Zofenopril and ramipril and acetylsalicylic acid in postmyocardial infarction patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: a retrospective analysis in hypertensive patients of the SMILE-4 study

Hydrogen sulfide-dependent microvascular vasodilation is improved following chronic sulfhydryl-donating antihypertensive pharmacotherapy in adults with hypertension

Hypertension is characterized by systemic microvascular endothelial dysfunction, in part due to a functional absence of hydrogen sulfide (H₂S)-mediated endothelium-dependent dilation. Treatment with a sulfhydryl-donating ACE inhibitor (SH-ACE inhibitor) improves endothelial function in preclinical models of hypertension. To date, no studies have directly assessed the effects of SH-ACE-inhibitor treatment on H₂S-dependent vasodilation in humans with hypertension. We hypothesized that SH-ACE-inhibitor treatment would improve H₂S-mediated endothelium-dependent vasodilation. Ten adults with hypertension [1 woman and 9 men; 56 ± 9 yr; systolic blood pressure (SBP): 141 ± 8.5 mmHg; diastolic blood pressure (DBP): 90.3 ± 6 mmHg] were treated (16 wk) with the SH-ACE-inhibitor captopril. Red blood cell flux (laser-Doppler flowmetry) was measured continuously during graded intradermal microdialysis perfusion of the endothelium-dependent agonist acetylcholine (ACh; 10^-10 to 10^-1 M) alone (control) and in combination with an inhibitor of enzymatic H₂S production [10^-3 M aminooxyacetate (AOAA)] preintervention and postintervention. Cutaneous vascular conductance (CVC; flux/mmHg) was calculated and normalized to the site-specific maximal CVC (0.028 M sodium nitroprusside and local heat to 43°C). Area under the curve was calculated using the trapezoid method. The 16-wk SH-ACE-inhibitor treatment resulted in a reduction of blood pressure (systolic BP: 129 ± 10 mmHg; diastolic BP: 81 ± 9 mmHg, both P < 0.05). Preintervention, inhibition of H₂S production had no effect on ACh-induced vasodilation (316 ± 40 control vs. 322 ± 35 AU AOAA; P = 0.82). Captopril treatment improved ACh-induced vasodilation (316 ± 40 pre vs. 399 ± 55 AU post; P = 0.04) and increased the H₂S-dependent component of ACh-induced vasodilation (pre: -6.6 ± 65.1 vs. post: 90.2 ± 148.3 AU, P = 0.04). These data suggest that SH-ACE-inhibitor antihypertensive treatment improves cutaneous microvascular endothelium-dependent vasodilation in adults with hypertension, in part via H₂S-dependent mechanisms.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This is the first study to prospectively assess the effects of sulfhydryl antihypertensive treatment on microvascular endothelial function in adults with hypertension. Our data suggest that 16 wk of SH-ACE-inhibitor antihypertensive treatment improves cutaneous microvascular endothelium-dependent vasodilation in middle-aged adults with hypertension, in part via H₂S-dependent mechanisms.

Efficacy and Safety of Zofenopril Versus Ramipril in the Treatment of Myocardial Infarction and Heart Failure: A Review of the Published and Unpublished Data of the Randomized Double-Blind SMILE-4 Study

Zofenopril is a lipophilic, sulfhydryl group-containing angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitor, characterized by wide tissue distribution, long duration of action, and pleiotropic effects on endothelial dysfunction. Its clinical efficacy and safety have been described in the four randomized controlled trials of the SMILE program, which globally enrolled more than 3600 patients in post-acute myocardial infarction (AMI) setting. The SMILE-4 study specifically selected patients with left ventricular dysfunction at admission, and compared the effects of zofenopril or ramipril in combination with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA). Zofenopril demonstrated its superiority over ramipril in reducing the combined occurrence of death or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes both in the overall population included in the original study and in subgroups of patients at highest risk, namely hypertensive and diabetic subjects. The effects of the early treatment with zofenopril were sustained over time, and, after 5 years of follow-up, zofenopril increased the survival likelihood and reduced the hospitalization rate. Compared to ramipril, zofenopril was cost-effective with a number to treat of 13 and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 2125.45 euros for any additional event prevented. Furthermore, in real-world settings, zofenopril decreased the risk of death in patients with heart failure, particularly in men, and in subjects older than 76 years or with ejection fraction lower than 54%. These results support the early use of zofenopril immediately after AMI, even in the presence of comorbidities, and its maintenance over time to reduce the risk of heart failure.

FUNDING

Menarini International Operations Luxembourg S.A.

Efficacy of Zofenopril Compared With Placebo and Other Angiotensin-converting Enzyme Inhibitors in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction and Previous Cardiovascular Risk Factors: A Pooled Individual Data Analysis of 4 Randomized, Double-blind, Controlled, Prospective Studies

In the Survival of Myocardial Infarction Long-term Evaluation (SMILE) 1, 3, and 4 studies, early administration of zofenopril in acute myocardial infarction showed to be prognostically beneficial versus placebo or ramipril. The SMILE-2 showed that both zofenopril and lisinopril are safe and showed no significant differences in the incidence of major cardiovascular (CV) complications. In this pooled analysis of individual data of the SMILE studies, we evaluated whether the superior efficacy of zofenopril is maintained also in patients with ≥1 CV risk factor (CV+, n = 2962) as compared to CV− (n = 668). The primary study end point was set to 1-year combined occurrence of death or hospitalization for CV causes. The risk of CV events was significantly reduced with zofenopril versus placebo either in the CV+ (−37%; hazard ratio: 0.63; 95% confidence interval: 0.51–0.78; P = 0.0001) or in the CV− group (−55%; hazard ratio: 0.45; 0.26–0.78; P = 0.004). Also, the other angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors reduced the risk of major CV outcomes, though the reduction was not statistically significant versus placebo (CV+: 0.78; 0.58–1.05; P = 0.107; CV−: 0.71; 0.36–1.41; P = 0.334). The benefit was larger in patients treated with zofenopril than other angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, with a statistically significant difference for CV+ (0.79; 0.63–0.99; P = 0.039) versus CV− (0.62; 0.37–1.06; P = 0.081). In conclusion, zofenopril administered to patients after acute myocardial infarction has a positive impact on prognosis, regardless of the patient's CV risk profile.

Cardioprotective role of zofenopril in hypertensive patients with acute myocardial infarction: a pooled individual data analysis of the SMILE studies

PURPOSE

The four SMILE studies demonstrated that early administration of zofenopril following acute myocardial infarction is prognostically beneficial compared to placebo or other angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. In the present retrospective pooled analysis of individual SMILE studies, we evaluated the efficacy of zofenopril on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in 1880 hypertensive and 1662 normotensive patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four hundred and forty-nine hypertensives and 486 normotensives were treated with placebo, 980 and 786 with zofenopril 30-60 mg daily, 252 and 259 with lisinopril 5-10 mg daily, 199 and 131 with ramipril 10 mg daily, for 6 to 48 weeks.

RESULTS

The 1-year risk of death or hospitalization for CV causes was significantly reduced with zofenopril and lisinopril vs. placebo in both hypertensive (HR: 0.65; 95%CI: 0.48-0.86; p = .003 and .60, .36-.99; p = .049, respectively) and normotensive patients (0.56, 0.42-0.75; p = .0001 and .51, .28-.90; p = .020), whereas this was not the case for ramipril (hypertensives: 1.02, 0.69-1.52; p = .918; normotensives: 0.91, 0.59-1.41; p = .670). Zofenopril significantly reduced the risk of CV outcomes vs. the other two ACE-inhibitors pooled together in hypertensive (0.76; 0.58-0.99; p = .045), but not in normotensive patients (0.77; 0.55-1.10; p = .150).

CONCLUSIONS

In cardiac patients of the SMILE studies with arterial hypertension treatment with the ACE-inhibitor zofenopril was beneficial in reducing the 1-year risk of CV events as compared to placebo and ramipril. An efficacy similar to that of zofenopril was observed with lisinopril.

Blood Pressure Response to Zofenopril or Irbesartan Each Combined with Hydrochlorothiazide in High-Risk Hypertensives Uncontrolled by Monotherapy: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled, Parallel Group, Noninferiority Trial

In this randomized, double-blind, controlled, parallel group study (ZENITH), 434 essential hypertensives with additional cardiovascular risk factors, uncontrolled by a previous monotherapy, were treated for 18 weeks with zofenopril 30 or 60 mg plus hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) 12.5 mg or irbesartan 150 or 300 mg plus HCTZ. Rate of office blood pressure (BP) response (zofenopril: 68% versus irbesartan: 70%; p = 0.778) and 24-hour BP response (zofenopril: 85% versus irbesartan: 84%; p = 0.781) was similar between the two treatment groups. Cardiac and renal damage was equally reduced by both treatments, whereas the rate of carotid plaque regression was significantly larger with zofenopril. In conclusion, uncontrolled monotherapy treated hypertensives effectively respond to a combination of zofenopril or irbesartan plus a thiazide diuretic, in terms of either BP response or target organ damage progression.

Zofenopril plus hydrochlorothiazide and irbesartan plus hydrochlorothiazide in previously treated and uncontrolled diabetic and non-diabetic essential hypertensive patients

INTRODUCTION

In most treated patients with hypertension, a two or more drug combination is required to achieve adequate blood pressure (BP) control. In our study we assessed whether the combination of zofenopril + hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) was at least as effective as irbesartan + HCTZ in essential hypertensives with at least one additional cardiovascular risk factor, uncontrolled by a previous monotherapy.

METHODS

After a 2-week placebo washout, 361 treated hypertensive patients [office sitting diastolic BP (DBP), ≥90 mmHg], aged 18-75 years, were randomized double blind to 18-week treatment with zofenopril 30 mg plus HCTZ 12.5 mg or irbesartan 150 mg plus HCTZ 12.5 mg once daily, in an international, multicenter study. After the first 6 and 12 weeks, zofenopril and irbesartan doses could be doubled in non-normalized subjects. The primary study end point was the office sitting DBP reduction after 18 weeks of treatment. Secondary end points included office systolic BP (SBP), ambulatory BP and high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP).

RESULTS

The between-treatment difference for office DBP averaged to +1.0 (95% CI -0.4, +0.8) mmHg (P = 0.150), the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval being inferior to the protocol-defined non-inferiority limit (3 mmHg). In the subset of patients with valid ambulatory BP, no difference in 24-h average DBP [n = 181; 6.7 (8.7, 4.6) zofenopril + HCTZ vs. 6.3 (8.8, 3.7) mmHg irbesartan + HCTZ, P = 0.810] and SBP reductions [11.7 (15.4, 8.0) vs. 12.6 (17.2, 8.0) mmHg, P = 0.758] were observed between the two treatment groups. hs-CRP was reduced by zofenopril + HCTZ [-0.52 (-1.05, 0.01) mg/L], while it was increased by irbesartan plus HCTZ [0.97 (0.29, 1.65) mg/L, P = 0.001 between treatments].

CONCLUSION

In previously monotherapy-treated, uncontrolled patients with hypertension, zofenopril 30-60 mg + HCTZ 12.5 mg is as effective as irbesartan 150-300 mg plus HCTZ 12.5 mg, with the added value of a potential protective effect against vascular inflammation.