Carvedilol Compared With Metoprolol Succinate in the Treatment and Prognosis of Patients With Stable Chronic Heart Failure: Carvedilol or Metoprolol Evaluation Study

Formulation and development of novel control release transdermal patches of carvedilol to improve bioavailability for the treatment of heart failure

The main aim of this study is to optimize and evaluate transdermal patch of Carvedilol by the use of different polymer and different permeation enhancers which help to release drug in controlled action and thereby increase the bioavailability of the drug. Main objective was to avoid first pass metabolism of Carvedilol. Transdermal patches were developed by solvent evaporation method. The combination of Eudragit RS-100 as rate controlling polymer and Span 80 as a permeation enhancer was found to be ideal formulation (Formulation F7) with maximum drug release i.e. 100.29 ± 0.44 % within 12 h. Formulation F7 showed maximum bioavailability and showed maximum drop of BP at 6 h. From this study the conclusion was, transdermal patch of Carvedilol which contains Eudragit RS-100 polymer and Span 80 as penetration enhancer produced sustained and continued drug release.

Long-Term Mortality Associated With Use of Carvedilol Versus Metoprolol in Heart Failure Patients With and Without Type 2 Diabetes: A Danish Nationwide Cohort Study

Background

Carvedilol may have favorable glycemic properties compared with metoprolol, but it is unknown if carvedilol has mortality benefit over metoprolol in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

Methods and Results

Using Danish nationwide databases between 2010 and 2018, we followed patients with new‐onset HFrEF treated with either carvedilol or metoprolol for all‐cause mortality until the end of 2018. Follow‐up started 120 days after initial HFrEF diagnosis to allow initiation of guideline‐directed medical therapy. There were 39 260 patients on carvedilol or metoprolol at baseline (mean age 70.8 years, 35% women), of which 9355 (24%) had T2D. Carvedilol was used in 2989 (32%) patients with T2D and 10 411 (35%) of patients without T2D. Users of carvedilol had a lower prevalence of atrial fibrillation (20% versus 35%), but other characteristics appeared well‐balanced between the groups. Totally 11 306 (29%) were deceased by the end of follow‐up. We observed no mortality differences between carvedilol and metoprolol, multivariable‐adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.97 (0.90–1.05) in patients with T2D versus 1.00 (0.95–1.05) for those without T2D, P for difference =0.99. Rates of new‐onset T2D were lower in users of carvedilol versus metoprolol; age, sex, and calendar year adjusted HR 0.83 (0.75–0.91), P<0.0001.

Conclusions

In a contemporary clinical cohort of HFrEF patients with and without T2D, carvedilol was not associated with a reduction in long‐term mortality compared with metoprolol. However, carvedilol was associated with lowered risk of new‐onset T2D supporting the assertion that carvedilol has a more favorable metabolic profile than metoprolol.

Optimizing Guideline-directed Medical Therapies for Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction During Hospitalization

Heart failure remains a huge societal concern despite medical advancement, with an annual direct cost of over $30 billion. While guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) is proven to reduce morbidity and mortality, many eligible patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are not receiving one or more of the recommended medications, often due to suboptimal initiation and titration in the outpatient setting. Hospitalization serves as a key point to initiate and titrate GDMT. Four evidence-based therapies have clinical benefit within 30 days of initiation and form a crucial foundation for HFrEF therapy: renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors with or without a neprilysin inhibitor, β-blockers, mineralocorticoid-receptor-antagonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. The authors present a practical guide for the implementation of these four pillars of GDMT during a hospitalization for acute heart failure.

Lucero Garcia-Rojas E, A. Bond R, K. McConnell B. Allosteric Modulators for GPCRs as a Therapeutic Alternative with High Potential in Drug Discovery

The superfamily of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) consists of biological microprocessors that can activate multiple signaling pathways. Most GPCRs have an orthosteric pocket where the endogenous ligand(s) typically binds. Conversely, allosteric ligands bind to GPCRs at sites that are distinct from the orthosteric binding region and they modulate the response elicited by the endogenous ligand. Allosteric ligands can also switch the response of a GPCR after ligand binding to a unique signaling pathway, these ligands are termed biased allosteric modulators. Thus, the development of allosteric ligands opens new and multiple ways in which the signaling pathways of GPCRs can be manipulated for potential therapeutic benefit. Furthermore, the mechanisms by which allosteric ligands modulate the effects of endogenous ligands have provided new insights into the interactions between allosteric ligands and GPCRs. These new findings have a high potential to improve drug discovery and development and, therefore, creating the need for better screening methods for allosteric drugs to increase the chances of success in the development of allosteric modulators as lead clinical compounds.

Metabolomics and the pig model reveal aberrant cardiac energy metabolism in metabolic syndrome

Although metabolic syndrome (MS) is a significant risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), the cardiac response (MR) to MS remains unclear due to traditional MS models' narrow scope around a limited number of cell-cycle regulation biomarkers and drawbacks of limited human tissue samples. To date, we developed the most comprehensive platform studying MR to MS in a pig model tightly related to human MS criteria. By incorporating comparative metabolomic, transcriptomic, functional analyses, and unsupervised machine learning (UML), we can discover unknown metabolic pathways connections and links on numerous biomarkers across the MS-associated issues in the heart. For the first time, we show severely diminished availability of glycolytic and citric acid cycle (CAC) pathways metabolites, altered expression, GlcNAcylation, and activity of involved enzymes. A notable exception, however, is the excessive succinate accumulation despite reduced succinate dehydrogenase complex iron-sulfur subunit b (SDHB) expression and decreased content of precursor metabolites. Finally, the expression of metabolites and enzymes from the GABA-glutamate, GABA-putrescine, and the glyoxylate pathways significantly increase, suggesting an alternative cardiac means to replenish succinate and malate in MS. Our platform discovers potential therapeutic targets for MS-associated CVD within pathways that were previously unknown to corelate with the disease.

The mortality benefit of carvedilol versus bisoprolol in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

BACKGROUND/AIMS

It is unknown whether different β-blockers (BBs) have variable effects on long-term survival of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This study compares the effects of two BBs, carvedilol and bisoprolol, on survival in patients with HFrEF.

METHODS

The Korean Acute Heart Failure (KorAHF) registry is a prospective multicenter cohort that includes 5,625 patients who were hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF). We selected 3,016 patients with HFrEF and divided this study population into two groups: BB at discharge (n = 1,707) or no BB at discharge (n = 1,309). Among patients with BB at discharge, subgroups were formed based on carvedilol prescription (n = 831), or bisoprolol prescription (n = 553). Propensity score matching analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Among patients who were prescribed a BB at discharge, 60.5% received carvedilol and 32.7% received bisoprolol. There was a significant reduction in allcause mortality in those patients with HFrEF prescribed a BB at discharge compared to those who were not (BB vs. no BB, 26.1% vs. 40.8%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.67; p < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in the rate of all-cause mortality between those receiving different types of BB (carvedilol vs. bisoprolol, 27.5% vs. 23.5%; HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.47; p = 0.07). Similar results were observed after propensity score matching analysis (508 pairs, 26.2% vs. 23.8%; HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.40; p = 0.47).

CONCLUSION

In the treatment of AHF with reduced EF after hospitalization, mortality benefits of carvedilol and bisoprolol were comparable.

Role of Metoprolol Succinate in the Treatment of Heart Failure and Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Beta-blockers are one of the most important classes of cardiovascular agents and have been considered a cornerstone therapy in heart diseases, such as heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF). Among different beta-blockers, metoprolol is a selective beta1-adrenergic antagonist, which has been extensively used since the 1970s.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

Although current guidelines include recommendations for the use of controlled-release metoprolol succinate in specific HF and AF indications, and despite extensive clinical experience with metoprolol, comparative evidence on the use of metoprolol succinate compared with other beta-blockers in these indications is limited.

DATA SOURCES

We systematically reviewed the data from head-to-head studies directly comparing this compound with other beta-blockers in the treatment of HF or AF. Only clinical trials and observational studies were considered; no other limits were applied. The quality and relevance of retrieved articles were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 18 articles of the 353 articles identified were selected for inclusion; 12 HF articles and 6 for AF. Additional references were identified from the bibliographies of retrieved articles. The studies show that oral prophylaxis with an appropriate dose of metoprolol may reduce new incidents of AF in high-risk patients. Furthermore, metoprolol succinate is associated with significant mortality and morbidity benefits in the treatment of HF.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the introduction of newer beta-blockers with differing clinical characteristics since its introduction, metoprolol succinate remains a useful drug in both HF and AF.

Acute effects of intravenous carvedilol versus metoprolol on baroreflex-mediated sympathetic circulatory regulation in rats

AIMS

To compare the effects of metoprolol and carvedilol on baroreflex-mediated sympathetic circulatory regulation.

METHODS

In anesthetized Wistar-Kyoto rats, carotid sinus baroreceptor regions were isolated. Changes in sympathetic nerve activity (SNA), arterial pressure (AP), heart rate (HR), and aortic flow (AoF) in response to a staircase-wise pressure input were examined before (control) and after intravenous injection of low-dose metoprolol (2 mg/kg), high-dose metoprolol (10 mg/kg), or carvedilol (0.67 mg/kg) (n = 6 each). Peripheral vascular resistance (PVR) was calculated from mean AP divided by mean AoF.

RESULTS

Low-dose metoprolol had limited effect on sympathetic AP regulation compared to control [operating-point AP (drug vs. control): 88.7 ± 7.1 vs. 98.3 ± 3.3 mm Hg, not significant] despite a significant bradycardic effect. Although high-dose metoprolol showed central sympathoinhibition, it increased PVR at a given SNA as a peripheral effect. Consequently, high-dose metoprolol decreased the operating-point AP slightly (96.1 ± 2.7 vs. 101.9 ± 2.7 mm Hg, P < 0.01). Carvedilol showed no significant central sympathoinhibition at the dose examined in this study, but significantly reduced PVR at a given SNA, leading to a marked reduction in the operating-point AP (71.9 ± 8.2 vs. 112.6 ± 7.6 mm Hg, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Low-dose metoprolol has limited hypotensive effect despite blockade of sympathetic HR regulation. Although high-dose metoprolol induces central sympathoinhibition, it also induces peripheral vasoconstriction that antagonizes the hypotensive effect. In contrast, carvedilol exhibits hypotensive effect mainly through peripheral vasodilation. Although carvedilol is frequently classified as a β-blocker, its vasodilatory effect via α₁-adrenergic blockade plays an important role in AP reduction or heart failure treatment.

Importance of beta-blocker dose in prevention of ventricular tachyarrhythmias, heart failure hospitalizations, and death in primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: a Danish nationwide cohort study

Aims

There is a paucity of studies investigating a dose-dependent association between beta-blocker therapy and risk of outcome. In a nationwide cohort of primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients, we aimed to investigate the dose-dependent association between beta-blocker therapy and risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (VT/VF), heart failure (HF) hospitalizations, and death.

Methods and results

Information on ICD implantation, endpoints, comorbidities, beta-blocker usage, type, and dose were obtained through Danish nationwide registers. The two major beta-blockers carvedilol and metoprolol were examined in three dose levels; low (metoprolol ≤ 25 mg; carvedilol ≤ 12.5 mg), intermediate (metoprolol 26-199 mg; carvedilol 12.6-49.9 mg), and high (metoprolol ≥ 200 mg; carvedilol ≥ 50 mg). Time to events was investigated utilizing multivariate Cox models with beta-blocker as a time-dependent variable. From 2007 to 2012, 2935 first-time ICD devices were implanted. During follow-up, 399 patients experienced VT/VF, 728 HF hospitalizations and 361 died. As compared with patients not on beta-blockers, low, intermediate, and high dose had significantly reduced risk of HF hospitalizations {hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 [0.54-0.87], P = 0.002; HR = 0.53 [0.42-0.66], P < 0.001; HR = 0.43 [0.34-0.54], P < 0.001} and death (HR = 0.47 [0.35-0.64], P < 0.001; HR = 0.29 [0.22-0.39], P = 0.001; HR = 0.24 [0.18-0.33], P < 0.001). For the endpoint of VT/VF, only intermediate and high dose beta-blocker was associated with significantly reduced risk (HR = 0.58 [0.43-0.79], P < 0.001; HR = 0.53 [0.39-0.72], P < 0.001). No significant difference was found between comparable doses of carvedilol and metoprolol on any endpoint (P = 0.06-0.94).

Conclusion

In primary prevention ICD patients, beta-blocker therapy was associated with significantly reduced risk of all endpoints, as compared with patients not on beta-blocker, with the suggestion of a dose-dependent effect. No detectable difference was found between comparable doses of carvedilol and metoprolol.

Antidepressant-like effects of ginseng fruit saponin in myocardial infarction mice

BACKGROUND

Recently, the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD) has been proved to be closely associated with depression in which 5-HT plays a crucial role. Ginseng Fruit Saponin (GFS) and Metoprolol are two drugs which have beneficial effects on the cardiovascular system in Myocardial Infarction (MI) mice. However, their effects on depression-like behaviors after MI and its underlying mechanisms remain unknown. We aimed to investigate their antidepressive-like effects as well as their impacts on the 5-HT system.

METHODS

The MI model was established by ligating left anterior descending coronary artery. Mice were administered with GFS, Metoprolol or saline for 4 weeks. Cardiac function was evaluated and depressive-like behaviors were quantified at the end of the experiments. Masson's staining was used to assess myocardial fibrosis while immunohistochemistry, western blot, ELISA and qPCR were performed to analyze the levels of 5-HT and its related genes.

RESULTS

Compared with MI groups, Both GFS and Metoprolol treatments significantly improved cardiac function and reduced myocardial fibrosis. Moreover, GFS but not Metoprolol increased the levels of 5-HT in the cortex and rescued depression-like behaviors in MI mice.

CONCLUSIONS

GFS has potential antidepressive effects and the mechanisms involve the regulation of 5-HT concentrations in the cortex.

Prognostic value of NT-proBNP added to clinical parameters to predict two-year prognosis of chronic heart failure patients with mid-range and reduced ejection fraction - A report from FAR NHL prospective registry

BACKGROUND

According to guidelines, the prognosis of patients with chronic heart failure can be predicted by determining the levels of natriuretic peptides, the NYHA classification and comorbidities. The aim our work was to develop a prognostic score in chronic heart failure patients that would take account of patients' comorbidities, NYHA and NT-proBNP levels.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1,088 patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (LVEF<40%) and mid-range EF (HFmrEF) (LVEF 40-49%) were enrolled consecutively. Two-year all-cause mortality, heart transplantation and/or LVAD implantation were defined as the primary endpoint (EP). The occurrence of EP was 14.9% and grew with higher NYHA, namely 4.9% (NYHA I), 11.4% (NYHA II) and 27.8% (NYHA III-IV) (p<0.001). The occurrence of EP was 3%, 10% and 15-37% in patients with NT-proBNP levels ≤125 ng/L, 126-1000 ng/L and >1000 ng/L respectively. Discrimination abilities of NYHA and NT-proBNP were AUC 0.670 (p<0.001) and AUC 0.722 (p<0.001) respectively. The predictive value of the developed clinical model, which took account of older age, advanced heart failure (NYHA III+IV), anaemia, hyponatraemia, hyperuricaemia and being on a higher dose of furosemide (>40 mg daily) (AUC 0.773; p<0.001) was increased by adding the NT-proBNP level (AUC 0.790).

CONCLUSION

The use of prediction models in patients with chronic heart failure, namely those taking account of natriuretic peptides, should become a standard in routine clinical practice. It might contribute to a better identification of a high-risk group of patients in which more intense treatment needs to be considered, such as heart transplantation or LVAD implantation.

Metoprolol in the treatment of cardiovascular disease: a critical reappraisal

BACKGROUND

Extensive clinical experience on metoprolol has been gained in different cardiovascular conditions.

REVIEW

This paper discusses the use of metoprolol, with a focus on the extended-release formulation, in clinical practice in the light of existing evidence and current recommendations. This is a narrative review based on existing evidence and clinical experience of the author. Evidence on the use of metoprolol in heart failure, ischemic artery disease, arterial hypertension, and atrial fibrillation is well-established.

CONCLUSIONS

Metoprolol still appears to be a suitable pharmacological option in different cardiovascular conditions. Research on this molecule is still active and new, promising settings of use are being explored and may provide relevant results in the years to come.

Effect of carvedilol vs metoprolol succinate on mortality in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Beta blocker therapy is indicated in all patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) as per current guidelines. The relative benefit of carvedilol to metoprolol succinate remains unknown. This study aimed to compare survival benefit of carvedilol to metoprolol succinate.

METHODS

The VA's databases were queried to identify 114,745 patients diagnosed with HFrEF from 2007 to 2015 who were prescribed carvedilol and metoprolol succinate. The study estimated the survival probability and hazard ratio by comparing the carvedilol and metoprolol patients using propensity score matching with replacement techniques on observed covariates. Sub-group analyses were performed separately for men, women, elderly, duration of therapy of more than 3 months, and diabetic patients.

RESULTS

A total of 43,941 metoprolol patients were matched with as many carvedilol patients. The adjusted hazard ratio of mortality for metoprolol succinate compared to carvedilol was 1.069 (95% CI: 1.046-1.092, P value: < .001). At six years, the survival probability was higher in the carvedilol group compared to the metoprolol succinate group (55.6% vs 49.2%, P value < .001). The sub-group analyses show that the results hold true separately for male, over or under 65 years old, therapy duration more than three months and non-diabetic patients.

CONCLUSION

Patients with HFrEF taking carvedilol had improved survival as compared to metoprolol succinate. The data supports the need for furthering testing to determine optimal choice of beta blockers in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Peripheral versus central effect of intravenous moxonidine on rat carotid sinus baroreflex-mediated sympathetic arterial pressure regulation

AIMS

Moxonidine is a centrally acting antihypertensive agent with a selectivity to I₁-imidazoline receptors higher than that to α₂-adrenergic receptors. The present study aimed to quantify a peripheral effect of moxonidine on carotid sinus baroreflex-mediated sympathetic arterial pressure (AP) regulation separately from its central effect.

MAIN METHODS

In eight anesthetized Wistar rats, changes in efferent sympathetic nerve activity (SNA) and AP in response to a carotid sinus pressure input were compared before and during an intravenous administration of moxonidine (100μgkg^-1 bolus followed by a continuous infusion at 200μg·kg^-1·h^-1).

KEY FINDINGS

Moxonidine significantly narrowed the range of the AP response (55.3±5.8 to 39.1±6.1mmHg, P<0.05) without changing the minimum AP (77.2±6.4 to 80.7±5.1mmHg, not significant). In the neural arc, moxonidine reduced the minimum SNA (56.6±5.9 to 29.7±6.2%, P<0.05) without affecting the range of the SNA response (45.3±5.5 to 40.2±5.0%, not significant). In the peripheral arc, moxonidine increased the intercept (3.0±8.5 to 51.1±7.2mmHg, P<0.01) and reduced the slope (1.28±0.06 to 0.92±0.15mmHg/%, P<0.05).

SIGNIFICANCE

Moxonidine increased AP at any given SNA, suggesting that the peripheral vasoconstrictive effect is stronger than generally recognized. The peripheral vasoconstrictive effect of moxonidine may partly offset the vasodilatory effect attained by centrally-mediated sympathoinhibition.

Bisoprolol compared with carvedilol and metoprolol succinate in the treatment of patients with chronic heart failure

AIMS

Beta-blockers are recommended for the treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF). However, it is disputed whether beta-blockers exert a class effect or whether there are differences in efficacy between agents.

METHODS AND RESULTS

6010 out-patients with stable CHF and a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction prescribed either bisoprolol, carvedilol or metoprolol succinate were identified from three registries in Norway, England, and Germany. In three separate matching procedures, patients were individually matched with respect to both dose equivalents and the respective propensity scores for beta-blocker treatment. During a follow-up of 26,963 patient-years, 302 (29.5%), 637 (37.0%), and 1232 (37.7%) patients died amongst those prescribed bisoprolol, carvedilol, and metoprolol, respectively. In univariable analysis of the general sample, bisoprolol and carvedilol were both associated with lower mortality as compared with metoprolol succinate (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.71-0.91, p < 0.01, and HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78-0.94, p < 0.01, respectively). Patients prescribed bisoprolol or carvedilol had similar mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82-1.08, p = 0.37). However, there was no significant association between beta-blocker choice and all-cause mortality in any of the matched samples (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.76-1.06; p = 0.20; HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.93-1.31, p = 0.24; and HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95-1.22, p = 0.26 for bisoprolol vs. carvedilol, bisoprolol vs. metoprolol succinate, and carvedilol vs. metoprolol succinate, respectively). Results were confirmed in a number of important subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that the three beta-blockers investigated have similar effects on mortality amongst patients with CHF.