Effect of Treatment With Sacubitril/Valsartan in Patients With Advanced Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Randomized Clinical Trial

SGLT2 inhibitor therapy in patients with advanced heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

Sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitors (SGLT2-i) improve outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, evidence in patients with advanced HF is lacking. We aimed to determine the effect of SGLT2-i in advanced HFrEF compared to their effect on a non-advanced population.

METHODS

Consecutive HFrEF outpatients who started SGLT2-i were observed for 6-months. Patients were categorized as having advanced or non-advanced HFrEF. The primary outcome was the trend of NTproBNP in the two groups. Secondary outcomes included changes in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, glomerular filtration rate (GFR), and ejection fraction (LVEF). The association between advanced HF diagnosis and including N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) reduction was tested using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 105 patients (45 advanced, 60 non-advanced) were included. Mean age was 56 ± 10 years, 22 % were female, and 35 % had ischemic heart disease. Median NTproBNP at baseline for advanced and non-advanced patients was 1672pg/ml (IQR 520-3320) vs. 481 pg/ml (IQR 173-917), respectively (p < 0.001). At follow-up, only non-advanced patients reduced their NTproBNP (-32 % (95 % CI -51 to -3), p < 0.001), while advanced patients had an increase in NTproBNP. LVEF and NYHA class improved only in non-advanced patients. GFR was stable in both subgroups. At multivariate analysis a diagnosis of advanced HF was independently associated with a reduced probability of NTproBNP reduction (OR 0.041 (95 % CI 0.002-0.752), p = 0.031). Only one patient discontinued the drug due to side effects.

CONCLUSION

In advanced HFrEF, SGLT2-i do not impact on NTproBNP, LVEF or NYHA class but are well tolerated.

Relevant adverse events and drug discontinuation of sacubitril/valsartan in a real-world Japanese cohort: REVIEW-HF registry

BACKGROUND

The characteristics, tolerability, and outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) who are treated with sacubitril/valsartan remain unclear in Japan.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide multicenter study to evaluate the features and outcomes of patients newly prescribed sacubitril/valsartan for the management of HF. We analyzed adverse events (AEs) related to sacubitril/valsartan at 3 months, which were defined as hypotension, worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, and angioedema. Additionally, the association between AEs and outcomes was examined.

RESULTS

Among 993 patients, the mean age was 70 years and 291 (29.3 %) were female, and 22.8 % had left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50 %. Of them, 20.8 % had systolic blood pressure (sBP) <100 mmHg, and 19.5 % had estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 ml/min/1.73 m2 at baseline, which were the populations excluded from the eligibility in landmark trials. AEs related to sacubitril/valsartan were observed in 22.5 % of the patients at 3 months. Overall, 22.6 % of patients discontinued sacubitril/valsartan, and hypotension was the most common event leading to drug discontinuation. After adjustment, patients who had worse HF symptoms (New York Heart Association III or IV), sBP <100 mmHg, and eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73 m2 were associated with a higher risk of AEs related to sacubitril/valsartan. Additionally, patients experiencing AEs had a higher risk of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization than those who did not.

CONCLUSION

In Japan, sacubitril/valsartan was also prescribed to patients not eligible for landmark trials, and AEs were observed at a relatively high rate from soon after treatment initiation. Physicians should closely monitor patients for these events, especially in patients anticipated to have a higher risk of AEs.

Waiting list and post-transplant outcome in Sweden after national centralization of heart transplant surgery

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated an association between transplantation rate per center and postoperative mortality after heart transplantation. In 2011, Sweden centralized heart transplants and waiting lists, reducing the number of centers from 3 to 2. We aimed to assess the active waiting time and pre- and post-transplant mortality before and after centralization.

METHODS

Heart transplantations performed in Sweden between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 2020 were included. Background and donor organ supply data were collected from Scandiatransplant, the Swedish Thoracic Transplant Registry, and the Swedish Cardiac Surgery Registry. The Fine and Gray methods were applied to visualize cumulative incidence curves and conduct competing risk regressions. A Cox model was used to adjust for factors influencing time to post-transplant death.

RESULTS

When comparing the two eras, the median active waiting time increased from 54 to 71 days (p = 0.015). The risk of mortality on the waiting list decreased in the later era (subhazard ratio 0.43; [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.25-0.74]; p = 0.002). The number of heart transplantation procedures (including pediatric patients) increased by 53%. There was a significant difference in organ utilization between eras (p = 0.033; chi-square test). 30-day and 1-year survival post-transplant rates for adults increased from 90.8% to 97.8% (p < 0.001) and from 87.9% to 94.6% (p < 0.001), respectively. 1-year mortality was reduced by 63% (hazard ratio 0.37; 95% CI 0.22-0.61).

CONCLUSIONS

This nationwide study examined patients listed for and undergoing heart transplantation before and after the centralization of waiting lists and surgeries in Sweden. Waiting list mortality decreased, and 1-year post-transplantation survival was improved.

The function and therapeutic potential of transfer RNA-derived small RNAs in cardiovascular diseases: A review

Transfer RNA-derived small RNAs (tsRNAs) are a class of small non-coding RNA (sncRNA) molecules derived from tRNA, including tRNA derived fragments (tRFs) and tRNA halfs (tiRNAs). tsRNAs can affect cell functions by participating in gene expression regulation, translation regulation, intercellular signal transduction, and immune response. They have been shown to play an important role in various human diseases, including cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Targeted regulation of tsRNAs expression can affect the progression of CVDs. The tsRNAs induced by pathological conditions can be detected when released into the extracellular, giving them enormous potential as disease biomarkers. Here, we review the biogenesis, degradation process and related functional mechanisms of tsRNAs, and discuss the research progress and application prospects of tsRNAs in different CVDs, to provide a new perspective on the treatment of CVDs.

Contemporary pharmacological treatment and management of heart failure

The prevention and treatment strategies for heart failure (HF) have evolved in the past two decades. The stages of HF have been redefined, with recognition of the pre-HF state, which encompasses asymptomatic patients who have developed either structural or functional cardiac abnormalities or have elevated plasma levels of natriuretic peptides or cardiac troponin. The first-line treatment of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction includes foundational therapies with angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, β-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and diuretics. The first-line treatment of patients with HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction or with HF with preserved ejection fraction includes SGLT2 inhibitors and diuretics. The timely initiation of these disease-modifying therapies and the optimization of treatment are crucial in all patients with HF. Reassessment after initiation of these therapies is recommended to evaluate patient symptoms, health status and left ventricular function, and timely referral to a HF specialist is necessary if a patient has persistent advanced HF symptoms or worsening HF. Lifestyle modification and treatment of comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus, ischaemic heart disease and atrial fibrillation are crucial through each stage of HF. This Review provides an overview of the management strategies for HF according to disease stages that are derived from the recommendations in the latest US and European HF guidelines.

Sacubitril/valsartan compared to equivalent/sub-equivalent dose angiotensin receptor blocker or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

PURPOSE

The objective of this meta-analysis is to determine how sacubitril/valsartan (SV) compares to equivalent and sub-equivalent angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS

The databases of PubMed and EMBASE were used to identify those randomized controlled trials which compared SV to ARB/ACEI in patients with HFrEF. Only those trials that reported outcomes regarding total mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and worsening heart failure were considered. Meta-analysis was performed separately in those patients receiving equivalent doses of ARB/ACEI and those receiving sub-equivalent doses. Equivalent doses were SV 97/103 = valsartan 160 mg twice daily = enalapril 20 mg twice daily = ramipril 5 mg twice daily. Meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.4.

RESULTS

Twelve randomized trials were identified involving 17,484 patients: 11,291 in the sub-equivalent group (8 trials) and 6193 in the equivalent group (4 trials). Meta-analyses showed there were no statistical differences regarding the outcomes of total mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and worsening heart failure in the equivalent dosing group. However, SV reduced total mortality (risk ratio (RR) = 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.78-0.93, p < 0.001), cardiovascular mortality (RR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.73-0.90, p ≤ 0.001) and worsening heart failure (RR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.64-0.92, p = 0.005) in the sub-equivalent group.

CONCLUSION

When compared to equivalent doses of ARB/ACEI, SV is not superior in reducing mortality and worsening heart failure. SV is superior when compared to sub-equivalent doses of ACEI.

Prognostic impact of beta-blocker use by N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide level in acute heart failure patients

AIMS

Both patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and those with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) present with elevated N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and have multiple comorbidities; consequently, the prognostic effect of NT-proBNP according to beta-blocker (BB) use is unknown.

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated patients admitted for acute HF between January 2012 and December 2017 at Ulsan University Hospital. Clinical, echocardiographic, laboratory and drug prescription data, including BB data, were collected from the hospital database. Information on mortality was collected by reviewing medical records or using national death data.

RESULTS

Of the 472 patients evaluated, 216 (45.8%) and 256 (54.2%) patients were and were not prescribed BB at discharge, respectively. A total of 224 (47.5%) patients died within a median follow-up duration of 44 months. The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed reduced all-cause mortality with BB in HFrEF (ejection fraction ≤ 40%) but not in HFpEF (ejection fraction > 40%). In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, transmitral to tissue Doppler imaging, early diastolic velocity ratio (E/E'), NT-proBNP and BB use were independent predictors of all-cause mortality in HFrEF. Meanwhile, haemoglobin and NT-proBNP levels were independent predictors of HFpEF. The NT-proBNP cut-off value for determining all-cause mortality was set to 4800 pg/mL. Among HFrEF patients with NT-proBNP < 4800 pg/mL, the survival rate was higher for patients with BB use than those with no BB use (log-rank P < 0.001). However, in the HFpEF group, the survival rate associated with BB use did not differ according to the NT-proBNP levels. Both HFrEF and HFpEF patients with NT-proBNP levels of ≥4800 pg/mL presented with multiple comorbidities, including lower body mass index and haemoglobin levels and higher creatinine levels, NT-proBNP levels and E/E'.

CONCLUSION

In patients with acute HF, BB use is associated with reduced all-cause mortality in those with HFrEF but not in those with HFpEF. HFrEF patients with NT-proBNP levels of <4800 pg/mL treated with BB have a higher survival rate than those not treated with BB. However, this benefit is not seen in HFrEF patients with NT-proBNP levels of ≥4800 pg/mL or in all HFpEF patients, regardless of the NT-proBNP level. NT-proBNP levels are elevated in multiple comorbid conditions, and these comorbidities may contribute to the attenuated effects of BB on all-cause mortality.

Semaglutide and NT-proBNP in Obesity-Related HFpEF: Insights From the STEP-HFpEF Program

BACKGROUND

The glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, semaglutide, improved health status and reduced body weight in patients with obesity-related heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in the STEP-HFpEF (Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with Obesity and HFpEF) program. Whether benefits were due to mechanical unloading or effects on HF pathobiology is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine if semaglutide 2.4 mg reduced N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) in patients with obesity-related HFpEF and compare treatment responses by baseline NT-proBNP.

METHODS

This was a prespecified secondary analysis of pooled data from 2 double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trials (STEP-HFpEF [Research Study to Investigate How Well Semaglutide Works in People Living With Heart Failure and Obesity] and STEP-HFpEF DM [Research Study to Look at How Well Semaglutide Works in People Living With Heart Failure, Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes]) testing effects of semaglutide in patients with obesity-related HFpEF. The main outcomes were change in NT-proBNP at 52 weeks and change in the dual primary endpoints of Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score and body weight by baseline NT-proBNP.

RESULTS

In total, 1,145 patients were randomized. Semaglutide compared with placebo reduced NT-proBNP at 52 weeks (estimated treatment ratio: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.74-0.91; P = 0.0002). Improvements in health status were more pronounced in those with higher vs lower baseline NT-proBNP (estimated difference: tertile 1: 4.5 points, 95% CI: 0.8-8.2; tertile 2: 6.2 points, 95% CI: 2.4-10.0; tertile 3: 11.9 points, 95% CI: 8.1-15.7; P interaction = 0.02; baseline NT-proBNP as a continuous variable: P interaction = 0.004). Reductions in body weight were consistent across baseline NT-proBNP levels (P interaction = 0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with obesity-related HFpEF, semaglutide reduced NT-proBNP. Participants with higher baseline NT-proBNP had a similar degree of weight loss but experienced larger reductions in HF-related symptoms and physical limitations with semaglutide than those with lower NT-proBNP.

Pharmacological and Non-Pharmacological Advancements in Heart Failure Treatment

Heart failure (HF) is a complex, life-threatening condition characterized by high mortality, morbidity, and poor quality of life. Despite studies of epidemiology, pathogenesis, and therapies, the rate of HF hospitalization is still increasing due to the growing and aging population and an increase in obesity in relatively younger individuals. It remains a predominant issue in the public health and the global economic burden. Current research has focused on how HF affects the entire range of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), especially the three HF subgroups. This review provides a latest overview of pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies of these three subgroups (HF with preserved ejection fraction, HF with reduced ejection fraction, and HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction). We summarize conventional therapies, investigate novel strategies, and explore the new technologies such as aortic thoracic stimulation and interatrial shunting devices.

Is Sacubitril/Valsartan a Superior Agent in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction? A Review of Randomized Comparative Trials

Background: The PARADIGM HF trial showed sacubitril/valsartan (SV) to be superior to enalapril in patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Since its publication, several other randomized trials have compared SV to either an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) in HFrEF which showed conflicting results regarding mortality, hospitalizations, and quality of life scoring. Objective: To review randomized comparative trials of SV to either ACEI or ARB in patients with HFrEF. Methods: PubMed and Embase databases were used to identify randomized comparative trials. The text terms sacubitril, angiotensin neprilysin, and LCZ696 were used for both searches. Meta-analysis, retrospective, adhoc, and cohort studies were excluded. Results: 1476 and 3983 citations were reviewed on PubMed and Embase, respectively. Of these, 11 randomized comparative trials to either ACEI or ARB were included for analysis. The mortality/quality of life benefits of SV over enalapril in the PARADIGM HF were not corroborated in any of the other trials. The effect of hospitalizations for heart failure was inconsistent among trials. Exercise tolerance was not improved with SV versus enalapril. Conclusion: The results of the PARADIGM HF trial have largely not been confirmed in subsequent randomized comparative trials.

The Polypill: A New Alternative in the Prevention and Treatment of Cardiovascular Disease

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the primary cause of death and disability worldwide. Although age-standardized CVD mortality rates decreased globally by 14.5% between 2006 and 2016, the burden of CVD remains disproportionately higher in low- and middle-income countries compared to high-income countries. Even though proven, effective approaches based on multiple-drug intake aimed at the prevention and treatment of CVD are currently available, poor adherence, early discontinuation of treatment, and suboptimal daily execution of the prescribed therapeutic regimes give rise to shortfalls in drug exposure, leading to high variability in the responses to the prescribed medications. Wald and Law, in their landmark paper published in BMJ 2003, hypothesized that the use of a fixed-dose combination of statins, β-blockers, angiotensin receptor blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and aspirin (classic Polypill composition) may increase adherence and decrease CVD by up to 80% when prescribed as primary prevention or in substitution of traditional protocols. Since then, many clinical trials have tested this hypothesis, with comparable results. This review aims to describe the available clinical trials performed to assess the impact of fixed-dose combinations on adherence, cost-effectiveness, and the risk factors critical to the onset of CVD.

Association of Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Inhibitors With Clinical Outcomes, Hemodynamics, and Myocardial Remodeling Among Patients With Advanced Heart Failure on Left Ventricular Assist Device Support

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the potential benefits of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) in patients with left ventricular assist device support.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 165 consecutive patients undergoing left ventricular assist device implant and alive at 6-month on support were studied. RAASi status after 6-month visit along with clinical reasons for nonprescription/uptitration were retrospectively assessed. The primary outcome was a composite of heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death between 6 and 24 months after left ventricular assist device implant. Remodeling and hemodynamic outcomes were explored by studying the association of RAASi new prescription/uptitration versus unmodified therapy at 6-month visit with the change in echocardiographic parameters and hemodynamics between 6 and 18 months. After the 6-month visit, 76% of patients were on RAASi. Patients' characteristics among those receiving and not receiving RAASi were mostly similar. Of 85 (52%) patients without RAASi new prescription/uptitration at 6-month visit, 62% had no apparent clinical reason. RAASi were independently associated with the primary outcome (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.16-0.69]). The baseline rates of optimal echocardiographic profile (neutral interventricular septum, mitral regurgitation less than mild, and aortic valve opening) and hemodynamic profile (cardiac index ≥2.2 L/min per m2, wedge pressure <18 mm Hg, and right atrial pressure <12 mm Hg) were similar between groups. At 18 months, patients receiving RAASi new prescription/uptitration at 6 months had higher rates of optimal hemodynamic profile (57.5% versus 37.0%; P=0.032) and trends for higher rates of optimal echocardiographic profile (39.6% versus 22.9%; P=0.055) compared with patients with 6-month unmodified therapy. Optimal 18-month hemodynamic and echocardiographic profiles were associated with the primary outcome (log-rank=0.022 and log-rank=0.035, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

RAASi are associated with improved outcomes and improved hemodynamics among mechanically unloaded patients.

Correlation between SUA and prognosis in CHF patients after revascularization

Background

To explore the correlation between serum uric acid (SUA) and prognosis in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) after revascularization.

Methods

A total of 126 patients with CHF undergoing revascularization [coronary artery intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)] in the hospital were enrolled as CHF group between December 2021 and October 2022, while 126 healthy controls during the same period were enrolled as healthy control group. The levels of SUA, inflammatory factors and cardiac function in the two groups were detected. The correlation between SUA level and inflammatory factors, cardiac function levels was analyzed. All patients in CHF group were followed up for 6 months to observe prognosis. The differences in the above indexes among patients with different prognosis were compared. The risk factors of prognosis were analyzed by multivariate Logistic regression analysis, and their predictive value for prognosis was evaluated by ROC curves analysis.

Imagenetics for Precision Medicine in Dilated Cardiomyopathy

Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is a common heart muscle disorder of nonischemic etiology associated with heart failure development and the risk of malignant ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. A tailored approach to risk stratification and prevention of sudden cardiac death is required in genetic DCM given its variable presentation and phenotypic severity. Currently, advances in cardiogenetics have shed light on disease mechanisms, the complex genetic architecture of DCM, polygenic contributors to disease susceptibility and the role of environmental triggers. Parallel advances in imaging have also enhanced disease recognition and the identification of the wide spectrum of phenotypes falling under the DCM umbrella. Genotype-phenotype associations have been also established for specific subtypes of DCM, such as DSP (desmoplakin) or FLNC (filamin-C) cardiomyopathy but overall, they remain elusive and not readily identifiable. Also, despite the accumulated knowledge on disease mechanisms, certain aspects remain still unclear, such as which patients with DCM are at risk for disease progression or remission after treatment. Imagenetics, that is, the combination of imaging and genetics, is expected to further advance research in the field and contribute to precision medicine in DCM management and treatment. In the present article, we review the existing literature in the field, summarize the established knowledge and emerging data on the value of genetics and imaging in establishing genotype-phenotype associations in DCM and in clinical decision making for DCM patients.

The role and application of current pharmacological management in patients with advanced heart failure

In the last decades, several classifications and definitions have been proposed for advanced heart failure (ADVHF) patients, including clinical, functional, hemodynamic, imaging, and electrocardiographic features. Despite different inclusion criteria, ADVHF is characterized by some common items, such as drug intolerance, low arterial pressure, multiple organ dysfunction, chronic kidney disease, and diuretic use dependency. Additional features include fatigue, hypotension, hyponatremia, and unintentional weight loss associated with a specific laboratory profile reflecting systemic multiorgan dysfunction. Notably, studies evaluating guideline-directed medical therapy recently endorsed by guidelines in stable HF, including the 4 drug classes all together (i.e., betablocker, mineral corticoid antagonist, renin angiotensin inhibitors/neprilysin inhibitors, and sodium glucose transporter inhibitors), remain scarcely analyzed in ADVHF and New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class IV. Additionally, due to the common conditions associated with advanced stages, the balance between drug tolerance and potential benefits of the contemporary use of all agents is questioned. Therefore, less hard endpoints, such as exercise tolerance, quality of life (QoL) and self-competency, are not clearly demonstrated. Specific analyses evaluating outcome and rehospitalization of each drug provided conflicting results and are often limited to subjects with stable conditions and less advanced NYHA class. Current European Society of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ESC/AHA) Guidelines do not indicate the type of treatment, dosage, and administration modalities, and they do not suggest specific indications for ADVHF patients. Due to these concerns, there is an impelling need to understand what drugs may be used as the first line, what management leads to the better outcome, and what is the best treatment algorithm in this setting. In this paper, we summarize the most common pitfalls and limitations for the use of the traditional agents, and we propose a personalized approach aiming at preserve drug tolerance and maintaining adverse event protection and satisfactory QoL.

Effect of sacubitril/valsartan on lipid metabolism in patients with chronic kidney disease combined with chronic heart failure: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Dyslipidemia is significantly more common in those with concurrent chronic kidney disease (CKD) and chronic heart failure (CHF). Sacubitril/valsartan has showcased its influence on both cardiac and renal functions, extending its influence to the modulation of lipid metabolism pathways. This study aimed to examine how sacubitril/valsartan affects lipid metabolism within the context of CKD and CHF.

METHODS

This study adopted a retrospective design, focusing on a single center and involving participants who were subjected to treatment with sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan. The investigation assessed the treatment duration, with a particular emphasis on recording blood lipid indicators, including triglyceride (TG), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), apolipoprotein A (ApoA), and apolipoprotein B (ApoB). Furthermore, cardiac and renal functions, blood pressure, potassium levels, and other factors influencing the blood lipids were analyzed in both groups at identical time points.

RESULTS

After 16 weeks of observation, the sacubitril/valsartan group exhibited lower TG levels compared to the valsartan group. Noteworthy was the fact that individuals undergoing sacubitril/valsartan treatment experienced an average reduction of 0.84 mmol/L in TG levels, in stark contrast to the valsartan group, which registered a decline of 0.27 mmol/L (P < 0.001). The sacubitril/valsartan group exhibited elevated levels of HDL-C and ApoA in comparison to the valsartan group (PHDL-C = 0.023, PApoA = 0.030). While TC, LDL-C, and ApoB decreased compared to baseline, the differences between groups were not statistical significance. Regarding cardiac indicators, there was an observed enhancement in the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) within the sacubitril/valsartan group when compared to the baseline, and it was noticeably higher than that of the valsartan group. Spearman correlation analysis and multiple linear regression analysis revealed that medication, body mass index(BMI), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) had a direct influencing effect on TG levels.

CONCLUSION

Sacubitril/valsartan demonstrated improvements in lipid metabolism and cardiac indicators in patients with CKD and CHF. Specifically, it presented promising benefits in reducing TG levels. In addition, both BMI and HbA1c emerged as influential factors contributing to alterations in TG levels, independent of the administration of sacubitril/valsartan.

Hypertension Related Co-Morbidities and Complications in Women of Sub-Saharan Africa: A Brief Review

Hypertension is the leading cause of cardiovascular disease in women, and sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries have some of the highest rates of hypertension in the world. Expanding knowledge of causes, management, and awareness of hypertension and its co-morbidities worldwide is an effective strategy to mitigate its harms, decrease morbidities and mortality, and improve individual quality of life. Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDPs) are a particularly important subset of hypertension, as pregnancy is a major stress test of the cardiovascular system and can be the first instance in which cardiovascular disease is clinically apparent. In SSA, women experience a higher incidence of HDP compared with other African regions. However, the region has yet to adopt treatment and preventative strategies for HDP. This delay stems from insufficient awareness, lack of clinical screening for hypertension, and lack of prevention programs. In this brief literature review, we will address the long-term consequences of hypertension and HDP in women. We evaluate the effects of uncontrolled hypertension in SSA by including research on heart disease, stroke, kidney disease, peripheral arterial disease, and HDP. Limitations exist in the number of studies from SSA; therefore, we will use data from countries across the globe, comparing and contrasting approaches in similar and dissimilar populations. Our review highlights an urgent need to prioritize public health, clinical, and bench research to discover cost-effective preventative and treatment strategies that will improve the lives of women living with hypertension in SSA.

Guideline-directed medical therapy in severe heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: An analysis from the HELP-HF registry

AIM

Persistent symptoms despite guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and poor tolerance of GDMT are hallmarks of patients with advanced heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, real-world data on GDMT use, dose, and prognostic implications are lacking.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We included 699 consecutive patients with HFrEF and at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF enrolled in a multicentre registry. Beta-blockers (BB) were administered to 574 (82%) patients, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ACEi/ARB/ARNI) were administered to 381 (55%) patients and 416 (60%) received mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA). Overall, ≥50% of target doses were reached in 41%, 22%, and 56% of the patients on BB, ACEi/ARB/ARNI and MRA, respectively. Hypotension, bradycardia, kidney dysfunction and hyperkalaemia were the main causes of underprescription and/or underdosing, but up to a half of the patients did not receive target doses for unknown causes (51%, 41%, and 55% for BB, ACEi/ARB/ARNI and MRA, respectively). The proportions of patients receiving BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI were lower among those fulfilling the 2018 HFA-ESC criteria for advanced HF. Treatment with BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI were associated with a lower risk of death or HF hospitalizations (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.84, and HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.95, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large, real-world, contemporary cohort of patients with severe HFrEF, with at least one marker for advanced HF, prescription and uptitration of GDMT remained limited. A significant proportion of patients were undertreated due to unknown reasons suggesting a potential role of clinical inertia either by the prescribing healthcare professional or by the patient. Treatment with BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI was associated with lower mortality/morbidity.

Immunomodulation and immunopharmacology in heart failure

The immune system is intimately involved in the pathophysiology of heart failure. However, it is currently underused as a therapeutic target in the clinical setting. Moreover, the development of novel immunomodulatory therapies and their investigation for the treatment of patients with heart failure are hampered by the fact that currently used, evidence-based treatments for heart failure exert multiple immunomodulatory effects. In this Review, we discuss current knowledge on how evidence-based treatments for heart failure affect the immune system in addition to their primary mechanism of action, both to inform practising physicians about these pleiotropic actions and to create a framework for the development and application of future immunomodulatory therapies. We also delineate which subpopulations of patients with heart failure might benefit from immunomodulatory treatments. Furthermore, we summarize completed and ongoing clinical trials that assess immunomodulatory treatments in heart failure and present several therapeutic targets that could be investigated in the future. Lastly, we provide future directions to leverage the immunomodulatory potential of existing treatments and to foster the investigation of novel immunomodulatory therapeutics.

Patient-Centered Heart Failure Therapy

Simultaneous initiation of quadruple therapy with angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, beta-adrenergic receptor blocker, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor aims at prompt improvement and prevention of readmission in patients hospitalized for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. However, titration of quadruple therapy is time consuming. Lengthy up-titration of quadruple therapy may negate the benefit of early initiation. Quadruple therapy should start with a sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibition and a mineralocorticoid antagonist, as both enable safe decongestion and require minimal or no titration. Depending on the level of decongestion and clinical characteristics, patients receive an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor or a beta-adrenergic receptor blocker to be titrated after hospital discharge. Outpatient addition of an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor to a beta-adrenergic receptor blocker or vice versa completes the quadruple therapy scheme. By focusing on decongestion and matching intervention to patients' profile, the present therapeutic sequence allows rapid implementation of quadruple therapy at fully recommended doses.

Baroreflex activation therapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a single-centre experience

AIMS

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is associated with excessive sympathetic and impaired parasympathetic activity. The Barostim Neo™ device is used for electronical baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) to counteract autonomic nervous system dysbalance. Randomized trials have shown that BAT improves walking distance and reduces N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels at least in patients with only moderate elevation at baseline. Its impact on the risk of heart failure hospitalization (HFH) and death is not yet established, and experience in clinical routine is limited.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We report on patient characteristics and clinical outcome in a retrospective, non-randomized single-centre registry of BAT in HFrEF. Patients in the New York Heart Association (NYHA) Classes III and IV with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <35% despite guideline-directed medical therapy were eligible. Symptom burden, echocardiography, and laboratory testing were assessed at baseline and after 12 months. Clinical events of HFH and death were recorded at routine clinical follow-up. Data are shown as number (%) or median (inter-quartile range). Between 2014 and 2020, 30 patients were treated with BAT. Median age was 67 (63-77) years, and 27 patients (90%) were male. Most patients (83%) had previous HFH. Device implantation was successful in all patients. At 12 months, six patients had died and three were alive but did not attend follow-up. NYHA class was III/IV in 26 (87%)/4 (13%) patients at baseline, improved in 19 patients, and remained unchanged in 5 patients (P < 0.001). LVEF improved from 25.5 (20.0-30.5) % at baseline to 30.0 (25.0-36.0) % at 12 months (P = 0.014). Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter remained unchanged. A numerical decrease in NT-proBNP [3165 (880-8085) vs. 1001 (599-3820) pg/mL] was not significant (P = 0.526). Median follow-up for clinical events was 16 (10-33) months. Mortality at 1 (n = 6, 20%) and 3 years (n = 10, 33%) was as expected by the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure risk score. Despite BAT, event rate was high in patients with NYHA Class IV, NT-proBNP levels >1600 pg/mL, or estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 mL/min at baseline. NYHA class and eGFR were independent predictors of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HFrEF who are selected for BAT are in a stage of worsening or even advanced heart failure. BAT appears to be safe and improves clinical symptoms and-to a modest degree-left ventricular function. The risk of death remains high in advanced disease stages. Patient selection seems to be crucial, and the impact of BAT in earlier disease stages needs to be established.

Sacubitril/Valsartan in the Treatment of Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction Focusing on the Impact on the Quality of Life: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

There exists a paucity of research data reported by analyses performed on randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that encompass quality of life (QOL) and the aftermath for patients suffering from heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have been done to evaluate the drug sacubitril/valsartan in the treatment of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with a clear focus on the effect it bestows on measures of physical exercise tolerance and quality of life. A thorough systematic search was done in databases including Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, and PubMed from 1 January 2010 to 1 January 2023. The search only included published RCTs on adult patients aged 18 and above, with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Data analysis was performed by using the software RevMan 5.4 (Cochrane Collaboration, London, United Kingdom). The included studies' bias risk was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool. The quality of evidence for the primary outcome was done using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. This systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs yielded 458 studies, of which eight randomized clinical trials were included and analyzed. The meta-analysis of the included trials shows that the I2 value is 61% (i.e., I2 > 50%), demonstrating a substantial heterogeneity within the studies. The left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) expressed in percentage was reported in the five studies, and thereby, a subgroup analysis that yielded a confidence interval (CI) of 95% had the standard mean difference of 0.02 (-0.02, 0.07). The trials had disparity between the reporting of effect on peak oxygen consumption (VO2), measured through cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) methods, six-minute walking test (6MWT), overall physical activity, and exercise capacity. Sacubitril/valsartan did not exponentially improve peak VO2 or 6MWT in these trials; however, the patient-reported data suggested that the quality of life was modestly influenced by the drug. A subgroup analysis was performed using the pooled effect value by the random effects model. The findings showed that the sacubitril/valsartan group significantly was better than the control group in improving HFrEF-associated health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that evaluated the drug sacubitril/valsartan in treating heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and focused on its tangible effect on the measures of physical exercise tolerance and quality of life. It depicts that the statistical scrutiny due to the lack of significant data and parity across studies did not impart significant improvement of either LVEF, peak VO2, or 6MWT with the use of sacubitril/valsartan; however, the reported exercise tolerance, including daytime physical activity, had a modest impact with the said drug. The pooled values demonstrated that the sacubitril/valsartan group significantly outperformed the control group in improving HFrEF HRQoL.

Repetitive levosimendan infusions for patients with advanced chronic heart failure in the vulnerable post-discharge period: The multinational randomized LeoDOR trial

AIM

The LeoDOR trial explored the efficacy and safety of intermittent levosimendan therapy in the vulnerable phase following a hospitalization for acute heart failure (HF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this prospective multicentre, double-blind, two-armed trial, patients with advanced HF were randomized 2:1 at the end of an index hospitalization for acute HF to intermittent levosimendan therapy or matching placebo for 12 weeks. All patients had left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤30% during index hospitalization. Levosimendan was administered according to centre preference either as 6 h infusion at a rate of 0.2 μg/kg/min every 2 weeks, or as 24 h infusion at a rate of 0.1 μg/kg/min every 3 weeks. The primary efficacy assessment after 14 weeks was based on a global rank score consisting of three hierarchical groups. Secondary clinical endpoints included the composite risk of tiers 1 and 2 at 14 and 26 weeks, respectively. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the planned number of patients could not be recruited. The final modified intention-to-treat analysis included 145 patients (93 in the combined levosimendan arm, 52 in the placebo arm), which reduced the statistical power to detect a 20% risk reduction in the primary endpoint to 60%. Compared with placebo, intermittent levosimendan had no significant effect on the primary endpoint: the mean rank score was 72.55 for the levosimendan group versus 73.81 for the placebo group (p = 0.863). However, there was a signal towards a higher incidence of the individual clinical components of the primary endpoint in the levosimendan group versus the placebo group both after 14 weeks (hazard ratio [HR] 2.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-7.68; p = 0.021) and 26 weeks (HR 1.64, 95% CI 0.87-3.11; p = 0.122).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients recently hospitalized with HF and reduced LVEF, intermittent levosimendan therapy did not improve post-hospitalization clinical stability.

Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor Effects on Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Events: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Sacubitril-valsartan is an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) associated with a decreased risk of death and hospitalization for selected patients with heart failure (HF). However, its association with improved atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the association of ARNI with ASCVD events in patients with HF. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies comparing ARNIs with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in terms of myocardial infarction, stroke, angina pectoris, peripheral artery disease, and the composite end point in patients with HF. A total of 8 randomized controlled trials were included, with 17,541 patients assigned to either the ARNI (8,764 patients) or ACEi/ARB (8,777 patients) groups. The incidence of composite end point (risk ratio [RR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93 to 1.13, p = 0.63), myocardial infarction (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.30, p = 0.85), angina pectoris (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.17, p = 0.70), and stroke (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.16, p = 0.93) were not statistically different between the ARNI and ACEi/ARB groups. However, ARNI was associated with a higher incidence of peripheral artery disease (RR 1.63, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.52, p = 0.03). In conclusion, this meta-analysis found no association between ARNI therapy and improved ASCVD events in patients with HF.

Addressing Barriers for Women with Advanced Heart Failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Describe disparities in diagnosis and management between men and women with advanced heart failure (HF). Our goal is to identify barriers and suggest solutions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Women with advanced HF are less likely to undergo diagnostic testing and procedures (i.e., revascularization, implantable cardioverter defibrillators, cardiac resynchronization therapy, mechanical circulatory support, and orthotopic heart transplantation). Disparities related to gender create less favorable outcomes for women with advanced HF. The issues arise from access to care, paucity of knowledge, enrollment in clinical trials, and eligibility for advanced therapies. In this review, we propose a call to action to level the playing field in order to improve survival in women with advanced HF.

Effects of Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitors Versus Enalapril or Valsartan on Patients With Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Recent studies have focused on treating heart failure, primarily mitigating symptoms and reducing the risk of mortality and other cardiovascular complications. A promising new treatment approach involves using LCZ696, an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) comprising sacubitril and valsartan. This treatment is superior to the conventional drugs enalapril or valsartan in patients diagnosed with heart failure. A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Elsevier's ScienceDirect databases to identify studies comparing sacubitril/valsartan with other drugs in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The analyses were conducted using the random-effects model. The study's primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, death from cardiovascular causes, first hospitalization for heart failure, congestive heart failure, and changes in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) clinical score. The pooled analysis showed that treatment with the sacubitril/valsartan combination was associated with a significantly decreased rate of first hospitalization for heart failure (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.79, 0.98, p: 0.03; I2: 57%) and significantly increased KCCQ clinical score (WMD: 2.20; 95% CI: 0.33, 4.06, p: 0.02; I2: 100%). However, the two groups had no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.80, 1.01, p: 0.08; I2: 20%), death from cardiovascular causes (RR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.87, 1.05, p: 0.34; I2: 0%), or congestive heart failure (RR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.75, 1.25, p: 0.19; I2: 38%). The research findings suggest that sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) reduces hospitalizations due to heart failure and improves KCCQ clinical scores. This treatment also reduces the decline in renal function and side effects associated with enalapril or valsartan. Nonetheless, further high-quality randomized controlled trials with large sample sizes are needed to assess other impacts of this therapy on heart failure patients. Overall, the use of LCZ696 represents a promising new approach to the treatment of heart failure.

Left ventricular electrical potential measured by the NOGA XP electromechanical mapping method as a predictor of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy

Objectives

The aim of the study was to determine whether left ventricular electrical potential measured by electromechanical mapping with the NOGA XP system has predictive value for response to CRT.

Background

Approximately 30% of patients who undergo cardiac resynchronization therapy do not see the expected effects.

Methods

The group of 38 patients qualified for CRT implantation were included in the study, of which 33 patients were analyzed. A 15% reduction in ESV after 6 months of pacing was used as a criterion for a positive response to CRT. The mean value and sum of unipolar and bipolar potentials obtained by mapping with the NOGA XP system and their predictive value in relation to the effect of CRT were analyzed using a bulls-eye projection at three levels: 1) the global value of the left ventricular (LV) potentials, 2) the potentials of the individual LV walls and 3) the mean value of the potentials of the individual segments (basal and middle) of the individual LV walls.

Results

24 patients met the criterion of a positive response to CRT vs. 9 non-responders. At the global analysis stage, the independent predictors of favorable response to CRT were the sum of the unipolar potential and bipolar mean potential. In the analysis of individual left ventricular walls, the mean bipolar potential of the anterior and posterior wall and in the unipolar system, mean septal potential was found to be an independent predictor of favorable response to CRT. In the detailed segmental analysis, the independent predictors were the bipolar potential of the mid-posterior wall segment and the basal anterior wall segment.

Conclusions

Measurement of bipolar and unipolar electrical potentials with the NOGA XP system is a valuable method for predicting a favorable response to CRT.

Natriuretic peptides: role in the diagnosis and management of heart failure: a scientific statement from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America and Japanese Heart Failure Society

Natriuretic peptides, brain (B-type) natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) are globally and most often used for the diagnosis of heart failure (HF). In addition, they can have an important complementary role in the risk stratification of its prognosis. Since the development of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), the use of natriuretic peptides as therapeutic agents has grown in importance. The present document is the result of the Trilateral Cooperation Project among the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, the Heart Failure Society of America and the Japanese Heart Failure Society. It represents an expert consensus that aims to provide a comprehensive, up-to-date perspective on natriuretic peptides in the diagnosis and management of HF, with a focus on the following main issues: (1) history and basic research: discovery, production and cardiovascular protection; (2) diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers: acute HF, chronic HF, inclusion/endpoint in clinical trials, and natriuretic peptide-guided therapy; (3) therapeutic use: nesiritide (BNP), carperitide (ANP) and ARNIs; and (4) gaps in knowledge and future directions.

Natriuretic Peptides: Role in the Diagnosis and Management of Heart Failure: A Scientific Statement From the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America and Japanese Heart Failure Society

Natriuretic peptides, brain (B-type) natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) are globally and most often used for the diagnosis of heart failure (HF). In addition, they can have an important complementary role in the risk stratification of its prognosis. Since the development of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), the use of natriuretic peptides as therapeutic agents has grown in importance. The present document is the result of the Trilateral Cooperation Project among the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, the Heart Failure Society of America and the Japanese Heart Failure Society. It represents an expert consensus that aims to provide a comprehensive, up-to-date perspective on natriuretic peptides in the diagnosis and management of HF, with a focus on the following main issues: (1) history and basic research: discovery, production and cardiovascular protection; (2) diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers: acute HF, chronic HF, inclusion/endpoint in clinical trials, and natriuretic peptides-guided therapy; (3) therapeutic use: nesiritide (BNP), carperitide (ANP) and ARNIs; and (4) gaps in knowledge and future directions.

Intermittent inotropic support with levosimendan in advanced heart failure as destination therapy: The LEVO-D registry

AIM

Patients with advanced heart failure (AHF) who are not candidates to advanced therapies have poor prognosis. Some trials have shown that intermittent levosimendan can reduce HF hospitalizations in AHF in the short term. In this real-life registry, we describe the patterns of use, safety and factors related to the response to intermittent levosimendan infusions in AHF patients not candidates to advanced therapies.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Multicentre retrospective study of patients diagnosed with advanced heart failure, not HT or LVAD candidates. Patients needed to be on the optimal medical therapy according to their treating physician. Patients with de novo heart failure or who underwent any procedure that could improve prognosis were not included in the registry. Four hundred three patients were included; 77.9% needed at least one admission the year before levosimendan was first administered because of heart failure. Death rate at 1 year was 26.8% and median survival was 24.7 [95% CI: 20.4-26.9] months, and 43.7% of patients fulfilled the criteria for being considered a responder lo levosimendan (no death, heart failure admission or unplanned HF visit at 1 year after first levosimendan administration). Compared with the year before there was a significant reduction in HF admissions (38.7% vs. 77.9%; P < 0.0001), unplanned HF visits (22.7% vs. 43.7%; P < 0.0001) or the combined event including deaths (56.3% vs. 81.4%; P < 0.0001) during the year after. We created a score that helps predicting the responder status at 1 year after levosimendan, resulting in a score summatory of five variables: TEER (+2), treatment with beta-blockers (+1.5), Haemoglobin >12 g/dL (+1.5), amiodarone use (-1.5) HF visit 1 year before levosimendan (-1.5) and heart rate >70 b.p.m. (-2). Patients with a score less than -1 had a very low probability of response (21.5% free of death or HF event at 1 year) meanwhile those with a score over 1.5 had the better chance of response (68.4% free of death or HF event at 1 year). LEVO-D score performed well in the ROC analysis.

CONCLUSION

In this large real-life series of AHF patients treated with levosimendan as destination therapy, we show a significant decrease of heart failure events during the year after the first administration. The simple LEVO-D Score could be of help when deciding about futile therapy in this population.

The history and mystery of sacubitril/valsartan: From clinical trial to the real world

Heart failure is a serious threat to human health, with morbidity and mortality rates increasing despite the existence of multiple treatment options. Therefore, it is necessary to identify new therapeutic targets for this disease. Sacubitril/valsartan is a supramolecular sodium salt complex of the enkephalinase inhibitor prodrug sacubitril and the angiotensin receptor blocker valsartan. Its combined action increases endogenous natriuretic peptides while inhibiting the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and exerting cardioprotective effects. Clinical evidence suggests that sacubitril/valsartan is superior to conventional renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitor therapy for patients with reduced ejection fraction heart failure who can tolerate angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers. The therapy reduces the risk of heart failure hospitalization, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality and has a better safety and tolerability record. This review describes the potential pathophysiological mechanisms of cardiomyocyte injury amelioration by sacubitril/valsartan. We explore the protective effects of sacubitril/valsartan and outline the therapeutic value in patients with heart failure by summarizing the results of recent large clinical trials. Furthermore, a preliminary outlook shows that sacubitril/valsartan may be effective at treating other diseases, and provides some exploratory observations that lay the foundation for future studies on this drug.

Efficacy and safety of low-dose sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Controversy has persisted over the clinical benefits of low-dose sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure (HF).

HYPOTHESIS

Low-dose sacubitril/valsartan might also be effective and safe in HF patients.

METHODS

Electronic databases including PubMed, Ovid, and Cochrane Library were systematically retrieved from inception to August 5, 2021. Review manager 5.4 and Stata 15.1 were employed in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Key efficacy outcomes of interest included HF hospitalization, all-cause mortality, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), together with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class. The safety outcome was systolic blood pressure (SBP). The grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation approach was conducted to evaluate the quality of evidence for each outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 1269 studies were screened and 9 real-world studies met the inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis, with 1697 participants. Compared with low-dose sacubitril/valsartan, high-dose sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced the risk of HF hospitalization (odds ratio [OR]: 0.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.27-0.61, p < .0001) and the risk of all-cause mortality (OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.11-0.47, p < .0001). However, there were no appreciable differences in improvements of NYHA (OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.15-2.35, p = .45), changes of LVEF (mean difference [MD]: 2.73%, 95% CI: -2.24% to 7.7%, p = .28), changes of NT-proBNP (MD: 43.09, 95% CI: -28.41 to 114.59, p = .24) and changes of SBP (MD: 3.01, 95% CI: -4.62 to 10.64, p = .44) between groups with low-dose and high-dose sacubitril/valsartan.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with high-dose sacubitril/valsartan, low-dose sacubitril/valsartan was associated with increased risks of HF hospitalization and all-cause mortality. However, no distinct between-group differences in improvements of NYHA, changes of LVEF, changes of NT-proBNP and changes of SBP were observed.

Diuretic and renal effects of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor in patients hospitalized for acute heart failure

In patients hospitalized for acute decompensation of heart failure (HF), the impact of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) on diuresis and renal function has not been fully investigated. Patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction who were hospitalized for acute decompensation and newly initiated ARNI after hemodynamic stabilization were enrolled. Changes in urine volume (UV), body weight, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and urine N-acetyl-beta-d-glucosaminidase (uNAG) levels before and after ARNI initiation were investigated. Changes in the diuretic response [DR, calculated as urine volume/(intravenous furosemide volume/40 mg)], N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), hematocrit, and plasma volume (PV) were also evaluated. A total of 60 patients were enrolled. ARNI was initiated at a median of 6 [5, 7] days after hospitalization. After initiation of ARNI, body weight, NT-proBNP, and PV decreased. UV and DR increased only on the day of ARNI initiation (delta UV 400 ± 957 ml and delta DR 1100 ± 3107 ml/40 mg furosemide) and then decreased to baseline levels. In the multivariable linear regression analysis, younger age, higher BMI, and higher NT-proBNP levels were significantly associated with greater UV after ARNI initiation. eGFR and uNAG did not significantly change after the initiation of ARNI [delta eGFR -1.7 ± 12.0 mL/min/1.73 m² and delta uNAG 2.0 (-5.6, 6.9) IU/L]. In patients hospitalized for HF, the initiation of ARNI was associated with a small and transient increase in UV and DR, and was not associated with worsening of renal function or tubular injury.

Endocrine functions of the heart: from bench to bedside

Heart has a recognized endocrine function as it produces several biologically active substances with hormonal properties. Among these hormones, the natriuretic peptide (NP) system has been extensively characterized and represents a prominent expression of the endocrine function of the heart. Over the years, knowledge about the mechanisms governing their synthesis, secretion, processing, and receptors interaction of NPs has been intensively investigated. Their main physiological endocrine and paracrine effects on cardiovascular and renal systems are mostly mediated through guanylate cyclase-A coupled receptors. The potential role of NPs in the pathophysiology of heart failure and particularly their counterbalancing action opposing the overactivation of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone and sympathetic nervous systems has been described. In addition, NPs are used today as key biomarkers in cardiovascular diseases with both diagnostic and prognostic significance. On these premises, multiple therapeutic strategies based on the biological properties of NPs have been attempted to develop new cardiovascular therapies. Apart from the introduction of the class of angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitors in the current management of heart failure, novel promising molecules, including M-atrial natriuretic peptide (a novel atrial NP-based compound), have been tested for the treatment of human hypertension. The development of new drugs is currently underway, and we are probably only at the dawn of novel NPs-based therapeutic strategies. The present article also provides an updated overview of the regulation of NPs synthesis and secretion by microRNAs and epigenetics as well as interactions of cardiac hormones with other endocrine systems.

HFSA Expert Consensus Statement on the Medical Management of Patients on Durable Mechanical Circulatory Support

The medical management of patients supported with durable continuous flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support encompasses pharmacologic therapies administered in the preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative and chronic LVAD support stages. As patients live longer on LVAD support, the risks of LVAD-related complications and progression of cardiovascular and other diseases increase. Using existing data from cohort studies, registries, randomized trials and expert opinion, this Heart Failure Society of America Consensus Document on the Medical Management of Patients on Durable Mechanical Circulatory Support offers best practices on the management of patients on durable MCS, focusing on pharmacological therapies administered to patients on continuous flow LVADs. While quality data in the LVAD population are few, the utilization of guideline directed heart failure medical therapies (GDMT) and the importance of blood pressure management, right ventricular preload and afterload optimization, and antiplatelet and anticoagulation regimens are discussed. Recommended pharmacologic regimens used to mitigate or treat common complications encountered during LVAD support, including arrhythmias, vasoplegia, mucocutaneous bleeding, and infectious complications are addressed. Finally, this document touches on important potential pharmacological interactions from anti-depressants, herbal and nutritional supplements of relevance to providers of patients on LVAD support.

Effectiveness and Safety of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease-A Real-World Experience

BACKGROUND

data regarding the effectiveness and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are scarse.

OBJECTIVE

to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in HFrEF and CKD in a real-world population.

METHODS

we included consecutive ambulatory HFrEF patients that initiated sacubitril/valsartan between February 2017 and October 2020, stratified by CKD (KDIGO stage 5 excluded).

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

the incidence rate per 100 patient-years and the annualized length of stay (LOS) of acute decompensated HF hospitalizations (HFH).

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

all-cause mortality, NYHA improvement, and titration of sacubitril/valsartan.

RESULTS

We included 179 patients, 77 with CKD, those being older (72 ± 10 vs. 65 ± 12 years, p < 0.001), had higher NT-proBNP (4623 ± 5266 vs. 1901 ± 1835 pg/mL, p < 0.001), and high anaemia incidence (p < 0.001). After 19 ± 11 months, a significant reduction in HFH adjusted incidence rate (57.5% decrease in CKD vs. 74.6%, p = 0.261) was observed, with 5 days there was a reduction in annualized LOS in both groups (p = 0.319). NYHA improved similarly in both groups (p = 0.670). CKD patients presented non-significant higher all-cause mortality (HR = 2.405, 95%CI: [0.841; 6.879], p = 0.102). Both groups had similar sacubitril/valsartan maximum dose achievement and drug withdrawal.

CONCLUSION

sacubitril/valsartan was effective on reducing HFH and LOS without affecting all-cause mortality in a CKD real-world population.

Renal Safety of Sacubitril/Valsartan: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

ABSTRACT

As a first-line therapy, sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) plays a significant role in the treatment of heart failure. However, its effect on renal function is still uncertain. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials for randomized controlled trials to evaluate the effect of S/V on renal function in patients. The results are reported as the mean difference, relative ratio, and 95% confidence intervals. A total of 13 randomized controlled trials were included (19,367 patients). Among them, 11 studies focused on patients with heart failure, 1 on patients with acute myocardial infarction, and 1 on patients with chronic kidney disease. We found that fewer worsening renal function events, elevated creatine level events, and severe hyperkalemia events (blood potassium >6.0 mmol/L) occurred in the S/V group than those in the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RASi) group. The estimated glomerular filtration rate decreased in both the S/V group and the RASi group, but the change was more obvious in the RASi group. There was no significant difference in hyperkalemia events (blood potassium >5.5 mmol/L) between the 2 groups. Subgroup analysis showed that with the extension of follow-up time (>6 months), worsening renal function events occurred less frequently in the S/V group than in the RASi group. Existing evidence has shown that S/V is superior to RASi in general renal safety. Perhaps with the prolongation of treatment time, the advantages of S/V are more obvious.

Meta-Analysis on Drug and Device Therapy of New York Heart Association Functional Class IV Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, particularly in patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class IV symptoms. Decades of discovery have heralded significant advancements in the pharmacologic management of HFrEF. However, patients with NYHA IV symptoms remain an under-represented population in almost every clinical trial to date, leaving clinicians with limited evidence with which to guide drug treatment decisions in this patient group with severe heart failure. Randomized controlled trials of adult patients with NYHA IV symptoms of HFrEF randomized to current guideline-recommended medical therapy were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The outcomes of interest included the rate of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and heart failure hospitalization. A total of 39 randomized controlled trials were included. A total of 6 studies examined angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, with meta-analyses of 2 demonstrating a reduced risk of all-cause mortality (relative risk (RR) 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 0.97, p = 0.03). A total of 11 studies examined β blockers, with meta-analysis of 6 demonstrating a reduced risk of all-cause mortality (risk ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.92, p = 0.008). A study examined the mineralocorticoid antagonist spironolactone, reporting a reduced risk of all-cause mortality in the NYHA IV subgroup. A total of 6 studies examined device therapy, demonstrating the benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without an implantable cardiac defibrillator in reducing hospitalization in the NYHA IV subgroup. Although trial evidence exists for angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, β-blockers, and mineralocorticoid antagonist therapy in the NYHA IV population, the role of angiotensin receptor blockers is unclear. Ivabradine, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, and sodium-glucose transport protein 2 inhibitors remain underinvestigated and have not been proved to provide any benefit above standard heart failure therapy in patients with HFrEF and NYHA IV symptoms.

Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitors, Angiotensin Receptor Blockers, and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

The superiority of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) over angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) and angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) has not been reassessed after the publication of recent trials that did not find clinical benefits. Therefore, we performed an updated network meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of ARNI, ACE-I, ARB, and placebo in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. We included randomized clinical trials that compared ARNI, ARB, ACE-I, and placebo in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. We extracted prespecified efficacy end points and produced network estimates, p scores, and surface under the cumulative ranking curve scores using frequentist and Bayesian network meta-analysis approaches. A total of 28 randomized controlled trials including 47,407 patients were included. ARNI was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 to 0.96), cardiac death (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.99), and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.97) but higher risk of hypotension (RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.10) than ARB. ARNI was associated with lower risk of MACE (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.97), but higher risk of hypotension (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.24) compared with ACE-I. P scores and surface under the cumulative ranking curve scores demonstrated superiority of ARNI over ARB and ACE-I in all-cause mortality, cardiac death, MACE, and hospitalization for heart failure. In conclusion, ARNI was associated with improved clinical outcomes, except for higher risk of hypotension, compared with ARB and ACE-I.

Effectiveness and safety evaluation of sacubitril/valsartan in blood pressure control and clinical outcomes for elderly patients with heart failure and hypertension: A prospective cohort study

AIM

This study was conducted to investigate the safety and effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan (sac/val) for elderly patients with hypertension and heart failure in the real-world setting.

METHODS

Patients with established hypertension complicated with structural or functional impairment of ventricular fillings [New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II-IV)] were enrolled. The effectiveness of sac/val in terms of BP reduction and improvement in frailty and echocardiographic evaluation of cardiac function were examined from baseline to 6-month administration.

RESULTS

Overall, 241 patients were treated with sac/val and 227 with renin angiotensin aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi) for hypertension control. There were significant difference in the degree of systolic blood pressure reduction between two groups. Echocardiography showed that sac/val significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction [4.0% (95% CI: 2.0-7.5) vs -1.0 (95% CI: -4.0-2.0), P = 0.001] during the follow-up visits. Significant improvements in NYHA function class and FRAIL scores post sac/val were observed after 3 and 6 month treatment. The rate of primary cardiovascular composite outcome was higher in patients in the RAASi group (26.9%; 95% CI: 19.6-34.0) than in the sac/val group (22.0%; 95% CI: 16.7-27.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Sac/val may be useful not only for reducing BP, but also for improving the structural and functional parameters of echocardiography, eventually resulting in a significant improvement of the overall symptomatic status, a significant reduction in NYHA class, and functional improvement.

Emerging concepts in heart failure management and treatment: focus on current guideline-directed medical therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

One of the most relevant and differentiating aspects provided by the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure is the retraction of the historical stepped and vertical pharmacological treatment scheme for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Subsequently, it was replaced by an updated algorithm that places four therapeutic families in the same initial horizontal step with an equally high degree of recommendation (class I). In this context, these four pillars, which have demonstrated a significant reduction in mortality and hospitalizations in patients with HFrEF, include (1) angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB)/angiotensin II receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNi), (2) beta blockers, (3) mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) and (4) sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) as the main novelty. This manuscript reviews the current therapeutic algorithm with a special focus on the therapeutic value of adding an MRA (still underused in both clinical trials and real world), changing an ACEi/ARB for an ARNi and incorporating an SGLT2i in patients with HFrEF. This article is part of the Emerging concepts in heart failure management and treatment Special Issue: https://www.drugsincontext.com/special_issues/emerging-concepts-in-heart-failure-management-and-treatment.

Advances in the Management of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction; The Role of SGLT2is, ARNI, Myotropes, Vericiguat, and Anti-inflammatory Agents: A Mini-review

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has been associated with poor prognosis, reduced quality of life, and increased healthcare expenditure. Despite tremendous advances in HFrEF management, reduced survival and a high rate of hospitalization remain unsolved issues. Furthermore, HFrEF morbidity and economic burden are estimated to increase in the following years; hence, new therapies are constantly emerging. In the last few years, a series of landmark clinical trials have expanded our therapeutic armamentarium with a ground-breaking change in HFrEF-related outcomes. Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (mainly dapagliflozin and empagliflozin) have already revolutionized the management of HFrEF patients via a significant reduction in cardiovascular mortality and heart failure hospitalizations. Furthermore, vericiguat and omecamtiv mecarbil have emerged as promising and novel disease-modifying therapies. The former restores the impaired cyclic guanosine monophosphate pathway, and the latter stimulates cardiac myosin without marked arrhythmogenesis. Both vericiguat and omecamtiv mecarbil have been shown to reduce heart failure admissions. Sacubitril/valsartan is an established and effective therapy in HFrEF patients and should be considered as a replacement for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs). Lastly, inflammasome activity is implicated in HFrEF pathophysiology, and the role of anti-inflammatory agents in HFrEF trajectories is readily scrutinized, yet available therapies are ineffective. This mini-review summarizes the major and most recent studies in this field, thus covering the current advances in HFrEF therapeutics.

Association between sacubitril/valsartan initiation and changes in left ventricular ejection fraction: Insights from ARIADNE registry

AIMS

We tested the hypothesis that initiation versus non-initiation of sacubitril/valsartan is associated with a more favorable subsequent change in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

A prospective, non-randomized, double-arm, open-label, cohort study had been conducted across 687 centers in 17 European countries enrolling HFrEF patients aged ≥18 years with symptoms of HF (New York Heart Association [NYHA] II-IV) and "reduced LVEF". For the current analysis, 2602 patients with LVEF measured at baseline and follow-up were chosen, of which 860 (33%, mean age 67 years, 26% women) were started on sacubitril/valsartan at baseline and 1742 (67%, 68 years, 23% women) were not. Patients started on sacubitril/valsartan had higher NYHA class and lower LVEF.

RESULTS

LVEF increased from mean 32.7% to 38.1% in the sacubitril/valsartan group versus from 35.9% to 38.7% in the non-sacubitril/valsartan group (mean difference in increase 2.6%, p < 0.001). LVEF increased from baseline in 64% versus 53% of patients and increased by ≥5% (absolute %) in 50% versus 35% of patients in the sacubitril/valsartan versus non-sacubitril/valsartan groups, respectively. In the overall cohort, initiation of sacubitril/valsartan was independently associated with any increase in LVEF (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.49 [1.26-1.75]) and with increase by ≥5% (OR 1.65 [1.39-1.95]).

CONCLUSION

Initiating versus not initiating sacubitril/valsartan was independently associated with a greater subsequent increase in LVEF in this real-world setting. Reverse cardiac remodeling may be one mechanism of benefit of sacubitril/valsartan.