The angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a phase 2 double-blind randomised controlled trial

Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors: Comprehensive review and implications in hypertension treatment

Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) are a new class of cardiovascular agents characterized by their dual action on the major regulators of the cardiovascular system, including the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) and the natriuretic peptide (NP) system. The apparent clinical benefit of one ARNI, sacubitril/valsartan, as shown in clinical trials, has positioned the drug class as a first-line therapy in patients with heart failure, particularly with reduced ejection fraction. Accumulating evidence also suggests that sacubitril/valsartan is superior to conventional RAS blockers in lowering blood pressure in patients with hypertension. To decide whether to apply an ARNI to treat hypertension clinically, it is important to understand the potential properties of the drug in modulating multiple factors inside and outside the cardiovascular system beyond its effect on reducing peripheral blood pressure. In this context, ARNIs are distinct from preexisting antihypertensive medications in terms of the multiple actions of NPs in various organs and the pharmacological potential of neprilysin inhibitors to modulate multiple cardiac and noncardiac peptides. In particular, analysis of the clinical trials of sacubitril/valsartan implies that ARNIs can provide additional clinical benefits independent of their original purpose, including alleviation of glycemic control and renal impairment in patients with heart failure. Understanding the potential mechanisms of action of ARNIs will help interpret the relevance of their additional benefits beyond lowering blood pressure in hypertension. This review summarizes the comprehensive clinical evidence and relevance of ARNIs by specifically focusing on the potential properties of this new drug class in treating patients with hypertension.

Benefits and adverse effects of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with chronic heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This review aims to assess the benefits and adverse effects of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure, with a focus on important patient outcomes. A systematic review was conducted of double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing sacubitril/valsartan versus a reference drug, in heart failure patients with reduced (HFrEF) and preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction, published in French or English. Searches were undertaken of Medline, Cochrane Central, and Embase. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and adverse events. From 2 082 articles analyzed, 5 were included. For all-cause mortality, the absolute numbers for HFrEF (2 RCTs, 4627 patients) were 16% on sacubitril/valsartan and 18% on enalapril, with a risk ratio (RR) of 0.85 [CI = 0.78, 0.93], and 13% vs 14% in with HFpEF (2 RCTs, 5097 patients), with no statistical difference. Under the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, the evidence for HFrEF patients was of moderate quality. For HFrEF patients, an increased risk of symptomatic hypotension and angioedema (low quality of evidence) was shown. There was no statistical difference for the risk of hyperkalemia or worsening renal function. There was a protective RR (0.50 [0.34, 0.75]) for worsening renal function for patients with HFpEF, with a high quality of evidence despite similar absolute numbers (1.4% vs. 2.8%). To keep in mind for shared decision-making, sacubitril/valsartan reduces all-cause mortality in HFrEF patients but for HFpEF further data are needed. Take into consideration the small number of studies to date to assess the risks.

Effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan Combined with Dapagliflozin on Long-Term Cardiac Mortality in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

The angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor dapagliflozin have been shown to reduce rehospitalization and cardiac mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We aimed to compare the long-term cardiac and all-cause mortality of ARNI and dapagliflozin combination therapy against ARNI monotherapy in patients with HFrEF. This retrospective study involved 244 patients with HF with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-IV symptoms and ejection fraction ≤40%. The patients were divided into 2 groups: ARNI monotherapy and ARNI+dapagliflozin. Median follow-up was 2.5 (.16-3.72) years. One hundred and seventy-five (71.7%) patients were male, and the mean age was 65.9 (SD, 10.2) years. Long-term cardiac mortality rates were significantly lower in the ARNI+dapagliflozin group (7.4%) than in the ARNI monotherapy group (19.5%) (P = .01). Dapagliflozin [Hazard Ratio (HR) [95% Confidence Interval (CI)] = .29 [.10-.77]; P = .014] and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) [HR (95% CI) = .89 (.85-.93); P < .001] were found to be independent predictors of cardiac mortality. Our study showed a significant reduction in cardiac mortality with ARNI and dapagliflozin combination therapy compared with ARNI monotherapy.

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.

Congestion in Patients with Advanced Heart Failure: Assessment and Treatment

Heart failure (HF) is characterized by frequent hospital admissions due to acute decompensation and shortened life span with a progressive clinical course leading to an advanced stage where traditional therapies become ineffective. Due to aging of the population and improved therapies, only a small of proportion of patients with advanced HF are candidates for surgical treatments, such as mechanical circulatory support or heart transplantation. In most cases, prompt identification and management of congestion is paramount to improving symptoms and quality of life and avoiding progression to severe multiorgan dysfunction and death.

Effects of canagliflozin on NT-proBNP stratified by left ventricular diastolic function in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic heart failure: a sub analysis of the CANDLE trial

Background

Identification of the effective subtypes of treatment for heart failure (HF) is an essential topic for optimizing treatment of the disorder. We hypothesized that the beneficial effect of SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) on the levels of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) might depend on baseline diastolic function. To elucidate the effects of SGLT2i in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and chronic HF we investigated, as a post-hoc sub-study of the CANDLE trial, the effects of canagliflozin on NT-proBNP levels from baseline to 24 weeks, with the data stratified by left ventricular (LV) diastolic function at baseline.

Methods

Patients (n = 233) in the CANDLE trial were assigned randomly to either an add-on canagliflozin (n = 113) or glimepiride treatment groups (n = 120). The primary endpoint was a comparison between the two groups of the changes from baseline to 24 weeks in NT-pro BNP levels, stratified according to baseline ventricular diastolic function.

Results

The change in the geometric mean of NT-proBNP level from baseline to 24 weeks was 0.98 (95% CI 0.89–1.08) in the canagliflozin group and 1.07 (95% CI 0.97–1.18) in the glimepiride group. The ratio of change with canagliflozin/glimepiride was 0.93 (95% CI 0.82–1.05). Responder analyses were used to investigate the response of an improvement in NT-proBNP levels. Although the subgroup analyses for septal annular velocity (SEP-e′) showed no marked heterogeneity in treatment effect, the subgroup with an SEP-e′ < 4.7 cm/s indicated there was an association with lower NT-proBNP levels in the canagliflozin group compared with that in the glimepiride group (ratio of change with canagliflozin/glimepiride (0.83, 95% CI 0.66–1.04).

Conclusions

In the subgroup with a lower LV diastolic function, canagliflozin showed a trend of reduced NT-pro BNP levels compared to that observed with glimepiride. This study suggests that the beneficial effects of canagliflozin treatment may be different in subgroups classified by the severity of LV diastolic dysfunction.

Advanced Heart Failure in a Special Population: Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a complex clinical syndrome that has become a global health issue, with mortality ranging from 53% to 74% at 5 years. It is defined as the presence of signs and symptoms of heart failure associated with left ventricular ejection fraction greater than or equal to 50%. The definition and diagnosis of HFpEF in patients with unexplained dyspnea remain a clinical challenge in the absence of a unique diagnostic algorithm universally recognized. Clinical trials conducted so far did not show a significant improvement of prognosis, but forthcoming therapies could provide innovative solutions.

The Central Role of Left Atrium in Heart Failure

In past cardiovascular medicine, the attention to the left ventricle-identified as the only indicator and determinant of healthy or unhealthy cardiac conditions- has systematically hidden the role of the left atrium (LA). The recent advances in cardiovascular imaging have provided a better understanding of LA anatomy, physiology, and pathology, making us realize that this functional structure is far from being an innocent spectator. We now know that the LA's mechanical and neuro-hormonal properties play a relevant part in several cardiovascular diseases, including atrial fibrillation, ischemic heart disease, valvular heart disease, and heart failure. The present review aims to describe the role of LA in the specific setting of heart failure. We provide currently available information on LA structure and function and summarize its role as a determinant of symptoms, prognosis, and potential therapeutic target in heart failure patients.

Effect of canagliflozin on N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic heart failure according to baseline use of glucose-lowering agents

BACKGROUND

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce the risk of a deterioration in heart failure (HF) and mortality in patients with a broad range of cardiovascular risks. Recent guidelines recommend considering the use of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and HF, irrespective of their glycemic control status and background use of other glucose-lowering agents including metformin. However, only a small number of studies have investigated whether the effects of SGLT2 inhibitor in these patients differ by the concomitant use of other glucose-lowering agents.

METHODS

This was a post-hoc analysis of the CANDLE trial (UMIN000017669), an investigator-initiated, multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial. The primary aim of the analysis was to assess the effect of 24 weeks of treatment with canagliflozin, relative to glimepiride, on N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentration in patients with T2D and clinically stable chronic HF. In the present analysis, the effect of canagliflozin on NT-proBNP concentration was assessed in the patients according to their baseline use of other glucose-lowering agents.

RESULTS

Almost all patients in the CANDLE trial presented as clinically stable (New York Heart Association class I to II), with about 70% of participants having HF with a preserved ejection fraction phenotype (defined as a left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 50%) at baseline. Of the 233 patients randomized to either canagliflozin (100 mg daily) or glimepiride (starting dose 0.5 mg daily), 85 (36.5%) had not been taking any glucose-lowering agents at baseline (naïve). Of the 148 patients who had been taking at least one glucose-lowering agent at baseline (non-naïve), 44 (29.7%) and 127 (85.8%) had received metformin or a dipeptidyl dipeptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor, respectively. The group ratio (canagliflozin vs. glimepiride) of proportional changes in the geometric means of NT-proBNP concentration was 0.95 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76 to 1.18, p = 0.618) for the naïve subgroup, 0.92 (95% CI 0.79 to1.07, p = 0.288) for the non-naïve subgroup, 0.90 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.20, p = 0.473) for the metformin-user subgroup, and 0.91 (95% CI 0.77 to 1.08, p = 0.271) for the DPP-4 inhibitor-user subgroup. No heterogeneity in the effect of canagliflozin, relative to glimepiride, on NT-proBNP concentration was observed in the non-naïve subgroups compared to that in the naïve subgroup.

CONCLUSION

The impact of canagliflozin treatment on NT-proBNP concentration appears to be independent of the background use of diabetes therapy in the patient population examined. Trial registration University Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry, number 000017669. Registered on May 25, 2015.

Sacubitril/valsartan decreases mortality in the rat model of the isoprenaline-induced takotsubo-like syndrome

Aims

Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) is an acute potentially reversible cardiac syndrome characterized by variable regional myocardial akinesia that cannot be attributed to a culprit coronary artery occlusion. TTS is an important differential diagnosis of acute heart failure where brain natriuretic peptides are elevated. Sacubitril/valsartan is a novel and effective pharmacological agent for the treatment of patients with heart failure. Our aim was to explore whether treatment with sacubitril/valsartan could prevent isoprenaline‐induced takotsubo‐like phenotype in rats.

Methods and results

A total number of 186 Sprague–Dawley male rats were randomized to receive pretreatment with water (CONTROL, n = 62), valsartan (VAL, n = 62), or sacubitril/valsartan (SAC/VAL, n = 62) before receiving isoprenaline for induction of TTS. We recorded heart rate and blood pressure invasively. Cardiac morphology and function were evaluated by high‐resolution echocardiography 90 min after the administration of isoprenaline. We documented the survival rate at the time of echocardiography. Compared with the CONTROL group, the SAC/VAL group had less pronounced TTS‐like cardiac dysfunction and lower mortality rate, while the VAL group did not differ. Heart rate and blood pressure were not significantly different between the groups. Analysis of cardiac lipids was performed with mass spectrometry. The VAL and SAC/VAL groups had significantly higher levels of lysophosphatidylcholine (LPC), in particular LPC 18:1 and LPC 16:0.

Conclusions

Pretreatment with sacubitril/valsartan but not with valsartan reduces mortality and attenuates isoprenaline‐induced apical akinesia in the TTS‐like model in rats. Sacubitril/valsartan could be a potential treatment option in patients with TTS in humans.

Sacubitril/Valsartan: A new dawn has begun!: A revisited review

Heart failure (HF) is among the major causes of global morbidity as well as mortality. Increased prevalence, frequent and prolonged hospitalization, rehospitalization, long-term consumption of healthcare resources, absenteeism, and death upsurge the economic burden linked to HF. For decades, Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEIs), Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers (ARBs), Beta-Blockers (BBs), and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA), have remained the mainstay of the standard of care for HF management. Despite their proven efficacy and cost-effectiveness, HF remains a global pandemic and is still increasing in prevalence. Sacubitril/Valsartan (SAC/VAL) is an Angiotensin Receptor/Neprilysin Inhibitor (ARNI) that proved out to be a game-changer drug in HF treatment. Recent data indicated that SAC/VAL is more efficient and can improve the overall quality of life of HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with fewer side effects. It is now incorporated in the guidelines as an alternative to ACEIs or ARBs to lower morbidity in addition to mortality in HFrEF patients. This review article will discuss the current guidelines-approved indications and highlight the potential emerging indications, in addition to the currently ongoing clinical trials that will expand the use of SAC/VAL.

Angiotensin receptor blocker neprilysin inhibitors

Heart failure (HF) is a clinical syndrome that results from a structural or functional cardiac disorder that reduces the ability of the ventricle of the heart to fill with, or eject, blood. It is a multifaceted clinical condition that affects up to 2% of the population in the developed world, and is linked to significant morbidity and mortality; it is therefore considered a major concern for public health. Regarding the mechanism of HF, three neurohumoral factors - the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, the sympathetic nervous system, and natriuretic peptides - are related to the pathology of chronic HF (CHF), and the targets of treatment. Angiotensin receptor blocker and neprilysin inhibitor (angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor), namely sacubitril/valsartan (SAC/VAL), has been introduced as a treatment for CHF. SAC/VAL is an efficacious, safe, and cost-effective therapy that improves quality of life and longevity in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), and reduces hospital admissions. An in-hospital initiation strategy offers a potential new avenue to improve the clinical uptake of SAC/VAL. In the last five years, SAC/VAL has been established as a cornerstone component of comprehensive disease-modifying medical therapy in the management of chronic HFrEF. On the other hand, further work, with carefully designed and controlled preclinical studies, is necessary for understanding the molecular mechanisms, effects, and confirmation of issues such as long-term safety in both human and animal models.

Sacubitril-valsartan as a treatment for apparent resistant hypertension in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction

Aims

Patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) frequently have difficult-to-control hypertension. We examined the effect of neprilysin inhibition on ‘apparent resistant hypertension’ in patients with HFpEF in the PARAGON-HF trial, which compared the effect of sacubitril–valsartan with valsartan.

Methods and results

In this post hoc analysis, patients were categorized according to systolic blood pressure at the end of the valsartan run-in (n = 4795). ‘Apparent resistant hypertension’ was defined as systolic blood pressure ≥140 mmHg (≥135 mmHg if diabetes) despite treatment with valsartan, a calcium channel blocker, and a diuretic. ‘Apparent mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA)-resistant’ hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure ≥140 mmHg (≥135 mmHg if diabetes) despite the above treatments and an MRA. The primary outcome in the PARAGON-HF trial was a composite of total hospitalizations for heart failure and death from cardiovascular causes. We examined clinical endpoints and the safety of sacubitril–valsartan according to the hypertension category. We also examined reductions in blood pressure from the end of valsartan run-in to Weeks 4 and 16 after randomization. Overall, 731 patients (15.2%) had apparent resistant hypertension and 135 (2.8%) had apparent MRA-resistant hypertension. The rate of the primary outcome was higher in patients with apparent resistant hypertension [17.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 15.6–19.1 per 100 person-years] compared to those with a controlled systolic blood pressure (13.4; 12.7–14.3 per 100 person-years), with an adjusted rate ratio of 1.28 (95% CI 1.05–1.57). The reduction in systolic blood pressure at Weeks 4 and 16, respectively, was greater with sacubitril–valsartan vs. valsartan in patients with apparent resistant hypertension [−4.8 (−7.0 to −2.5) and 3.9 (−6.6 to −1.3) mmHg] and apparent MRA-resistant hypertension [−8.8 (−14.0 to −3.5) and −6.3 (−12.5 to −0.1) mmHg]. The proportion of patients with apparent resistant hypertension achieving a controlled systolic blood pressure by Week 16 was 47.9% in the sacubitril–valsartan group and 34.3% in the valsartan group [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.78, 95% CI 1.30–2.43]. In patients with apparent MRA-resistant hypertension, the respective proportions were 43.6% vs. 28.4% (adjusted OR 2.63, 95% CI 1.18–5.89).

Conclusion

Sacubitril–valsartan may be useful in treating apparent resistant hypertension in patients with HFpEF, even in those who continue to have an elevated blood pressure despite treatment with at least four antihypertensive drug classes, including an MRA.

Clinical trial registration

PARAGON-HF: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01920711.

Cardiac complications associated with hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation

Advances in chemotherapy and supportive therapy have resulted in improved clinical outcomes in patients with hematological malignancies undergoing hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT). However, the association between HSCT and early- and late-onset cardiotoxicity remains controversial as these cardiac complications, including acute heart failure and arrhythmia, such as atrial fibrillation, can occasionally be lethal. Although the overall pathophysiology has not been elucidated, initial/salvage chemotherapy before HSCT, such as anthracycline-combined regimens, conditioning regimens, thoracic radiotherapy, and pre-existing personal risk factors, could be associated with an increased risk of cardiac events. Routine monitoring of cardiac function using global longitudinal strain or left ventricular ejection fraction in echocardiogram and serum biomarkers could be an option to detect early changes in cardiac status before irreversible cardiac complications develop. While beta-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors are commonly used for cardioprotection, their clinical benefit has not been fully established in HSCT-associated cardiotoxicity. In the future, genetic analysis to reveal individual vulnerability to cardiotoxicity and prospective trials assessing the clinical benefit of early interventions, including novel agents such as angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, are warranted. Collaboration between oncologists and cardiologists is crucial to establishing a strategy to prevent cardiac complications.

The effects of sacubitril/valsartan on heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers, Sacubitril/Valsartan has been reported to have superior results. However, the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are still in dispute.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to evaluate the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on the treatment of HFpEF patients.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov were used to search for randomised controlled trials of sacubitril/valsartan in HFpEF patients from inception to 7 December 2020.

RESULTS

Four studies, with a total of 7739 participants, met the inclusion criteria. The present meta-analysis results showed that compared with the control group, sacubitril/valsartan reduced the hospitalisation rate of HF in HFpEF patients [Risk Ratio(RR): 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.79-0.93; p = 0.0002). Regarding all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and the improvement in NYHA class, sacubitril/valsartan did not show apparent advantages. Although sacubitril/valsartan was linked to increasing the risk of symptomatic hypotension (RR: 1.44; 95% CI: 1.25-1.66; p﹤0.00001), there was no evidence supporting the incidence of renal function worsening and hyperkalemia.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that compared with valsartan or individualised medical therapy (IMT), there were not different between the two groups except for the hospitalisation rate which was favoured by Sacubitril/Valsartan treatment group for HFpEF patients.

Effect of Neprilysin Inhibition for Ischemic Mitral Regurgitation after Myocardial Injury

Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) treatment reduces functional mitral regurgitation (MR) to a greater extent than angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) treatment alone, but the mechanism is unclear. We evaluated the mechanisms of how ARNI has an effect on functional MR. After inducing functional MR by left circumflex coronary artery occlusion, male Sprague Dawley rats (n = 31) were randomly assigned to receive the ARNI LCZ696, the ARB valsartan, or corn oil only (MR control). Excised mitral leaflets and left ventricle (LV) were analyzed, and valvular endothelial cells were evaluated focusing on molecular changes. LCZ696 significantly attenuated LV dilatation after 6 weeks when compared with the control group (LV end-diastolic volume, 461.3 ± 13.8 µL versus 525.1 ± 23.6 µL; p < 0.05), while valsartan did not (471.2 ± 8.9 µL; p > 0.05 to control). Histopathological analysis of mitral leaflets showed that LCZ696 strongly reduced fibrotic thickness compared to the control group (28.2 ± 2.7 µm vs. 48.8 ± 7.5 µm; p < 0.05). Transforming growth factor-β and downstream phosphorylated extracellular-signal regulated kinase were also significantly lower in the LCZ696 group. Consequently, excessive endothelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EndoMT) was mitigated in the LCZ696 group compared to the control group and leaflet area was higher (11%) in the LCZ696 group than in the valsartan group. Finally, the MR extent was significantly lower in the LCZ696 group and functional improvement was observed. In conclusion, neprilysin inhibitor has positive effects on LV reverse remodeling and also attenuates fibrosis in MV leaflets and restores adaptive growth by directly modulating EndoMT.

New Drugs for Heart Failure: What is the Evidence in Older Patients?

Heart failure (HF) is a major public health concern, with a high prevalence in the older population. The majority of randomized clinical trials evaluating new emerging pharmacologic agents for HF (eg, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, intravenous iron for deficiency treatment, transthyretin stabilizers, soluble guanylate cyclase stimulators, cardiac myosin activators, and new potassium binders) have found positive results on various clinical outcomes, particularly in patients with reduced ejection fraction. These treatments might have an important role in the management of older patients as well. Nevertheless, trials demonstrating benefit of these drugs have involved patients significantly younger (on average, approximately 10 years) and fewer comorbidities than those commonly encountered in clinical practice. We describe the recent evidence regarding the newest HF drugs and their applicability to older individuals in terms of efficacy and safety, and we discuss their effects on outcomes particularly valuable to older patients, such as preservation of cognitive function, functional status, independence, and quality of life. Although available subgroup analyses seem to confirm efficacy and safety across the age spectrum for some of these drugs, their effects on older patients centered outcomes often have been neglected. Future HF trials should be designed to include older patients more representative of the real clinical practice, to overcome generalizability biases.

Effects of phosphodiesterase V inhibition alone and in combination with BNP on cardiovascular and renal response to volume load in human preclinical diastolic dysfunction

Preclinical diastolic dysfunction (PDD) results in impaired cardiorenal response to volume load (VL) which may contribute to the progression to clinical heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The objective was to evaluate if phosphodiesterase V inhibition (PDEVI) alone or combination PDEVI plus B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) administration will correct the impaired cardiorenal response to VL in PDD. A randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled cross-over study was conducted in 20 subjects with PDD, defined as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >50% with moderate or severe diastolic dysfunction by Doppler echocardiography and without HF diagnosis or symptoms. Effects of PDEVI with oral tadalafil alone and tadalafil plus subcutaneous (SC) BNP, administered prior to acute volume loading, were assessed. Tadalafil alone did not result in improvement in cardiac response to VL, as measured by LVEF, LV end diastolic volume, left atrial volume (LAV), or right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP). Tadalafil plus SC BNP resulted in improved cardiac response to VL, with increased LVEF (4.1 vs. 1.8%, p = 0.08) and heart rate (4.3 vs. 1.6 bpm, p = 0.08), and reductions in both LAV (-4.3 ± 10.4 vs. 2.8 ± 6.6 ml, p = 0.03) and RVSP (-4.0 ± 3.0 vs. 2.1 ± 6.0 mmHg, p < 0.01) versus tadalafil alone. Plasma and urinary cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) excretion levels were higher (11.3 ± 12.3 vs. 1.7 ± 3.8 pmol/ml, 1851.0 ± 1386.4 vs. 173.4 ± 517.9 pmol/min, p < 0.01) with tadalafil plus SC BNP versus tadalafil alone. There was no improvement in renal response as measured by GFR, renal plasma flow, sodium excretion, and urine flow with tadalafil plus SC BNP compared to tadalafil alone. In subjects with PDD, tadalafil alone resulted in no improvement in cardiac adaptation, while tadalafil and SC BNP resulted in enhanced cardiac adaptation to VL. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01544998.

NT-proBNP Qualifies as a Surrogate for Clinical End Points in Heart Failure

N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is a well-established biomarker in heart failure (HF) but controversially discussed as a potential surrogate marker in HF trials. We analyzed the NT-proBNP/mortality relationship in real-world data (RWD) of 108,330 HF patients from the IBM Watson Health Explorys database and compared it with the NT-proBNP / clinical event end-point relationship in 20 clinical HF studies. With a hierarchical statistical model, we quantified the functional relationship and interstudy variability. To independently qualify the model, we predicted outcome hazard ratios in five phase III HF studies solely based on NT-proBNP measured early in the respective study. In RWD and clinical studies, the relationship between NT-proBNP and clinical outcome is well described by an Emax model. The NT-proBNP independent baseline risk (R0 , RWD/studies median (interstudy interquartile range): 5.5%/3.0% (1.7-4.9%)) is very low compared with the potential NT-proBNP-associated maximum risk (Rmax : 55.2%/79.4% (61.5-89.0%)). The NT-proBNP concentration associated with the half-maximal risk is comparable in RWD and across clinical studies (EC50 : 3,880/2,414 pg/mL (1,460-4,355 pg/mL)). Model-based predictions of phase III outcomes, relying on short-term NT-proBNP data only, match final trial results with comparable confidence intervals. Our analysis qualifies NT-proBNP as a surrogate for clinical outcome in HF trials. NT-proBNP levels after short treatment durations of less than 10 weeks quantitatively predict hazard ratios with confidence levels comparable to final trial readout. Early NT-proBNP measurement can therefore enable shorter and smaller but still reliable HF trials.

Short-Term Effects of Sacubitrilvalsartan on Echocardiographic Parameters in Dogs With Symptomatic Myxomatous Mitral Valve Disease

Background and Objective: Sacubitril/valsartan (SV) is an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor that works by inhibiting the neprilysin enzyme as well as blocking angiotensin receptors. The benefits of using SV in congestive heart failure patients has been demonstrated in several clinical trials; however, limited data are available for dogs with heart failure. The aim of this study was to investigate the short-term effects of SV in comparison with ramipril in the standard therapy of symptomatic dogs suffering from myxomatous mitral valve disease (MMVD).

Methods: In this prospective, randomized, single-blind study, 21 dogs with MMVD stage C were randomly assigned to received SV (20 mg/kg orally twice a day) or ramipril (0.125 mg/kg, orally once a day) in addition to pimobendan and furosemide. Echocardiography, electrocardiography, blood pressure, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and urinary aldosterone per creatinine ratio were obtained at baseline (D0) and at follow-up (4 weeks).

Results: When comparing the percent change from baseline between groups, the left atrium to aortic root ratio (LA/Ao) and left ventricular internal diameter diastole normalized to body weight (LVIDDN) were significantly reduced in the SV group (P < 0.001 and P < 0.01, respectively). The end-diastolic volume index (EDVI), end-systolic volume index (ESVI), and stroke volume were lower in the SV group (P < 0.001, P < 0.05, and P < 0.01, respectively). No changes were observed between groups for NTproBNP, blood pressure, ECG parameters, and urinary aldosterone per creatinine ratio.

Conclusion: The current study suggested that the short-term effects of SV can reverse myocardial remodeling, as inferred from several echocardiographic indices (i.e., the reduction in LA/Ao, LVIDDN, EDVI and ESVI) in dogs with MMVD stage C. These findings would support the use of SV in clinically symptomatic heart failure in dogs.

Beneficial and harmful effects of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Current guidelines recommend angiotensin receptor blocker neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) (sacubitril/valsartan) as a replacement for angiotensin-converting-enzymeinhibitor (ACE-I) in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who remain symptomatic despite optimal medical therapy. The effects of ARNIs have not previously been assessed in a systematic review. We searched for relevant trials until October 2019 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, BIOSIS, CNKI, VIP, WanFang and CBM. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and serious adverse events. We systematically assessed the risks of random errors and systematic errors. PROSPERO registration: CRD42019129336. 48 trials randomising 19 086 participants were included. The ARNI assessed in all trials was sacubitril/valsartan. ACE-I or ARB were used as control interventions. Trials randomising HFrEF participants (27 trials) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) participants (four trials) were analysed separately. In HFrEF participants, meta-analyses and Trial Sequential Analyses showed evidence of a beneficial effect of sacubitril/valsartan when assessing all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR), 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.94) and serious adverse events (RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.93); and the results did not differ between the guideline recommended target population and HFrEF participants in general. We found no evidence of an effect of sacubitril/valsartan in HFpEF participants. Sacubitril/valsartan compared with either ACE-I or ARB seems to have a beneficial effect in patients with HFrEF. Our results indicate that sacubitril/valsartan might be beneficial in a wider population of patients with heart failure than the guideline recommended target population. Sacubitril/valsartan does not seem to show evidence of a difference compared with valsartan in patients with HFpEF.

Integrating High-Sensitivity Troponin T and Sacubitril/Valsartan Treatment in HFpEF: The PARAGON-HF Trial

OBJECTIVES

This study examined the relationship among high-sensitivity troponin-T (hs-TnT), outcomes, and treatment with sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure (HF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

BACKGROUND

hs-TnT is a marker of myocardial injury in HF.

METHODS

The PARAGON-HF trial randomized 4,796 patients with HFpEF to sacubitril/valsartan or valsartan. We compared the risk of the composite outcome of cardiovascular death (CVD) and total HF hospitalization (HHF) according to hs-TnT. We also assessed the effect of allocated treatment on hs-TnT.

RESULTS

hs-TnT was available in 1,141 patients (24%) at run-in (median value: 17 ng/L) and 1,260 (26%) at randomization, with 58.3% having hs-TnT >14 ng/L (upper limit of normal). During a median follow-up of 34 months, there were 393 outcome events (82 CVD, 311 HHF). Adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), log-hs-TnT at randomization was an independent predictor of the composite outcome (HR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.19-1.59; P < 0.001). Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced hs-TnT by 9% at week 16 (P < 0.001). Patients whose hs-TnT decreased from randomization to 16 weeks to at or below the median value of 17 ng/L subsequently had a lower risk of CVD/HHF compared with those with persistently elevated hs-TnT (P = 0.046). Patients with higher baseline hs-TnT (>17 ng/L) appeared to have a greater benefit from sacubitril/valsartan treatment when accounting for other potential effect modifiers (P interaction = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher baseline hs-TnT was associated with increased risk of CVD/HHF, whereas hs-TnT decrease at 16 weeks led to lower subsequent risk of CVD/HHF compared with those who had persistently elevated values. Sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced hs-TnT compared with valsartan. hs-TnT may be helpful in identifying patients with HFpEF who are more likely to benefit from sacubitril/valsartan.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction based on aging and comorbidities

Heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a leading cause of hospitalizations and mortality when diagnosed at the age of ≥ 65 years. HFpEF represents multifactorial and multisystemic syndrome and has different pathophysiology and phenotypes. Its diagnosis is difficult to be established based on left ventricular ejection fraction and may benefit from individually tailored approaches, underlying age-related changes and frequent comorbidities. Compared with the rapid development in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, HFpEF presents a great challenge and needs to be addressed considering the failure of HF drugs to improve its outcomes. Further extensive studies on the relationships between HFpEF, aging, and comorbidities in carefully phenotyped HFpEF subgroups may help understand the biology, diagnosis, and treatment of HFpEF. The current review summarized the diagnostic and therapeutic development of HFpEF based on the complex relationships between aging, comorbidities, and HFpEF.

Management of hypertension in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: is there a blood pressure goal?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hypertension remains a leading risk factor for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), and elevated blood pressure (BP) portends an adverse prognosis in patients with established HFpEF. We summarize current evidence for mechanisms linking hypertension to HFpEF and management of hypertension in HFpEF.

RECENT FINDINGS

Data suggest a complex, multifactorial pathophysiology driving the association between hypertension and HFpEF, including left ventricular hypertrophy, diastolic dysfunction, atrial dysfunction, coronary microvascular disease, endothelial dysfunction, myocardial injury and fibrosis. Although intensive BP control may attenuate these processes, this hypothesis has not been tested on clinical outcomes in a dedicated randomized controlled trial (RCT) in HFpEF. Antihypertensive therapies variably improve key surrogate markers in HFpEF, though BP reduction generally does not account for these benefits. Accordingly, BP targets are extrapolated from observational studies and RCTs testing heart failure therapies that affect BP in addition to dedicated RCT data in patients at elevated risk (without heart failure).

SUMMARY

Clinicians should recognize the risk of disease progression and poor outcomes associated with uncontrolled hypertension in HFpEF. Intensive BP control, preferably by therapies known to improve outcomes in heart failure, may slow key pathways in disease progression. Future RCTs testing intensified BP control strategies in HFpEF are warranted.

Sacubitril/Valsartan in the Management of Heart Failure Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices

For heart failure patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), especially those who remain symptomatic after implantation, the best management strategy is still unclear. Although there are several concerns regarding the clinical utilization of sacubitril/valsartan, it has improved the prognosis of patients with heart failure compared with the use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors in recent years. Recent real-world observational studies and post hoc analyses demonstrated that sacubitril/valsartan might have effects in patients with CIEDs. Given its potential underlying mechanisms, sacubitril/valsartan could improve outcomes of mortality and sudden cardiac death incidence, as well as clinical and echocardiographic evaluations. The possible antiarrhythmic effect of sacubitril/valsartan is still debated. Moreover, given that hypotension is the critical limitation of uptitration, the rise in systolic blood pressure attributed to cardiac resynchronization therapy might support the use of sacubitril/valsartan, with improved tolerance. The clinical utility of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure patients with CIEDs requires further investigation to determine the actual effects, optimal target populations, and underlying mechanisms.

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.

Baseline characteristics of patients in the PARALLAX trial: insights into quality of life and exercise capacity in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

AIMS

We sought to describe the baseline characteristics of PARALLAX [a randomized controlled trial of sacubitril/valsartan vs. individualized medical therapy in heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)]; compare PARALLAX to recent HFpEF trials; and examine the clinical characteristics associated with quality of life (QOL) and 6-min walk test distance (6MWD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 2566 patients with HF and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >40% were randomized, of whom 96% had an LVEF ≥45%. Multivariable linear regression was used to determine characteristics associated with Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS) and 6MWD. Mean age was 73 ± 8 years, 51% were female, and comorbidities were common. Of the QOL measures tested in PARALLAX, the Short Form Health Survey-36 physical functioning score was most closely correlated with 6MWD (R = 0.41, P < 0.001), and outperformed the KCCQ physical limitation score (R = 0.33) and KCCQ-CSS (R = 0.31) on multivariable analyses. Female sex, higher body mass index, history of coronary artery disease, lower LVEF, and higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were associated with worse (lower) KCCQ-CSS; older age, female sex, higher body mass index, diabetes, coronary artery disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, prior HF hospitalization, lower LVEF, and higher NT-proBNP were associated with shorter 6MWD (P < 0.05 for all associations).

CONCLUSIONS

PARALLAX is the largest HFpEF study to date to examine 6MWD together with QOL. The KCCQ-CSS and 6MWD were modestly correlated, and several factors were associated with worse values of both. These results provide insight into the association between QOL and exercise capacity in HFpEF.

Effects of Sacubitril-Valsartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction in Patients Undergoing Peritoneal Dialysis

Aims: The effect of the angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril-valsartan in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains unclear, and data on ARNI treatment in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients are lacking. The present study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of sacubitril-valsartan in patients with HFpEF undergoing peritoneal dialysis.

Methods and Results: End-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients undergoing PD for 3 months with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II–IV heart failure, ejection fraction of 50% or higher, and elevated levels of N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were assigned to receive sacubitril-valsartan. Patients were followed up regularly after medication treatment. The alterations in clinical and biochemical parameters before and after taking sacubitril-valsartan (generally 50–100 mg b.i.d) were investigated, and safety was also assessed. Twenty-one patients were recruited in this study. Compared with baseline levels, NT-proBNP levels [9769.0 (3093.5–21941.0) vs. 3034.0 (1493.2–6503.0), P = 0.002], and heart rate [80.0 (74.5–90.5) vs. 75.0 (70.3–87.0), P = 0.031] were markedly decreased after treatment with sacubitril-valsartan. Signs and symptoms of heart failure (21/21 vs. 15/21, P = 0.021) were obviously alleviated, NYHA classification and E/e' ratio showed a notable trend of improvement after 3–12 months of follow-up. None of the patients showed adverse drug reactions.

Conclusions: The present data suggested that sacubitril-valsartan treatment in patients with HFpEF undergoing PD was effective and safe.

Hypertension and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: position paper by the European Society of Hypertension

Hypertension constitutes a major risk factor for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). HFpEF is a prevalent clinical syndrome with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Specific guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for HFpEF is not established due to lack of positive outcome data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and limitations of available studies. Although available evidence is limited, control of blood pressure (BP) is widely regarded as central to the prevention and clinical care in HFpEF. Thus, in current guidelines including the 2018 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Guidelines, blockade of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) with either angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers provides the backbone of BP-lowering therapy in hypertensive patients. Although superiority of RAS blockers has not been clearly shown in dedicated RCTs designed for HFpEF, we propose that this core drug treatment strategy is also applicable for hypertensive patients with HFpEF with the addition of some modifications. The latter apply to the use of spironolactone apart from the treatment of resistant hypertension and the use of the angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor. In addition, novel agents such as sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors, currently already indicated for high-risk patients with diabetes to reduce heart failure hospitalizations, and finerenone represent promising therapies and results from ongoing RCTs are eagerly awaited. The development of an effective and practical classification of HFpEF phenotypes and GDMT through dedicated high-quality RCTs are major unmet needs in hypertension research and calls for action.

Current Status of Pharmacologic and Nonpharmacologic Therapy in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a significantly symptomatic disease and has a poor prognosis similar to that of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Contrary to HFrEF, HFpEF is difficult to diagnose, and the recommended diagnostic algorithm of HFpEF is complicated. Several therapies for HFpEF have failed to reduce mortality or morbidity. HFpEF is thought to be a complex and heterogeneous systemic disorder that has various phenotypes and multiple comorbidities. Therefore, therapeutic strategies of HFpEF need to change depending on the phenotype of the patient. This review highlights the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of HFpEF.

Five Years of Sacubitril/Valsartan-a Safety Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials and Real-World Pharmacovigilance

PURPOSE

In PARADIGM-HF, sacubitril/valsartan showed a significant reduction in mortality and hospitalization for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Despite proven efficacy, sacubitril/valsartan has moderate uptake in clinical practice. This study explores the safety profile of sacubitril/valsartan by comparing adverse events in RCT and real-world use.

METHODS

We studied hypotension, renal dysfunction, hyperkalemia, and angioedema associated with sacubitril/valsartan in RCTs and pharmacovigilance databases. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed with six RCTs investigating sacubitril/valsartan vs. control/comparators in heart failure patients. WHO's VigiBase, FAERS, and EMA's EudraVigilance were mined to obtain spontaneously reported real-world adverse events. Disproportionality analysis was performed with the FDA's OpenVigil 2.0.

RESULTS

Six RCTs enrolled 15,538 patients with heart failure with reduced and preserved ejection fractions. There was no statistical difference for the composite of hypotension, renal dysfunction, hyperkalemia, and angioedema between sacubitril/valsartan and its comparators viz. ACEi or ARBs (OR 1.23, CI 0.98-1.56; p = 0.08). A total of 103,038 adverse events were registered in the spontaneous reporting systems. Hypotension was the most reported adverse event. Proportions of composite adverse events were 20% in VigiBase, 17% in FAERS, and 39% with EudraVigilance. Disproportionality analysis showed a lower risk of adverse events with sacubitril/valsartan than other guideline-directed heart failure medications used in clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

With increased uptake of sacubitril/valsartan, risks of hypotension, renal dysfunction, hyperkalemia, and angioedema appear low and acceptable in RCTs and global clinical practice.

Clinical Phenogroups in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) accounts for more than one-half of patients with heart failure. Effective treatment of HFpEF has not been established, largely because of the complexities and heterogeneity in the phenotypes of HFpEF. Categorizing patients based on clinical and pathophysiologic phenotype may provide more targeted and efficacious therapies. Despite this clinical need, there is no consensus on how to categorize patients with HFpEF into phenogroups. Possible metrics include the presence or absence of specific comorbidities that influence pathophysiology, imaging, hemodynamics, or other biomarkers. This article describes currently recognized phenotypes of HFpEF and potential treatment strategies.

Invasive validation of the left ventricular global longitudinal strain for estimating left ventricular filling pressure

PURPOSE

An elevated left ventricular (LV) filling pressure is the main finding in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction, which is estimated with an algorithm using echocardiographic parameters recommended by the recent American Society of Echocardiography (ASE)/European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) guidelines. In this study, we sought to determine the efficacy of the LV global longitudinal strain (GLS) in predicting an elevated LV filling pressure.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 73 prospectively selected patients undergoing LV catheterization (mean age 63.19 ± 9.64, 69% male) participated in this study. Using the algorithm, the LV filling pressure was estimated using the echocardiographic parameters obtained within 24 hours before catheterization. The LV GLS was measured using an automated functional imaging system (GE, Vivid E9 USA). Invasive LV pre-A pressure corresponding to the mean left atrial pressure (LAP) was used as a reference, and a LAP of >12 mm Hg was defined as elevated. Invasive LV filling pressure was elevated in 43 patients (59%) and normal in 30 patients (41%). Nine of 73 (12%) patients were defined as indeterminate based on the 2016 algorithm. Using the ROC method, -18.1% of LV GLS determined the elevated LAP (AUC =0.79; specificity, 73%; sensitivity, 84%) with better sensitivity compared to that by the algorithm (AUC =0.76; specificity, 77%; sensitivity, 72%).

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that LV GLS was an independent predictor of elevated LAP as the E/e' ratio and TR jet velocity and may be used as a major criterion for the diagnosis of HFpEF.

Association Between Left Atrial Volume Index and Ventricular Repolarization Heterogeneity: A Cross-Sectional Study of a Healthy Chinese Population

BACKGROUND

Electromechanical coupling may play a significant role in the association between abnormal myocardial mechanics and heterogeneity of repolarization. This study sought to assess the potential relationship between the left atrial volume index (LAVI), which is an important marker of cardiac diastolic function, and ventricular repolarization variables, such as the QT interval, Tpeak-to-Tend (Tpe) interval and Tpe/QT ratio, in an apparently healthy Chinese population.

METHODS

This was a community-based cross-sectional study conducted in Shenyang, China. A total of 414 healthy subjects aged 35-91 years, including 186 men (44.9%), were enrolled. In addition to performing clinical and laboratory measurements, all subjects underwent comprehensive echocardiography and standard 12-lead electrocardiography. Echocardiographic and electrocardiographic results were analysed separately and in a blinded fashion. Correlation and regression analyses were applied to determine associations.

RESULTS

Subjects were divided into four groups according to quartile of LAVI levels (<16.0, 16.0-18.9, 19.0-22.5 and >22.5 mL/m2). Ventricular repolarization variables, such as QT interval and QTc interval, gradually increased with the progression from low to high LAVI levels (P<0.05). LAVI was positively and significantly correlated with the QT interval, the QTc interval, and the Tpe interval (P<0.01). After adjusting for age and other possible confounders, LAVI showed significant and independent associations with the QT interval and the QTc interval (P<0.001; P=0.003).

CONCLUSION

Echocardiographic LAVI is linearly associated with ventricular repolarization variables even in healthy people.

Heart Failure With Mid-range Ejection Fraction: A Distinctive Subtype or a Transitional Stage?

Heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) was first proposed by Lam and Solomon in 2014, and was listed as a new subtype of heart failure (HF) in 2016 European Society of Cardiology guidelines. Since then, HFmrEF has attracted an increasing amount of attention, and the number of related studies on this topic has grown rapidly. The diagnostic criteria on the basis of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are straightforward; however, LVEF is not a static parameter, and it changes dynamically during the course of HF. Thus, HFmrEF may not be an independent disease with a uniform pathophysiological process, but rather a collection of patients with different characteristics. HFmrEF is often associated with various cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular diseases. Thus, the pathophysiological mechanisms of HFmrEF are particularly complex, and its clinical phenotypes are diverse. The complexity and heterogeneity of HFmrEF may be one reason for inconsistent results between clinical studies. In fact, whether HFmrEF is a distinctive subtype or a transitional stage between HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is controversial. In this review, we discuss the clinical characteristics, treatment and prognosis of patients with HFmrEF, as well as the differences among HFmrEF, HFrEF, and HFpEF.

Beta-blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin aldosterone system for chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Beta-blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system improve survival and reduce morbidity in people with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF); a review of the evidence is required to determine whether these treatments are beneficial for people with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in people with HFpEF.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and one clinical trial register on 14 May 2020 to identify eligible studies, with no language or date restrictions. We checked references from trial reports and review articles for additional studies.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials with a parallel group design, enrolling adults with HFpEF, defined by LVEF greater than 40%.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 randomised controlled trials (231 reports), totalling 23,492 participants across all comparisons. The risk of bias was frequently unclear and only five studies had a low risk of bias in all domains. Beta-blockers (BBs) We included 10 studies (3087 participants) investigating BBs. Five studies used a placebo comparator and in five the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 30 years to 81 years. A possible reduction in cardiovascular mortality was observed (risk ratio (RR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 0.99; number needed to treat for an additional benefit (NNTB) 25; 1046 participants; three studies), however, the certainty of evidence was low. There may be little to no effect on all-cause mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.00; 1105 participants; four studies; low-certainty evidence). The effects on heart failure hospitalisation, hyperkalaemia, and quality of life remain uncertain. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) We included 13 studies (4459 participants) investigating MRA. Eight studies used a placebo comparator and in five the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 54.5 to 80 years. Pooled analysis indicated that MRA treatment probably reduces heart failure hospitalisation (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.98; NNTB = 41; 3714 participants; three studies; moderate-certainty evidence). However, MRA treatment probably has little or no effect on all-cause mortality (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06; 4207 participants; five studies; moderate-certainty evidence) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.11; 4070 participants; three studies; moderate-certainty evidence). MRA treatment may have little or no effect on quality of life measures (mean difference (MD) 0.84, 95% CI -2.30 to 3.98; 511 participants; three studies; low-certainty evidence). MRA treatment was associated with a higher risk of hyperkalaemia (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.51; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) = 11; 4291 participants; six studies; high-certainty evidence). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) We included eight studies (2061 participants) investigating ACEIs. Three studies used a placebo comparator and in five the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 70 to 82 years. Pooled analyses with moderate-certainty evidence suggest that ACEI treatment likely has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.42; 945 participants; two studies), all-cause mortality (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.45; 1187 participants; five studies) and heart failure hospitalisation (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.15; 1019 participants; three studies), and may result in little or no effect on the quality of life (MD -0.09, 95% CI -3.66 to 3.48; 154 participants; two studies; low-certainty evidence). The effects on hyperkalaemia remain uncertain. Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) Eight studies (8755 participants) investigating ARBs were included. Five studies used a placebo comparator and in three the comparator was usual care. The mean age of participants ranged from 61 to 75 years. Pooled analyses with high certainty of evidence suggest that ARB treatment has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.02, 95% 0.90 to 1.14; 7254 participants; three studies), all-cause mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.11; 7964 participants; four studies), heart failure hospitalisation (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.02; 7254 participants; three studies), and quality of life (MD 0.41, 95% CI -0.86 to 1.67; 3117 participants; three studies). ARB was associated with a higher risk of hyperkalaemia (RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.33; 7148 participants; two studies; high-certainty evidence). Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) Three studies (7702 participants) investigating ARNIs were included. Two studies used ARBs as the comparator and one used standardised medical therapy, based on participants' established treatments at enrolment. The mean age of participants ranged from 71 to 73 years. Results suggest that ARNIs may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.15; 4796 participants; one study; moderate-certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.11; 7663 participants; three studies; high-certainty evidence), or quality of life (high-certainty evidence). However, ARNI treatment may result in a slight reduction in heart failure hospitalisation, compared to usual care (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.00; 7362 participants; two studies; moderate-certainty evidence). ARNI treatment was associated with a reduced risk of hyperkalaemia compared with valsartan (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.01; 5054 participants; two studies; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that MRA and ARNI treatment in HFpEF probably reduces heart failure hospitalisation but probably has little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality and quality of life. BB treatment may reduce the risk of cardiovascular mortality, however, further trials are needed. The current evidence for BBs, ACEIs, and ARBs is limited and does not support their use in HFpEF in the absence of an alternative indication. Although MRAs and ARNIs are probably effective at reducing the risk of heart failure hospitalisation, the treatment effect sizes are modest. There is a need for improved approaches to patient stratification to identify the subgroup of patients who are most likely to benefit from MRAs and ARNIs, as well as for an improved understanding of disease biology, and for new therapeutic approaches.

Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 for Short-term Management of Essential Hypertension Compared With ARBs: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

ABSTRACT

Whether LCZ696 (neprilysin inhibitor + valsartan) has greater advantages of blood pressure (BP) lowering than angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs) is unclear. To provide more detailed information about the benefits of LCZ696, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LCZ696 for short-term management of hypertension compared with ARBs. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov, using relevant keywords. We used a random or fixed effects model to calculate the weighted mean difference (WMD) of changes in BP and the risk ratio (RR) for BP control rates and adverse events (AEs). In this meta-analysis, 9 studies were incorporated. Compared with ARBs, LCZ696 revealed a significant reduction in mean sitting systolic BP [msSBP; WMD -4.79 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval (CI): -5.46 to -4.11 mm Hg], mean sitting diastolic BP (msDBP; WMD -2.12 mm Hg; 95% CI: -2.53 to -1.71 mm Hg), mean sitting pulse pressure (msPP; WMD -2.79 mm Hg; 95% CI: -3.52 to -2.07 mm Hg), and mean ambulatory pulse pressure (maPP; WMD -2.96 mm Hg; 95% CI: -3.35 to -2.57 mm Hg). LCZ696 had a higher BP control rate than ARBs (OR = 1.55; 95% CI: 1.39 to 1.73). There was no significant difference between LCZ696 and ARBs in the incidence of AEs (RR = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.96 to 1.25) and discontinuations because of AEs (RR = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.54 to 1.32). Overall, in short-term treatment, LCZ696 has greater advantages of antihypertensive efficacy and the safety is not inferior to ARBs. Further long-term studies are required to rule out the potential risks of beta amyloid accumulation and the potential for Alzheimer's disease.

Exploring the Food and Drug Administration's review and approval of Entresto (sacubitril/valsartan)

Federal regulatory agencies such as the United States Food and Drug Administration review pharmacological evidence to ensure the safety and efficacy of new and repurposed pharmaceuticals prior to market approval. The discussions, disagreements and procedural decisions contained within such reviews offer unique insight into a pharmaceutical's strengths, weaknesses and opportunities, yet are often overlooked as a significant source of pharmacological information for research and development. To highlight the value of such resources, we present a case study on Entresto, a first-in-class angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, and explore the regulatory rationale underlying its market approval. Using information extracted from Entresto's online approval package at Drugs@FDA, we explore some of the procedural complexities underlying market approval of new pharmaceuticals, discuss the broad pharmacological implications contained within regulatory agency grey literature, and highlight opportunities for future therapeutic development.

Computational Modeling Studies of the Roles of Left Ventricular Geometry, Afterload, and Muscle Contractility on Myocardial Strains in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Global longitudinal strain and circumferential strain are found to be reduced in HFpEF, which some have interpreted that the global left ventricular (LV) contractility is impaired. This finding is, however, contradicted by a preserved ejection fraction (EF) and confounded by changes in LV geometry and afterload resistance that may also affect the global strains. To reconcile these issues, we used a validated computational framework consisting of a finite element LV model to isolate the effects of HFpEF features in affecting systolic function metrics. Simulations were performed to quantify the effects on myocardial strains due to changes in LV geometry, active tension developed by the tissue, and afterload. We found that only a reduction in myocardial contractility and an increase in afterload can simultaneously reproduce the blood pressures, EF and strains measured in HFpEF patients. This finding suggests that it is likely that the myocardial contractility is reduced in HFpEF patients. Graphical abstract.

Adverse events of sacubitril/valsartan: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

ABSTRACT

This review aimed to summarize the adverse events (AEs) reported during the use of sacubitril/valsartan versus ACEI/ARB. Studies containing safety outcomes or AEs during the use of sacubitril/valsartan versus ACEI/ARB were retrieved from the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library databases and clinical trials. From the selected studies, the pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of dichotomous outcomes were assessed by a random or fixed effects model in our meta-analysis. Fourteen studies involving 20261 patients were included in this review. No significant differences were found in total AEs between the sacubitril/valsartan and ACEI/ARB groups. Compared with ACEI/ARB, sacubitril/valsartan decreased the risk of death, discontinuation due to AEs and renal dysfunction, while it increased the risk of hypotension. Specifically, sacubitril/valsartan decreased the risk of death compared with ACEI/ARB, while it increased the risk of hypotension for patients with heart failure (HF) and decreased the risk of discontinuation due to AEs in Caucasians. It also increased the risk of dizziness in Asians and decreased the risk of hyperkalemia and renal dysfunction, while it increased the risk of hypotension when the study duration ≥48 weeks. The available evidence showed that sacubitril/valsartan was associated with fewer side effects than ACEI/ARB, except for hypotension. Study duration, race, and patients with primary diseases affected the AEs of sacubitril/valsartan.

A study of the sequential treatment of acute heart failure with sacubitril/valsartan by recombinant human brain natriuretic peptide: A randomized controlled trial

This study aimed to investigate the effects of the basic treatment for heart failure and sequential treatment with rh-brain natriuretic peptide (rhBNP) alone or the combination of rhBNP and sacubitril/valsartan. Cardiac structure, pulmonary artery pressure, inflammation and oxidative stress in patients with acute heart failure were evaluated.Three hundred patients with acute heart failure were included. According to the random number table method, the patients were divided into 3 groups of 100 patients per group: the standard treatment group (treated with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, β receptor blocker, and corticosteroid antagonist), rhBNP group (basic treatment combined with rhBNP) and sequential treatment group (basic treatment for heart failure combined with rhBNP followed by sacubitril/valsartan). The changes in NT-probrain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels, cardiac troponin T (cTnT) levels, cardiac structure, pulmonary artery pressure, and the levels inflammatory factors and oxidative stress factors were compared among the 3 groups at 1, 4, 12, and 36 weeks after treatment.The sequential treatment group displayed superior outcomes than the standard treatment group and the rhBNP group in terms of left atrium diameter, left ventricular end diastolic volume, left ventricular ejection fraction, pulmonary artery pressure, NT-proBNP levels, and cTnT levels, which respond to damage to the heart structure and myocardium. This result may be related to the decreased levels of inflammatory factors and the correction of oxidative stress imbalance.Sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduce the serum levels of inflammatory factors in patients with acute heart failure while decreasing the levels of oxidizing factors and increasing the levels of antioxidant factors. These changes may be one of the explanations for the better cardiac structure and better pulmonary artery pressure observed in the sequential treatment group.

The natriuretic peptide system in heart failure: Diagnostic and therapeutic implications

Natriuretic peptides, which are activated in heart failure, play an important cardioprotective role. The most notable of the cardioprotective natriuretic peptides are atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), which are abundantly expressed and secreted in the atrium and ventricles, respectively, and C-type natriuretic peptide (CNP), which is expressed mainly in the vasculature, central nervous system, and bone. ANP and BNP exhibit antagonistic effects against angiotensin II via diuretic/natriuretic actions, vasodilatory actions, and inhibition of aldosterone secretion, whereas CNP is involved in the regulation of vascular tone and blood pressure, among other roles. ANP and BNP are of particular interest with respect to heart failure, as their levels, most notably BNP and N-terminal proBNP-a cleavage product produced when proBNP is processed to mature BNP-are increased in patients with heart failure. Furthermore, the identification of natriuretic peptides as sensitive markers of cardiac load has driven significant research into their physiological roles in cardiovascular homeostasis and disease, as well as their potential use as both biomarkers and therapeutics. In this review, I discuss the physiological functions of the natriuretic peptide family, with a particular focus on the basic research that has led to our current understanding of its roles in maintaining cardiovascular homeostasis, and the pathophysiological implications for the onset and progression of heart failure. The clinical significance and potential of natriuretic peptides as diagnostic and/or therapeutic agents are also discussed.

The Year in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia: Selected Highlights from 2020

THIS SPECIAL article is the 13th in an annual series for the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. The authors thank the editor-in-chief, Dr Kaplan, and the editorial board for the opportunity to continue this series; namely, the research highlights of the past year in the specialty of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesiology.1 The major themes selected for 2020 are outlined in this introduction, and each highlight is reviewed in detail in the main body of the article. The literature highlights in the specialty for 2020 begin with an update on valvular disease, with a focus on updates in management of aortic and mitral valve disorders. The second major theme is an update on coronary artery disease, with discussion of both medical and surgical management. The third major theme is focused on the perioperative management of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), with the authors highlighting literature discussing medical, surgical, and anesthetic considerations for their cardiac care. The fourth major theme is an update in heart failure, with discussion of medical, psychosocial, and procedural aspects of this complicated disease process. The fifth and final theme focuses on the latest analyses regarding survival in heart transplantation. The themes selected for this 13th special article are only a few of the diverse advances in the specialty during 2020. These highlights will inform the reader of key updates on a variety of topics, leading to improvement of perioperative outcomes for patients with cardiothoracic and vascular disease.

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in the treatment of heart failure: protocol for a systematic review incorporating unpublished clinical study reports

Background: Sacubitril/valsartan is a first-in-class angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor used to treat heart failure. The evidence for this novel medication is largely based on one pivotal phase III trial which was stopped early due to significant clinical benefits being shown. However potential limitations in trial design have been highlighted in recent literature, necessitating a thorough review of all evidence for sacubitril/valsartan. Methods: This review will be conducted using the PRISMA reporting guidelines. Relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for sacubitril/valsartan will be systematically searched for in Medline (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Toxline and Scopus. Clinical trials registries will be searched, as will eight grey literature databases. In addition, unpublished clinical study reports (CSRs) of relevant trials will be requested from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the Clinical Study Data Request database. Studies will be included if they involve randomising adult patients with heart failure to either sacubitril/valsartan or usual care, with either an active comparator or placebo as a control. Heart failure of any subtype or NYHA class will be included. All relevant clinical and safety outcomes will be reviewed, particularly hospitalisation due to heart failure and cardiovascular mortality. Two reviewers will assess eligibility of selected studies for inclusion. Data extraction will be performed separately for trial publications, clinical trial registries and for CSRs using a piloted form. Methodological quality of included trials from published sources will be assessed separately using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2). Narrative synthesis of included studies will be conducted and, if appropriate, meta-analysis for clinical efficacy and safety outcomes. Discussion: This review will collate all available RCT data on sacubitril/valsartan including published and unpublished sources in order to obtain a more complete picture of the evidence base for sacubitril/valsartan. Registration: This protocol is registered on PROSPERO (reference CRD42020162031).

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in the treatment of heart failure: protocol for a systematic review incorporating unpublished clinical study reports

Background: Sacubitril/valsartan is a first-in-class angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor used to treat heart failure. The evidence for this novel medication is largely based on one pivotal phase III trial which was stopped early due to significant clinical benefits being shown. However potential limitations in trial design have been highlighted in recent literature, necessitating a thorough review of all evidence for sacubitril/valsartan.

Methods: This review will be conducted using the PRISMA reporting guidelines. Relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for sacubitril/valsartan will be systematically searched for in Medline (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Toxline and Scopus. Clinical trials registries will be searched, as will eight grey literature databases. In addition, unpublished clinical study reports (CSRs) of relevant trials will be requested from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the Clinical Study Data Request database. Studies will be included if they involve randomising adult patients with heart failure to either sacubitril/valsartan or usual care, with either an active comparator or placebo as a control. Heart failure of any subtype or NYHA class will be included. All relevant clinical and safety outcomes will be reviewed, particularly hospitalisation due to heart failure and cardiovascular mortality. Two reviewers will assess eligibility of selected studies for inclusion. Data extraction will be performed separately for trial publications, clinical trial registries and for CSRs using a piloted form. Methodological quality of included trials from published sources will be assessed separately using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2). Narrative synthesis of included studies will be conducted and, if appropriate, meta-analysis for clinical efficacy and safety outcomes.

Discussion: This review will collate all available RCT data on sacubitril/valsartan including published and unpublished sources in order to obtain a more complete picture of the evidence base for sacubitril/valsartan.

Registration: This protocol is registered on PROSPERO (reference CRD42020162031).

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.

Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition confers renoprotection in rats with diabetes and hypertension by limiting podocyte injury

OBJECTIVES

Combined angiotensin receptor--neprilysin inhibition (ARNI) reduces glomerulosclerosis better than single angiotensin receptor blockade (ARB) in diabetic, hypertensive rats. The renoprotective mechanism remains unknown, but may depend on superior blood pressure control, improved renal hemodynamics, suppressed renal inflammation or prevention of podocyte loss.

METHODS

To address this, TGR(mREN2)27 rats (a model of angiotensin II-dependent hypertension) were made diabetic for 12 weeks and treated with vehicle (n = 10), valsartan (ARB; n = 7) or sacubitril/valsartan (ARNI; n = 8) for the final 3 weeks. Arterial pressure was measured via radiotelemetry.

RESULTS

Sacubitril/valsartan lowered mean arterial pressure by -50 ± 4 mmHg and valsartan by -43 ± 4 mmHg (P = 0.3). Both treatments lowered albuminuria, but only sacubitril/valsartan maintained high urinary atrial natriuretic peptide, improved glycemic control and protected podocyte integrity, reflected by increased nephrin expression and suppression of transient receptor potential canonical 6 and regulator of calcineurin 1. This resulted in markedly reduced glomerulosclerosis (P < 0.05 vs. control and valsartan). Despite higher effective renal plasma flow and glomerular filtration rates, sacubitril/valsartan did neither improve filtration fraction nor renal immune cell infiltration.

CONCLUSION

Sacubitril/valsartan offers drug-class-specific renoprotection in a preclinical model of diabetes and hypertension. Renoprotection is unrelated to antihypertensive efficacy, renal hemodynamics or inflammation, but may be related to protective effects of natriuretic peptides on podocyte integrity.