β-blockers (BBs), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) and angiotensin receptor blocker-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), have played a pivotal role in reducing in-hospital and mortality in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, effects of the five drug categories used alone or in combination for cardiac reverse remodeling (CRR) in these patients have not been systematically evaluated. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted based on 55 randomized controlled trials published between 1989 and 2019 involving 12,727 patients from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov. The study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020170457). Our primary outcomes were CRR indicators, including changes of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) and end-systolic volume (LVESV), indexed LVEDV (LVEDVI) and LVESV (LVESVI), and left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD) and end-systolic dimension (LVESD); Secondary outcomes were functional capacity comprising New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and 6-min walking distance (6MWD); cardiac biomarkers involving B type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro-BNP (NT-proBNP). The effect sizes were presented as the mean difference with 95% credible intervals. According to the results, all dual-combination therapies except ACEI+ARB were significantly more associated with LVEF or NYHA improvement than placebo, ARB+BB and ARNI+BB were the top two effective dual-combinations in LVEF improvement (+7.59% [+4.27, +11.25] and +7.31% [+3.93, +10.97] respectively); ACEI+BB was shown to be superior to ACEI in reducing LVEDVI and LVESVI (-6.88 mL/m² [-13.18, -1.89] and -10.64 mL/m² [-18.73, -3.54] respectively); ARNI+BB showed superiority over ACEI+BB in decreasing the level of NT-proBNP (-240.11 pg/mL [-456.57, -6.73]). All tri-combinations were significantly more effective than placebo in LVEF improvement, and ARNI+BB+MRA ranked first (+21.13% [+14.34, +28.13]); ACEI+BB+MRA was significantly more associated with a decrease in LVEDD than ACEI (-6.57 mm [-13.10, -0.84]). A sensitivity analysis ignoring concomitant therapies for LVEF illustrated that all the five drug types except ARB were shown to be superior to placebo, and ARNI ranked first (+4.83% [+1.75, +7.99]). In conclusion, combination therapies exert more benefits on CRR for patients with HFrEF. Among them, ARNI+BB, ARB+BB, ARNI+BB+MRA and ARB+BB+MRA were the top two effective dual and triple combinations in LVEF improvement, respectively; The new "Golden Triangle" of ARNI+BB+MRA was shown to be superior to ACEI+BB+MRA or ARB+BB+MRA in LVEF improvement.

Narrative review in the current role of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors

Heart failure (HF) accounts for a tremendous burden on health care systems and the society. Since the landmark PARADIGM-HF trial, sacubitril/valsartan, the first in the class of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) showed superiority to enalapril in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We performed a narrative literature review, hand-searched the reference lists of included articles and relevant reviews. Inhibition of neprilysin increases bradykinin, natriuretic peptides and adrenomedullin levels counteract the neurohormal activation that leads to sodium retention, vasoconstriction, and cardiac remodeling. In PARADIGM-HF the primary outcome of CV death or HF hospitalization was reduced 20% in the ARNI group (HR 0.80, P<0.001) similar to mortality due to cardiovascular cause (HR 0.80, P<0.001) in patients with HFrEF, rendering a number needed to treat of 21 patients. This effect was consistent across subgroups. The safety of starting ARNI inpatient once the acute decompensation of HF is stabilized was demonstrated in PIONEER-HF trial. With willingness-to-pay thresholds commonly acceptable in the United States, sacubitril/valsartan is likely to be cost effective, which might not be in other health systems. Although its safety has been reassured in some clinical trials, common side effects are hypotension, worsening kidney function, hyperkalemia and angioedema. In HFpEF (PARAGON-HF), sacubitril/valsartan showed decrease in the level of the cardiac biomarkers, with improve functional NYHA and decrease in hospitalizations, predominately in women and patients with borderline ejection fraction. Some ongoing studies aim to demonstrate the effects of ARNI in acute coronary syndrome, stable ischemic heart disease, advanced HF, mitral regurgitation, aortic impedance and pulmonary hypertension. In conclusion, sacubitril/valsartan has proven to be an effective addition to the HFrEF arsenal, with safety comparable to current standard of care. In HFpEF, it improves quality of life, particularly in women and in patients with borderline ejection fraction, with no effect on mortality.

Improvement in quality of life with sacubitril/ /valsartan in cardiac resynchronization non-responders: The RESINA (RESynchronization plus an Inhibitor of Neprilysin/Angiotensin) registry

BACKGROUND

Clinical management of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) non-responders is difficult, and their prognosis is poor. The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether treatment with sacubitril/valsartan can improve quality of life (QoL) parameters in these patients.

METHODS

Thirty five non-responders to CRT were included (75 ± 7 years, 28% females, mean left ventricular ejection fraction 28 ± 8%, 54% non-ischemic cardiomyopathy) with maximally optimized drug therapy and New York Heart Association class II-III. They were all on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers and were switched to sacubitril/valsartan. One week before and 6 months after initiation of the therapy they completed both the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLWHF) and the 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaires (KCCQ-12). The primary outcome was the effect of sacubitril/valsartan on the physical, clinical, social and emotional QoL parameters and number of hospitalizations.

RESULTS

The mean total scores of both questionnaires improved from baseline to the follow-up visit at 6-months (KCCQ-12 40 ± 10 to 47 ± 10; p < 0.001; MLWHF 40 ± 15 to 29 ± 15; p < 0.001). The best results were seen in the KCCQ-12 total symptom domains (77% improvement), the MLWHF physical domain (81% improvement), and the MLWHF emotional domain (71% improvement). Two patients died during follow-up. The mean number of hospitalizations reduced significantly (1 ± 0.6 vs. 0.5 ± 0.8; p = 0.003) CONCLUSIONS: In CRT non-responders, sacubitril/valsartan significantly improved overall QoL, physical limitations and emotional domains and reduced the number of hospitalizations.

Influence of neprilysin inhibition on the efficacy and safety of empagliflozin in patients with chronic heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction: the EMPEROR-Reduced trial

AIMS

We evaluated the influence of sacubitril/valsartan on the effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibition with empagliflozin in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The EMPEROR-Reduced trial randomized 3730 patients with heart failure and an ejection fraction ≤40% to placebo or empagliflozin (10 mg/day), in addition to recommended treatment for heart failure, for a median of 16 months. A total of 727 patients (19.5%) received sacubitril/valsartan at baseline. Analysis of the effect of neprilysin inhibition was 1 of 12 pre-specified subgroups. Patients receiving a neprilysin inhibitor were particularly well-treated, as evidenced by lower systolic pressures, heart rates, N-terminal prohormone B-type natriuretic peptide, and greater use of cardiac devices (all P < 0.001) when compared with those not receiving sacubitril/valsartan. Nevertheless, when compared with placebo, empagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure in patients receiving or not receiving sacubitril/valsartan [hazard ratio 0.64 (95% CI 0.45-0.89), P = 0.009 and hazard ratio 0.77 (95% CI 0.66-0.90), P = 0.0008, respectively, interaction P = 0.31]. Empagliflozin slowed the rate of decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate by 1.92 ± 0.80 mL/min/1.73 m2/year in patients taking a neprilysin inhibitor (P = 0.016) and by 1.71 ± 0.35 mL/min/1.73 m2/year in patients not taking a neprilysin inhibitor (P < 0.0001), interaction P = 0.81. Combined inhibition of SGLT2 and neprilysin was well-tolerated.

CONCLUSION

The effects on empagliflozin to reduce the risk of heart failure and renal events are not diminished in intensively treated patients who are receiving sacubitril/valsartan. Combined treatment with both SGLT2 and neprilysin inhibitors can be expected to yield substantial additional benefits.

Rationale and methods of a randomized trial evaluating the effect of neprilysin inhibition on left ventricular remodelling

AIMS

In patients at high risk of heart failure following myocardial infarction (MI) as a result of residual left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD), the angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan may result in a greater attenuation of adverse left ventricular (LV) remodelling than renin angiotensin aldosterone system inhibition alone, due to increased levels of substrates for neprilysin with vasodilatory, anti-hypertrophic, anti-fibrotic, and sympatholytic effects.

METHODS

We designed a randomized, double-blinded, active-comparator trial to examine the effect of sacubitril/valsartan to the current standard of care in reducing adverse LV remodelling in patients with asymptomatic LVSD following MI. Eligible patients were ≥3 months following MI, had an LV ejection fraction ≤40% as measured by echocardiography, were New York Heart Association functional classification I, tolerant of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker at equivalent dose of ramipril 2.5 mg twice daily or greater, and taking a beta-blocker unless contraindicated or intolerant. Patients were randomized to sacubitril/valsartan (target dose 97/103 mg twice daily) or valsartan (target dose 160 mg twice daily). The primary endpoint will be change in LV end-systolic volume indexed for body surface area measured using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging over 52 weeks from randomization. Secondary endpoints include other magnetic resonance imaging-based metrics of LV remodelling, biomarkers associated with LV remodelling and neurohumoral activation, and change in patient well-being assessed using a patient global assessment questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial will investigate the effect of neprilysin inhibition on LV remodelling and the neurohumoral actions of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with asymptomatic LVSD following MI.

Safety and tolerability of sacubitril-valsartan: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction: Sacubitril-valsartan is a recently approved drug. However, there are few data regarding safety issues. We aimed to summarize the available evidence regarding sacubitril-valsartan's safety and tolerability.Methods: We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) enrolling patients receiving sacubitril-valsartan for any condition, compared with standard therapy or placebo. Database search was performed in October 2019. Outcomes were adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), discontinuation due to AEs, and five AEs of special interest. Data were reported using risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI).Results: We included 20 RCTs (22510 participants). When compared with active controls, there were no differences in SAEs (RR=0.93, 95%CI 0.86-1.01) and AEs (RR=1.00, 95%CI 0.97-1.03). However, sacubitril-valsartan resulted in an 8% risk reduction in discontinuation due to AEs (95%CI 0.85-0.99) and an increased risk of hypotension (RR=1.45, 95%CI 1.27-1.67). The risk of angioedema was higher with follow-ups greater than 12 months (RR=2.36, 95%CI 1.29-4.33). There were no further significant differences in the remaining AEs' risk.Conclusions: Sacubitril-valsartan was at least as safe and tolerable as active control, with a similar need of administration cautiousness, except for a higher risk of hypotension. However, one should consider the study's limitations.

Effect of Empagliflozin on the Clinical Stability of Patients With Heart Failure and a Reduced Ejection Fraction: The EMPEROR-Reduced Trial

BACKGROUND

Empagliflozin reduces the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, with or without diabetes, but additional data are needed about the effect of the drug on inpatient and outpatient events that reflect worsening heart failure.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 3730 patients with class II to IV heart failure with an ejection fraction of ≤40% to double-blind treatment with placebo or empagliflozin (10 mg once daily), in addition to recommended treatments for heart failure, for a median of 16 months. We prospectively collected information on inpatient and outpatient events reflecting worsening heart failure and prespecified their analysis in individual and composite end points.

RESULTS

Empagliflozin reduced the combined risk of death, hospitalization for heart failure or an emergent/urgent heart failure visit requiring intravenous treatment (415 versus 519 patients; empagliflozin versus placebo, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.67-0.87; P<0.0001). This benefit reached statistical significance at 12 days after randomization. Empagliflozin reduced the total number of heart failure hospitalizations that required intensive care (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50-0.90; P=0.008) and that required a vasopressor or positive inotropic drug or mechanical or surgical intervention (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47-0.87; P=0.005). As compared with placebo, fewer patients in the empagliflozin group reported intensification of diuretics (297 versus 414 [HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.56-0.78; P<0.0001]). Additionally, patients assigned to empagliflozin were 20% to 40% more likely to experience an improvement in New York Heart Association functional class and were 20% to 40% less likely to experience worsening of New York Heart Association functional class, with statistically significant effects that were apparent 28 days after randomization and maintained during long-term follow-up. The risk of any inpatient or outpatient worsening heart failure event in the placebo group was high (48.1 per 100 patient-years of follow-up), and it was reduced by empagliflozin (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.63-0.78; P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, empagliflozin reduced the risk and total number of inpatient and outpatient worsening heart failure events, with benefits seen early after initiation of treatment and sustained for the duration of double-blind therapy. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03057977.

Initiation of Angiotensin-Neprilysin Inhibition After Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: Secondary Analysis of the Open-label Extension of the PIONEER-HF Trial

Importance

In PIONEER-HF, among stabilized patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF), the in-hospital initiation of sacubitril/valsartan was well tolerated and led to improved outcomes compared with enalapril. However, there are limited data comparing the strategies of in-hospital vs postdischarge initiation of sacubitril/valsartan.

Objective

To describe changes in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels in patients recently hospitalized for ADHF and switching from taking enalapril to taking sacubitril/valsartan after discharge and compare clinical outcomes for patients randomized to receive in-hospital initiation of sacubitril/valsartan vs in-hospital initiation of enalapril who later switched to taking sacubitril/valsartan during an open-label extension phase.

Interventions

Sacubitril/valsartan titrated to 97/103 mg twice daily.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The PIONEER-HF trial was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial conducted at 129 US sites between May 2016 and May 2018 that compared the in-hospital initiation of sacubitril/valsartan vs enalapril (titrated to target dose, 10 mg twice daily) for 8 weeks among patients admitted for ADHF with reduced ejection fraction and hemodynamic stability. All patients were to continue in a 4-week, open-label study of sacubitril/valsartan; of 881 patients enrolled in PIONEER-HF, 832 (94%) continued in the open-label study.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Changes in NT-proBNP levels from week 8 to 12 as well as the exploratory composite of heart failure rehospitalization or cardiovascular death from randomization through week 12.

Results

Of 881 participants, 226 (27.7%) were women, 487 (58.5%) were white, 297 (35.7%) were black, 15 (1.8%) were Asian, and 73 (8.8%) were of Hispanic ethnicity; the mean (SD) age was 61 (14) years. For patients who continued to take sacubitril/valsartan, NT-proBNP levels declined -17.2% (95% CI, -3.2 to -29.1) from week 8 to 12. The NT-proBNP levels declined to a greater extent for those switching from taking enalapril to sacubitril/valsartan after the week 8 visit (-37.4%; 95% CI, -28.1 to -45.6; P < .001; comparing changes in 2 groups). Over the entire 12 weeks of follow-up, patients that began taking sacubitril/valsartan in the hospital had a lower hazard for the composite outcome compared with patients that initiated enalapril in the hospital and then had a delayed initiation of sacubitril/valsartan 8 weeks later (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI 0.49-0.97).

Conclusions and Relevance

Switching patients' treatment from enalapril to sacubitril/valsartan at 8 weeks after randomization led to a further 37% reduction in NT-proBNP levels in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and a recent hospitalization for ADHF.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02554890.

Recent and Upcoming Drug Therapies for Pediatric Heart Failure

Pediatric heart failure (HF) is an important clinical condition with high morbidity, mortality, and costs. Due to the heterogeneity in clinical presentation and etiologies, the development of therapeutic strategies is more challenging in children than adults. Most guidelines recommending drug therapy for pediatric HF are extrapolated from studies in adults. Unfortunately, even using all available treatment, progression to cardiac transplantation is common. The development of prospective clinical trials in the pediatric population has significant obstacles, including small sample sizes, slow recruitment rates, challenging endpoints, and high costs. However, progress is being made as evidenced by the recent introduction of ivabradine and of sacubitril/valsartan. In the last 5 years, new drugs have also been developed for HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in adults. The use of well-designed prospective clinical trials will be fundamental in the evaluation of safety and efficacy of these new drugs on the pediatric population. The aim of this article is to review the clinical presentation and management of acute and chronic pediatric heart failure, focusing on systolic dysfunction in patients with biventricular circulation and a systemic left ventricle. We discuss the drugs recently approved for children and those emerging, or in use for adults with HFrEF.

Perspectives of bilateral thoracic sympathectomy for treatment of heart failure

Surgical neuromodulation therapies are still considered a last resort when standard therapies have failed for patients with progressive heart failure (HF). Although a number of experimental studies have provided robust evidence of its effectiveness, the lack of strong clinical evidence discourages practitioners. Thoracic unilateral sympathectomy has been extensively studied and has failed to show significant clinical improvement in HF patients. Most recently, bilateral sympathectomy effect was associated with a high degree of success in HF models, opening the perspective to be investigated in randomized controlled clinical trials. In addition, a series of clinical trials showed that bilateral sympathectomy was associated with a decreased risk of sudden death, which is an important outcome in patients with HF. These aspects indicates that bilateral sympathectomy could be an important alternative in the treatment of HF wherein pharmacological treatment barely reaches the target dose.

Biomarkers in Acute Heart Failure: Diagnosis, Prognosis, and Treatment

Heart failure is a global health problem. An episode of acute heart failure (AHF) is a period of substantial morbidity and mortality with few advances in the management of an episode that have improved outcomes. The measurement of multiple biomarkers has become an integral adjunctive tool for the management of AHF. Many biomarkers are now well established in their ability to assist with diagnosis and prognostication of an AHF patient. There are also emerging biomarkers that are showing significant promise in the areas of diagnosis and prognosis. For improving the management of AHF, both established and novel biomarkers may assist in guiding medical therapy and subsequently improving outcomes. Thus, it is important to understand the different abilities and limitations of established and emerging biomarkers in AHF so that they may be correctly interpreted and integrated into clinical practice for AHF. This knowledge may improve the care of AHF patients. This review will summarize the evidence of both established and novel biomarkers for diagnosis, prognosis and management in AHF so that the treating clinician may become more comfortable incorporating these biomarkers into clinical practice in an evidence-based manner.

Sacubitril-valsartan improves conduit vessel function and functional capacity and reduces inflammation in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

The Prospective comparison of ARNI with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure trial identified a marked reduction in the risk of death and hospitalization for heart failure in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) treated with sacubitril-valsartan (trade name Entresto), but the physiological processes underpinning these improvements are unclear. We tested the hypothesis that treatment with sacubitril-valsartan improves peripheral vascular function, functional capacity, and inflammation in patients with HFrEF. We prospectively studied patients with HFrEF (n = 11, 10 M/1 F, left ventricular ejection fraction = 27 ± 8%) on optimal, guideline-directed medical treatment who were subsequently prescribed sacubitril-valsartan (open-label, uncontrolled, and unblinded). Peripheral vascular function [brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD, conduit vessel function) and reactive hyperemia (RH, microvascular function)], functional capacity [six-minute walk test (6MWT) distance], and the proinflammatory biomarkers tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and interleukin-18 (IL-18) were obtained at baseline and at 1, 2, and 3 mo of treatment. %FMD improved after 1 mo of treatment, and this favorable response persisted for months 2 and 3 (baseline: 3.25 ± 1.75%; 1 mo: 5.23 ± 2.36%; 2 mo: 5.81 ± 1.79%; 3 mo: 6.35 ± 2.77%), whereas RH remained unchanged. 6MWT distance increased at months 2 and 3 (baseline: 420 ± 92 m; 1 mo: 436 ± 98 m; 2 mo: 465 ± 115 m; 3 mo: 460 ± 110 m), and there was a sustained reduction in TNF-α (baseline: 2.38 ± 1.35 pg/mL; 1 mo: 2.06 ± 1.52 pg/mL; 2 mo: 1.95 ± 1.34 pg/mL; 3 mo: 1.92 ± 1.37 pg/mL) and a reduction in IL-18 at month 3 (baseline: 654 ± 150 pg/mL; 1 mo: 595 ± 140 pg/mL; 2 mo: 601 ± 176 pg/mL; 3 mo: 571 ± 127 pg/mL). This study provides new evidence for the potential of this new drug class to improve conduit vessel function, functional capacity, and inflammation in patients with HFrEF.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We observed an approximately twofold improvement in conduit vessel function (brachial artery FMD), increased functional capacity (6MWT distance), and a reduction in inflammation (TNF-α and IL-18) following 3 mo of sacubitril-valsartan therapy. These findings provide important new information concerning the physiological mechanisms by which this new drug class provokes favorable changes in HFrEF pathophysiology.

Expect the Unexpected in the Medical Treatment of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: between Scientific Evidence and Clinical Wisdom

Over the past three decades, pharmacological treatment of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has witnessed a significant progress with the introduction of multiple disease-modifying therapies with a proven benefit on morbidity, mortality and quality of life. Recently, several novel medications (sacubitril/valsartan, sodium-glucose contransporter-2 [SGLT2] inhibitors, vericiguat and omecamtiv mecarbil) have shown to provide further improvement in outcomes in patients already receiving standard therapy for HFrEF. Available evidence suggests that sacubitril/valsartan and SGLT2 inhibitors (dapagliflozin and empagliflozin) are beneficial and well-tolerated in the majority inpatients and could be the mainstay treatment of HFrEF. Another group of medications (vericiguat and omecamtiv mecarbil) has shown promising results in reducing the risk of the composite of HF hospitalisation or cardiovascular mortality in patients with the more severe or advanced HF requiring recent hospitalisation. Therefore, these medications may be considered for the treatment of select group of patients with HFrEF with persisting or worsening symptoms despite optimal treatment. In addition, advances in pharmacological management of comorbidities frequently seen in HFrEF patients (diabetes, iron deficiency/anaemia, hyperkalaemia) provide further opportunities to improve outcomes. Given the increasing complexity of evidence-based therapies for HFrEF, there is a growing need to provide a practical perspective to their use. The purpose of this review is to summarise scientific evidence on the efficacy and safety of new and emerging medical therapies in HFrEF, with a focus on the clinical perspective of their use.

OUTSTEP-HF: randomised controlled trial comparing short-term effects of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril on daily physical activity in patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

OUTSTEP-HF compared the effect of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril on 6-min walk test (6MWT) distance, non-sedentary daytime physical activity and heart failure (HF) symptoms in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Ambulatory patients (n = 621) with stable symptomatic HFrEF were randomised 1:1 to sacubitril/valsartan (n = 310) or enalapril (n = 311). Changes in physical activity and mean daily non-sedentary daytime activity from baseline to Week 12 were measured using 6MWT and a wrist-worn accelerometer device, respectively. After 12 weeks, 6MWT improved by 35.09 m with sacubitril/valsartan [97.5% confidence interval (CI) 27.85, 42.32] and by 26.11 m with enalapril (97.5% CI 18.78, 33.43); however, there was no significant difference between groups [least squares means treatment difference: 8.98 m (97.5% CI -1.31, 19.27); P = 0.0503]. Mean daily non-sedentary daytime activity decreased by 27 min with sacubitril/valsartan and by 21 min with enalapril [least squares means treatment difference: -6 min (97.5% CI -25.7, 13.4), P = 0.4769] after 12 weeks. 6MWT improved by ≥30 m in 51% of patients in the sacubitril/valsartan group vs. 44% of patients treated with enalapril (odds ratio 1.251, 95% CI 0.895, 1.748). At Week 4, non-sedentary daytime activity increased by ≥10% in 58% of patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan vs. 64% with enalapril; 58% of patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan reported improved HF symptoms as assessed by patient global assessment vs. 43% with enalapril. However, these differences did not persist at Week 12.

CONCLUSION

After 12 weeks of treatment, there was no significant benefit of sacubitril/valsartan on either 6MWT or daytime physical activity measured by actigraphy compared with enalapril.

Sinergy between drugs and devices in the fight against sudden cardiac death and heart failure

The impact of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in heart failure (HF) patients is important and prevention of SCD is a reasonable and clinically justified endpoint if associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality. According to literature, in HF with reduced ejection fraction, only three classes of agents were found effective in reducing SCD and all-cause mortality: beta-blockers, mineralcorticoid receptor antagonists and, more recently, angiotensin-receptor neprilysin-inhibitors. In the PARADIGM trial that tested sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril, the 20% relative risk reduction in cardiovascular deaths obtained with sacubitril/valsartan was attributable to reductions in the incidence of both SCD and death due to HF worsening and this effect can be added to the known positive effect of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in appropriately selected patients. In order to maximize the implementation of all the available treatments, patients with HF should be included in virtuous networks with a dialogue between all the physician involved, with commitment by all these physicians for appropriate decision-making on application of pharmacological and device treatments according to available evidence, as well as commitment for drug titration before and after device implant, taking advantage from remote monitoring, and with the safety of back up device therapy when indicated. There are potential synergistic effects of drug therapy, with all the therapies acting on neuro-hormonal and sympathetic activation, but specifically with sacubitril/valsartan, and device therapy, in particular cardiac resynchronization therapy, with added incremental benefits on positive cardiac remodelling, prevention of HF progression, and prevention of ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

Prognostic value of brain natriuretic peptide vs history of heart failure hospitalization in a large real-world population

BACKGROUND

In heart failure (HF) patients, both natriuretic peptides (NP) and previous HF hospitalization (pHFH) have been used to predict prognosis.

HYPOTHESIS

In a large real-world population, both NP levels and pHFH have independent and interdependent predictive value for clinical outcomes of HFH and all-cause mortality.

METHODS

Linked electronic health records and insurance claims data from Decision Resource Group were used to identify HF patients that had a BNP or NT-proBNP result between January 2012 and December 2016. NT-proBNP was converted into BNP equivalents by dividing by 4. Index event was defined as most recent NP on or after 1 January 2012. Patients with incomplete records or age < 18 years were excluded. During one-year follow up, HFH and mortality rates stratified by index BNP levels and pHFH are reported.

RESULTS

Of 64 355 patients (74 ± 12 years old, 49% female) with available values, median BNP was 259 [IQR 101-642] pg/ml. The risk of both HFH and mortality was higher with increasing BNP levels. At each level of BNP, mortality was only slightly higher in patients with pHFH vs those without pHFH (RR 1.2 [95%CI 1.2,1.3], P < .001); however, at each BNP, HFH was markedly increased in patients with pHFH vs those without pHFH (RR 2.0 [95%CI 1.9,2.1], P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In this large real-world heart failure population, higher BNP levels were associated with increased risk for both HFH and mortality. At any given level of BNP, pHFH added greater prognostic value for prediction of future HFH than for mortality.

Sacubitril/Valsartan Inhibits Cardiomyocyte Hypertrophy in Angiotensin II-Induced Hypertensive Mice Independent of a Blood Pressure-Lowering Effect

Background

Hypertensive left ventricular hypertrophy is associated with the risk of heart failure, coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease. Although sacubitril/valsartan (SAC/VAL), a first-in-class angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor, reduces the risks of death and hospitalization for patients with heart failure, its mechanism of action is not fully understood. We hypothesized that SAC/VAL is superior to other conventional drugs in reducing cardiac hypertrophy.

Methods

Male C57BL/6J mice were implanted with an osmotic pump containing angiotensin II (Ang II). After 7 days of Ang II infusion, mice were also treated with either SAC/VAL, valsartan, enalapril or vehicle alone each day for 2 weeks. Blood pressure measurement was done weekly, and echocardiography was performed before and 3 weeks after infusion of Ang II. Histological analyses were done using extracted heart to investigate cardiac hypertrophy and fibrosis.

Results

Ang II markedly elevated blood pressures in all of the treatment groups, and there were no differences in the degree of blood pressure reduction among the SAC/VAL-, valsartan- and enalapril-treated groups. Echocardiography showed that SAC/VAL significantly suppressed the increase in left ventricular (LV) wall thickness and tended to decrease LV mass. In a histological analysis, SAC/VAL inhibited Ang II-induced cardiomyocyte hypertrophy, and individual cardiomyocytes in the SAC/VAL group were smaller than those in the valsartan and enalapril groups. Although previous studies using animal models of heart failure have indicated that SAC/VAL attenuates cardiac fibrosis, we found no supporting evidence in this setting.

Conclusions

SAC/VAL, valsartan and enalapril all attenuated cardiomyocyte hypertrophy in a mouse model of Ang II-induced cardiac hypertrophy. Of note, SAC/VAL most strongly suppressed hypertrophy in spite of similar blood pressure-lowering effects as valsartan and enalapril. The present study suggests that SAC/VAL may have a beneficial effect on the early stage of hypertensive heart disease.

Cardiovascular biomarkers in patients with acute decompensated heart failure randomized to sacubitril-valsartan or enalapril in the PIONEER-HF trial

AIMS

Circulating high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hsTn) and soluble ST2 (sST2) reflect myocardial stress in patients with heart failure (HF). Production of cyclic guanosine 3'5' monophosphate (cGMP) in response to activation of natriuretic peptide receptors reduces cardiac afterload and preload. We assessed the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on these biomarkers in patients with reduced ejection fraction and acute decompensated HF (ADHF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

PIONEER-HF was a randomized, double-blind trial of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril in hospitalized patients with ADHF following haemodynamic stabilization. We measured circulating hsTnT, sST2, and urinary cGMP at baseline, 1, 2 (sST2, cGMP), 4, and 8 weeks (n = 694 with all baseline biomarkers). Ratios of geometric means (timepoint/baseline) were determined and compared as a ratio for sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril. Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan led to a significantly greater decline in hsTnT and sST2. This effect emerged as early as 1 week for sST2 and was significant for both at 4 weeks with a 16% greater reduction in hsTnT (P < 0.001) and 9% greater reduction in sST2 (P = 0.0033). Serial urinary cGMP increased with sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril (P < 0.001, 1 week). The significant differences between treatment groups for each biomarker were sustained at 8 weeks. In an exploratory multivariable-adjusted analysis of cardiovascular death or HF-rehospitalization, the concentrations of hsTnT, sST2 at week 1 were significantly associated with subsequent outcome.

CONCLUSION

Biomarkers of myocardial stress are elevated in patients with ADHF and associated with outcome. Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan reduces myocardial injury and haemodynamic stress as reflected by biomarkers, with an onset that is apparent within 1-4 weeks.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT02554890 clinical.trials.gov.

Multiplicity of Nitric Oxide and Natriuretic Peptide Signaling in Heart Failure

Heart failure (HF) is a common consequence of several cardiovascular diseases and is understood as a vicious cycle of cardiac and hemodynamic decline. The current inventory of treatments either alleviates the pathophysiological features (eg, cardiac dysfunction, neurohumoral activation, and ventricular remodeling) and/or targets any underlying pathologies (eg, hypertension and myocardial infarction). Yet, since these do not provide a cure, the morbidity and mortality associated with HF remains high. Therefore, the disease constitutes an unmet medical need, and novel therapies are desperately needed. Cyclic guanosine-3',5'-monophosphate (cGMP), synthesized by nitric oxide (NO)- and natriuretic peptide (NP)-responsive guanylyl cyclase (GC) enzymes, exerts numerous protective effects on cardiac contractility, hypertrophy, fibrosis, and apoptosis. Impaired cGMP signaling, which can occur after GC deactivation and the upregulation of cyclic nucleotide-hydrolyzing phosphodiesterases (PDEs), promotes cardiac dysfunction. In this study, we review the role that NO/cGMP and NP/cGMP signaling plays in HF. After considering disease etiology, the physiological effects of cGMP in the heart are discussed. We then assess the evidence from preclinical models and patients that compromised cGMP signaling contributes to the HF phenotype. Finally, the potential of pharmacologically harnessing cardioprotective cGMP to rectify the present paucity of effective HF treatments is examined.

Effects of Angiotensin-Neprilysin Inhibition in Canines with Experimentally Induced Cardiorenal Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val), a combined angiotensin-II receptor blocker (Val) and neprilysin inhibitor (Sac) in a 1:1 molar ratio, was shown to decrease the risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients with HF and reduced left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction. This study examined the effects of Sac/Val on LV structure, function, and bioenergetics, and on biomarkers of kidney injury and kidney function in dogs with experimental cardiorenal syndrome.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Fourteen dogs with cardiorenal syndrome (coronary microembolization-induced HF and renal dysfunction) were randomized to 3 months Sac/Val therapy (100 mg once daily, n = 7) or no therapy (control, n = 7). LV ejection fraction and troponin-I, as well as biomarkers of kidney injury/function including serum creatinine and urinary kidney injury molecule-1 were measured before and at end of therapy and the change (treatment effect change) calculated. Mitochondrial function measures, including the maximum rate of adenosine triphosphate synthesis, were measured in isolated cardiomyocytes at end of therapy. In Sac/Val dogs, the change in ejection fraction increased compared with controls, 6.9 ± 1.4 vs 0.7 ± 0.6%, P < .002, whereas change in troponin I decreased, -0.16 ± 0.03 vs -0.03 ± 0.02 ng/mL, P < .001. Urinary change in kidney injury molecule 1 decreased in Sac/Val-treated dogs compared with controls, -17.2 ± 7.9 vs 7.7 ± 3.0 mg/mL, P < .007, whereas the change in serum creatinine was not significantly different. Treatment with Sac/Val increased adenosine triphosphate synthesis compared with controls, 3240 ± 121 vs 986 ± 84 RLU/µg protein, P < .05.

CONCLUSIONS

In dogs with cardiorenal syndrome, Sac/Val improves LV systolic function, improves mitochondrial function and decreases biomarkers of heart and kidney injury. The results offer mechanistic insights into the benefits of Sac/Val in HF with compromised renal function.

Safety and Tolerability of Sacubitril/Valsartan Initiation in Inpatient Versus Outpatient Setting: A Retrospective Real World Study

BACKGROUND

The Comparison of Pre- and Post-discharge Initiation of LCZ696 Therapy in HFrEF Patients After an Acute Decompensation Event (TRANSITION) and PIONEER-HF trials^a have shown that sacubitril/valsartan can be initiated early and safely in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) shortly after an acute heart failure episode during hospitalisation. However, it is unclear whether the results can be translated to Asian populations. Hence, this real-world study was designed with the aim of comparing the safety and tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan initiation in an inpatient versus outpatient setting.

METHODS

A retrospective review for all patients initiated with sacubitril/valsartan from 1 November 2015 to 30 September 2018 was conducted in a tertiary health care institution in Singapore. Patients with HFrEF and aged ≥21 years were included. Incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and discontinuation rate of sacubitril/valsartan were compared between initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in inpatient and outpatient settings. Reasons for discontinuation were investigated. Subgroup analysis was performed. Cox regression was used to analyse the primary outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 1,022 patients who were screened, 840 (289 inpatient group; 551 outpatient group) were included. The inpatient group experienced significantly higher ADRs (34.6% vs 22.7%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 2.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.68-3.10; p<0.01) and discontinuation rate (18.0% vs 10.3%; adjusted HR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.37-3.26; p<0.01) than the outpatient group. The safety outcomes were consistent across all the subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in an inpatient group was associated with higher ADRs and discontinuation rate as compared with an outpatient group in an Asian population. However, given that the majority of patients in the inpatient cohort could tolerate sacubitril/valsartan, it would still be feasible to initiate this drug with close monitoring. Further randomised clinical trials in Asian populations are required to confirm this finding.

Sacubitril/Valsartan: Neprilysin Inhibition 5 Years After PARADIGM-HF

Sacubitril/valsartan, an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), has been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization and improve symptoms among patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction compared to enalapril, the gold standard angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor. In the 5 years since the publication of the results of PARADIGM-HF, further insight has been gained into integrating a neprilysin inhibitor into a comprehensive multidrug regimen, including a renin-angiotensin aldosterone system (RAS) blocker. This paper reviews the current understanding of the effects of sacubitril/valsartan and highlights expected developments over the next 5 years, including potential new indications for use. Additionally, a practical, evidence-based approach is provided to the clinical integration of sacubitril/valsartan among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

BNP and NT-proBNP Interpretation in the Neprilysin Inhibitor Era

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Describe the mechanisms that may influence change in measured natriuretic peptide levels when using the neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril to treat a patient with heart failure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Prior to the introduction of the neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril as part of a chemical combination with the angiotensin receptor blocker valsartan shown to reduce mortality and heart failure hospitalizations in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, the natriuretic peptide assays for B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and the amino-terminal proBNP (NT-proBNP) assays were shown to have similar diagnostic accuracy to differentiate heart failure from other etiologies of shortness of breath. Sacubitril/valsartan use has been shown to result in a modest and chronic elevation of BNP while reducing levels of NT-prBNP. This review explores the potential impact of these findings on interpreting natriuretic peptide results for diagnosis and prognosis, as well as explore the challenges associated with the heterogeneity of this finding, highlighting the impact of inhibiting neprilysin, a non-specific endopeptidase with multiple target sites within BNP and other proteins. With increased uptake of sacubitril/valsartan expected in patients with heart failure, interpretation of natriuretic peptide assays becomes somewhat more complex, particularly for BNP. However, knowing a baseline steady-state concentration and using the same assay can assist with BNP interpretation for diagnosis and prognosis.

LCZ696 Ameliorates Oxidative Stress and Pressure Overload-Induced Pathological Cardiac Remodeling by Regulating the Sirt3/MnSOD Pathway

Aims

We aimed to investigate whether LCZ696 protects against pathological cardiac hypertrophy by regulating the Sirt3/MnSOD pathway.

Methods

In vivo, we established a transverse aortic constriction animal model to establish pressure overload-induced heart failure. Subsequently, the mice were given LCZ696 by oral gavage for 4 weeks. After that, the mice underwent transthoracic echocardiography before they were sacrificed. In vitro, we introduced phenylephrine to prime neonatal rat cardiomyocytes and small-interfering RNA to knock down Sirt3 expression.

Results

Pathological hypertrophic stimuli caused cardiac hypertrophy and fibrosis and reduced the expression levels of Sirt3 and MnSOD. LCZ696 alleviated the accumulation of oxidative reactive oxygen species (ROS) and cardiomyocyte apoptosis. Furthermore, Sirt3 deficiency abolished the protective effect of LCZ696 on cardiomyocyte hypertrophy, indicating that LCZ696 induced the upregulation of MnSOD and phosphorylation of AMPK through a Sirt3-dependent pathway.

Conclusions

LCZ696 may mitigate myocardium oxidative stress and apoptosis in pressure overload-induced heart failure by regulating the Sirt3/MnSOD pathway.

NT-proBNP Response to Sacubitril/Valsartan in Hospitalized Heart Failure Patients With Reduced Ejection Fraction: TRANSITION Study

OBJECTIVES

This study examined the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels and determined patient characteristics associated with favorable NT-proBNP reduction response.

BACKGROUND

NT-proBNP levels reflect cardiac wall stress and predict event risk in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF).

METHODS

Post-hoc analysis of the TRANSITION (Comparison of Pre- and Post-discharge Initiation of Sacubitril/Valsartan Therapy in HFrEF Patients After an Acute Decompensation Event) study, including stabilized ADHF patients with reduced ejection fraction, randomized to open-label sacubitril/valsartan initiation in-hospital (pre-discharge) versus post-discharge. NT-proBNP was measured at randomization (baseline), discharge, and 4 and 10 weeks post-randomization. A favorable NT-proBNP response was defined as reduction to ≤1,000 pg/ml or >30% from baseline.

RESULTS

In patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan in-hospital, NT-proBNP was reduced by 28% at discharge, with 46% of patients obtaining favorable NT-proBNP reduction response compared with a 4% reduction and 18% favorable response rate in patients initiated post-discharge (p < 0.001). NT-proBNP was reduced similarly in patients initiating sacubitril/valsartan pre- and post-discharge (reduction at 4 weeks: 25%/22%; 10 weeks: 38%/34%) with comparable favorable response rates (46%/42% and 51%/48% at 4 and 10 weeks, respectively). NT-proBNP favorable response at 4 weeks was associated with lower risk of first heart failure (HF) rehospitalization or cardiovascular death through 26 weeks (hazard ratio: 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38 to 0.86; p = 0.007). Predictors of a favorable response at 4 weeks were starting dose ≥49/51 mg twice daily, higher baseline NT-proBNP, lower baseline serum creatinine, de novo HF, no atrial fibrillation, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-naive or angiotensin receptor blocker-naive, and no prior myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital initiation of sacubitril/valsartan produced rapid reductions in NT-proBNP, statistically significant at discharge. A favorable NT-proBNP response over time was associated with a better prognosis and predicted by higher starting dose and predisposing clinical profile. (Comparison of Pre- and Post-discharge Initiation of LCZ696 Therapy in HFrEF Patients After an Acute Decompensation Event [TRANSITION]; NCT02661217).

Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sacubitril-Valsartan in Heart Failure: Emerging Clinical Data

One of the defining features of heart failure (HF) is neurohormonal activation. The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system (RAAS) and sympathetic nervous system (SNS) cause vasoconstriction and fluid retention and, in response, the secretion of natriuretic peptides (NPs) from volume and pressure-overloaded myocardium promotes vasodilation and diuresis. Inhibition of the RAAS with either angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) has been the cornerstone of medical treatment for HF with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but, until recently, it was unclear how the beneficial effects of NPs may be augmented in patients with HF. Neprilysin, a metalloproteinase widely distributed throughout the body, plays a role in degrading the gross excess of circulating NPs in patients with HF. Early studies of neprilysin inhibition suggested possible physiological benefits. In 2014, the PARADIGM-HF trial found that sacubitril-valsartan, a combination of the ARB valsartan, and the neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril, was superior to enalapril in patients with HFrEF, reducing the relative risk of cardiovascular (CV) death or first hospitalisation with HF by 20%. Almost half of the patients with HF symptoms have a “preserved” ejection fraction (HFpEF); however, the PARAGON-HF study found that sacubitril-valsartan in patients with LVEF ≥45% had no effect on CV death or first and recurrent hospitalisations with HF compared to valsartan. Guidelines across the world have changed to include sacubitril-valsartan for patients with HFrEF yet, nearly 6 years after PARADIGM-HF, there is still uncertainty as to when and in whom sacubitril-valsartan should be started. Furthermore, there may yet be subsets of patients with HFpEF who might benefit from treatment with sacubitril-valsartan. This review will describe the mechanisms behind the outcome benefit of sacubitril-valsartan in patients with HFrEF and to consider its future role in the management of patients with HF.

Impact of Sacubitril/Valsartan on Patient Outcomes in Heart Failure: Evidence to Date

With an estimated 6.2 million adults affected in the USA, heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, and health-care costs, despite the use of guideline-based medical therapies. The search for a more efficient therapy was rekindled when findings from the Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor–Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) trial demonstrated evidence for cardiovascular and mortality benefit of sacubitril/valsartan, a dual angiotensin receptor blocker and neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), over enalapril (an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor) in patients with heart failure and reduced rjection fraction (HFrEF). Following the trial’s compelling results, recommendations for the use of sacubitril/valsartan as a replacement for an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and/or angiotensin receptor blocker were incorporated into the 2016 American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and the Heart Failure Society of America recommended (HFSA) guidelines for the management of heart failure. This review aims to gain insight into the benefits as well as limitations associated with the use of sacubitril/valsartan in the treatment of heart failure (HF) through exploration of various subgroup analyses of the PARADIGM-HF trial, subsequent retrospective analyses, and randomized controlled trials that followed this landmark trial.

Early cost-utility analysis of tissue-engineered heart valves compared to bioprostheses in the aortic position in elderly patients

OBJECTIVES

Aortic valve disease is the most frequent indication for heart valve replacement with the highest prevalence in elderly. Tissue-engineered heart valves (TEHV) are foreseen to have important advantages over currently used bioprosthetic heart valve substitutes, most importantly reducing valve degeneration with subsequent reduction of re-intervention. We performed early Health Technology Assessment of hypothetical TEHV in elderly patients (≥ 70 years) requiring surgical (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) to assess the potential of TEHV and to inform future development decisions.

METHODS

Using a patient-level simulation model, the potential cost-effectiveness of TEHV compared with bioprostheses was predicted from a societal perspective. Anticipated, but currently hypothetical improvements in performance of TEHV, divided in durability, thrombogenicity, and infection resistance, were explored in scenario analyses to estimate quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain, cost reduction, headroom, and budget impact.

RESULTS

Durability of TEHV had the highest impact on QALY gain and costs, followed by infection resistance. Improved TEHV performance (- 50% prosthetic valve-related events) resulted in lifetime QALY gains of 0.131 and 0.043, lifetime cost reductions of €639 and €368, translating to headrooms of €3255 and €2498 per hypothetical TEHV compared to SAVR and TAVI, respectively. National savings in the first decade after implementation varied between €2.8 and €11.2 million (SAVR) and €3.2-€12.8 million (TAVI) for TEHV substitution rates of 25-100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the relatively short life expectancy of elderly patients undergoing SAVR/TAVI, hypothetical TEHV are predicted to be cost-effective compared to bioprostheses, commercially viable and result in national cost savings when biomedical engineers succeed in realising improved durability and/or infection resistance of TEHV.

Neprilysin: A Potential Therapeutic Target of Arterial Hypertension?

Arterial hypertension is the most prevalent chronic disease in the adult population of developed countries and it constitutes a significant risk factor in the development of cardiovascular disease, contributing to the emergence of many comorbidities, among which heart failure excels, a clinical syndrome that nowadays represents a major health problem with uncountable hospitalizations and the indolent course of which progressively worsens until quality of life decreases and lastly death occurs prematurely. In the light of this growing menace, each day more efforts are invested in the field of cardiovascular pharmacology, searching for new therapeutic options that allow us to modulate the physiological systems that appear among these pathologies. Therefore, in the later years, the study of natriuretic peptides has become so relevant, which mediate beneficial effects at the cardiovascular level such as diuresis, natriuresis, and decreasing cardiac remodeling; their metabolism is mediated by neprilysin, a metalloproteinase, widely expressed in the human and capable of catalyzing many substrates. The modulation of these functions has been studied by decades, giving room to Sacubitril, the first neprilysin inhibitor, which in conjunction with an angiotensin receptor blocker has provided a high efficacy and tolerability among patients with heart failure, for whom it has already been approved and recommended. Nonetheless, in the matter of arterial hypertension, significant findings have arisen that demonstrate the potential role that it will play among the pharmacological alternatives in the upcoming years.