Losing ALTITUDE? How should ASTRONAUT launch into ATMOSPHERE

Aliskiren, Enalapril, or Aliskiren and Enalapril in Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Among patients with chronic heart failure, angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors reduce mortality and hospitalization, but the role of a renin inhibitor in such patients is unknown. We compared the ACE inhibitor enalapril with the renin inhibitor aliskiren (to test superiority or at least noninferiority) and with the combination of the two treatments (to test superiority) in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction.

METHODS

After a single-blind run-in period, we assigned patients, in a double-blind fashion, to one of three groups: 2336 patients were assigned to receive enalapril at a dose of 5 or 10 mg twice daily, 2340 to receive aliskiren at a dose of 300 mg once daily, and 2340 to receive both treatments (combination therapy). The primary composite outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 36.6 months, the primary outcome occurred in 770 patients (32.9%) in the combination-therapy group and in 808 (34.6%) in the enalapril group (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.03). The primary outcome occurred in 791 patients (33.8%) in the aliskiren group (hazard ratio vs. enalapril, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.10); the prespecified test for noninferiority was not met. There was a higher risk of hypotensive symptoms in the combination-therapy group than in the enalapril group (13.8% vs. 11.0%, P=0.005), as well as higher risks of an elevated serum creatinine level (4.1% vs. 2.7%, P=0.009) and an elevated potassium level (17.1% vs. 12.5%, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with chronic heart failure, the addition of aliskiren to enalapril led to more adverse events without an increase in benefit. Noninferiority was not shown for aliskiren as compared with enalapril. (Funded by Novartis; ATMOSPHERE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00853658.).

New medical therapies for heart failure

Heart failure (HF) can rightfully be called the epidemic of the 21(st) century. Historically, the only available medical treatment options for HF have been diuretics and digoxin, but the capacity of these agents to alter outcomes has been brought into question by the scrutiny of modern clinical trials. In the past 4 decades, neurohormonal blockers have been introduced into clinical practice, leading to marked reductions in morbidity and mortality in chronic HF with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Despite these major advances in pharmacotherapy, our understanding of the underlying disease mechanisms of HF from epidemiological, clinical, pathophysiological, molecular, and genetic standpoints remains incomplete. This knowledge gap is particularly evident with respect to acute decompensated HF and HF with normal (preserved) LVEF. For these clinical phenotypes, no drug has been shown to reduce long-term clinical event rates substantially. Ongoing developments in the pharmacotherapy of HF are likely to challenge our current best-practice algorithms. Novel agents for HF therapy include dual-acting neurohormonal modulators, contractility-enhancing agents, vasoactive and anti-inflammatory peptides, and myocardial protectants. These novel compounds have the potential to enhance our armamentarium of HF therapeutics.