Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibition compared with enalapril on the risk of clinical progression in surviving patients with heart failure

Status and timing of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor implementation in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: Data from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry

AIMS

We explored timing, settings and predictors of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) initiation in a large, nationwide cohort of patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with HFrEF (ejection fraction <40%) registered in the Swedish HF Registry in 2017-2021 and naïve to ARNI were evaluated for timing and location of, and their characteristics at ARNI initiation. ARNI use increased from 8.3% in 2017 to 26.7% in 2021. Among 3892 hospitalized patients, 8% initiated ARNI in-hospital or ≤14 days after discharge, 4% between 15 and 90 days, and 88% >90 days after discharge or never initiated. Factors associated with earlier initiation included follow-up in specialized HF care, more severe HF, previous HF treatment use and higher income, whereas older age, higher comorbidity burden and living alone were associated with later/no initiation. Of 16 486 HFrEF patients, 8.1% inpatients and 5.9% outpatients initiated an ARNI at the index date. Factors associated with initiation in outpatients were overall consistent with those linked with an in-hospital/earlier ARNI initiation; 4.9% of 10 209 with HF duration <6 months and 9.1% of 5877 with HF duration ≥6 months initiated ARNI. Predictors of ARNI initiation in HF duration <6 months were inpatient status, lower ejection fraction, hypertension, whereas previous angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker use was associated with less likely initiation. Discontinuation at 1 year ranged between 13% and 20% across the above-reported analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital and early initiation of ARNI are limited in real-world care but still slightly more likely than in outpatients. ARNI were more likely initiated in patients with more severe HF, which might suggest its use as a second-line treatment and only following worsening of clinical status. One-year discontinuation rates were consistent regardless of the timing/setting of ARNI initiation.

A Review of Contemporary and Future Pharmacotherapy for Chronic Heart Failure in Children

This review delves into the most recent therapeutic approaches for pediatric chronic heart failure (HF) as proposed by the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT), which are not yet publicly available. The guideline proposes an exhaustive overview of the evolving pharmacological strategies that are transforming the management of HF in the pediatric population. The ISHLT guidelines recognize the scarcity of randomized clinical trials in children, leading to a predominance of consensus-based recommendations, designated as Level C evidence. This review article aims to shed light on the significant paradigm shifts in the proposed 2024 ISHLT guidelines for pediatric HF and their clinical ramifications for pediatric cardiology practitioners. Noteworthy advancements in the updated proposed guidelines include the endorsement of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), and soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) stimulators for treating chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in children. These cutting-edge treatments show potential for enhancing outcomes in pediatric HFrEF. Nonetheless, the challenge persists in validating the efficacy of therapies proven in adult HFrEF for the pediatric cohort. Furthermore, the proposed ISHLT guidelines address the pharmacological management of chronic HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in children, marking a significant step forward in pediatric HF care. This review also discusses the future HF drugs in the pipeline, their mechanism of actions, potential uses, and side effects.

Unlocking the Potential: Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin and Sodium Glucose Co-Transporter 2 Inhibitors for Right Ventricle Dysfunction in Heart Failure

This review article examines the mechanism of action of Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitors (ARNIs) and Sodium-Glucose Co-Transporter 2 Inhibitors (SGLT2is) in managing chronic right ventricular (RV) dysfunction. Despite advancements in heart failure (HF) treatment, RV dysfunction remains a significant contributor to morbidity and mortality. This article explores the The article explores the impact of ARNIs and SGLT2is on RV function based on clinical and preclinical evidence, and the potential benefits of combined therapy. It highlights the need for further research to optimize patient outcomes and suggests that RV function should be considered in future clinical trials as part of risk stratification for HF therapies. This review underscores the importance of the early initiation of ARNIs and SGLT2is as per guideline-directed medical therapy for eligible HFrEF and HFpEF patients to improve co-existing RV dysfunction.

Evaluation of a New NT-proBNP Immunoassay on an Automated Core Laboratory System

BACKGROUND

Heart failure remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality despite improvements in treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the Alere N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) immunoassay on the Abbott Alinity i platform.

METHODS

The analytical performance including precision, linearity, limit of quantitation (LOQ), carryover, dilution-recovery, and stability was evaluated. A method comparison between the Abbott Alere NT-proBNP assay and Roche Elecsys proBNP II assay was performed using 70 residual plasma samples.

RESULTS

Total imprecision was 4.1%, 3.5%, and 2.3% for low (120.9 ng/L), medium (333.9 ng/L), and high (4767.4 ng/L) QC levels, respectively. The manufacturer's claimed LOQ of 8.3 ng/L was verified. Method comparison between the Alere NT-proBNP assay and the Elecsys proBNP II assay showed good agreement between assays with an R value of 0.998, a slope of 1.05 (95% CI, 1.03-1.06), and an intercept of 45.81 (95% CI, -46.6.84 to 138.22). The Bland-Altman plot showed an absolute bias of 250 ng/L or 6.02%. Subrange analysis (NT-proBNP <2000 ng/L) showed good agreement with an R value of 0.998, a slope of 1.04 (95% CI, 1.02-1.06), and an intercept of -4.83 (95% CI, -26.95 to 17.28), with a mean bias of 26 ng/L or 3.2%. The stability of NT-proBNP was also verified in lithium heparin plasma samples stored at 4°C over a 7-day period. Hemolysis and lipemia interference thresholds were verified, but icterus impacted NT-proBNP recovery by >20% at low analyte concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

The Alere NT-proBNP assay demonstrated acceptable analytical performance and very good clinical concordance with the Elecsys proBNP II assay.

Latest pharmaceutical approaches across the spectrum of heart failure

Despite major advances in prevention and medical therapy, heart failure (HF) remains associated with high morbidity and mortality, especially in older and frailer patients. Therefore, a complete, guideline-based treatment is essential, even in HF patients with conditions traditionally associated with a problematic initiation and escalation of the medical HF therapy, such as chronic kidney disease and arterial hypotension, as the potential adverse effects are overcome by the overall decrease of the absolute risk. Furthermore, since the latest data suggest that the benefit of a combined medical therapy (MRA, ARNI, SGLT2i, beta-blocker) may extend up to a LVEF of 65%, further trials on these subgroups of patients (HFmrEF, HFpEF) are needed to re-evaluate the guideline-directed medical therapy across the HF spectrum. In particular, the use of SGLT2i was recently extended to HFpEF patients, as evidenced by the DELIVER and EMPEROR-preserved trials. Moreover, the indication for other conservative treatments in HF patients, such as the intravenous iron supplementation, was accordingly strengthened in the latest guidelines. Finally, the possible implementation of newer substances, such as finerenone, in guideline-directed medical practice for HF is anticipated with great interest.

Effect of sacubitril/valsartan on the hypertensive heart in continuous light-induced and lactacystin-induced pre-hypertension: Interactions with the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system

This study investigated whether sacubitril/valsartan or valsartan are able to prevent left ventricular (LV) fibrotic remodelling and dysfunction in two experimental models of pre-hypertension induced by continuous light (24 hours/day) exposure or by chronic lactacystin treatment, and how this potential protection interferes with the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). Nine groups of three-month-old male Wistar rats were treated for six weeks as follows: untreated controls (C), sacubitril/valsartan (ARNI), valsartan (Val), continuous light (24), continuous light plus sacubitril/valsartan (24+ARNI) or valsartan (24+Val), lactacystin (Lact), lactacystin plus sacubitil/valsartan (Lact+ARNI) or plus valsartan (Lact+Val). Both the 24 and Lact groups developed a mild but significant systolic blood pressure (SBP) increase, LV hypertrophy and fibrosis, as well as LV systolic and diastolic dysfunction. Yet, no changes in serum renin-angiotensin were observed either in the 24 or Lact groups, though aldosterone was increased in the Lact group compared to the controls. In both models, sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan reduced elevated SBP, LV hypertrophy and fibrosis and attenuated LV systolic and diastolic dysfunction. Sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan increased the serum levels of angiotensin (Ang) II, Ang III, Ang IV, Ang 1-5, Ang 1-7 in the 24 and Lact groups and reduced aldosterone in the Lact group. We conclude that both continuous light exposure and lactacystin treatment induced normal-to-low serum renin-angiotensin models of pre-hypertension, whereas aldosterone was increased in lactacystin-induced pre-hypertension. The protection by ARNI or valsartan in the hypertensive heart in either model was related to the Ang II blockade and the protective Ang 1-7, while in lactacystin-induced pre-hypertension this protection seems to be additionally related to the reduced aldosterone level.

Sacubitril/Valsartan Alleviates Cardiac Remodeling and Dysfunction in L-NAME-Induced Hypertension and Hypertensive Heart Disease

There is ample evidence on the benefit of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) in heart failure, yet data regarding the potential protective action of ARNIs in hypertensive heart disease are sparse. The aim of this study was to show whether an ARNI exerts a protective effect in a model of Nω-nitro-L-arginine methyl ester (L-NAME)-induced hypertension with a hypertensive heart and to compare this potential benefit with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, captopril. Five groups of adult male Wistar rats were studied (14 per group) for four weeks: untreated controls; ARNI (68 mg/kg/day); L-NAME (40 mg/kg/day); L-NAME treated with ARNI; and L-NAME treated with captopril (100 mg/kg/day). L-NAME administration induced hypertension, accompanied by increased left ventricular (LV) weight and fibrotic rebuilding of the LV in terms of increased concentration and content of hydroxyproline in insoluble collagen and in total collagen and with a histological finding of fibrosis. These alterations were associated with a compromised systolic and diastolic LV function. Treatment with either an ARNI or captopril reduced systolic blood pressure (SBP), alleviated LV hypertrophy and fibrosis, and prevented the development of both systolic and diastolic LV dysfunction. Moreover, the serum levels of prolactin and prolactin receptor were reduced significantly by ARNI and slightly by captopril. In conclusion, in L-NAME-induced hypertension, the dual inhibition of neprilysin and AT1 receptors by ARNI reduced SBP and prevented the development of LV hypertrophy, fibrosis, and systolic and diastolic dysfunction. These data suggest that ARNI could provide protection against LV structural remodeling and functional disorders in hypertensive heart disease.

Assessment and management of heart failure in patients with chronic kidney disease

Heart failure (HF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are two pathological conditions with a high prevalence in the general population. When they coexist in the same patient, a strict interplay between them is observed, such that patients affected require a clinical multidisciplinary and personalized management. The diagnosis of HF and CKD relies on signs and symptoms of the patient but several additional tools, such as blood-based biomarkers and imaging techniques, are needed to clarify and discriminate the main characteristics of these diseases. Improved survival due to new recommended drugs in HF has increasingly challenged physicians to manage patients with multiple diseases, especially in case of CKD. However, the safe administration of these drugs in patients with HF and CKD is often challenging. Knowing up to which values ​​of creatinine or renal clearance each drug can be administered is fundamental. With this review we sought to give an insight on this sizable and complex topic, in order to get clearer ideas and a more precise reference about the diagnostic assessment and therapeutic management of HF and CKD.

Chronic heart failure with reduced EF: A decade of major pharmacological innovations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Because of its severity, prevalence, and medical economic importance, heart failure is a chronic disease that is the subject of intense medical research. The aim of this article was to review the therapeutic innovations of the last decade that have been incorporated into the latest international recommendations for the treatment of heart failure.

METHOD

Review of literature and current guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The results of the clinical trials reviewed here represent major advances that will have a significant impact on quality of life, survival, rehospitalisation and, for certain treatments, a beneficial joint effect on commonly associated comorbidities such as diabetes and chronic renal failure.

The Safety and Efficacy of the Early Use of Sacubitril/Valsartan After Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a significant global cause of mortality, necessitating the exploration of innovative treatments against the condition. Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) such as sacubitril/valsartan have demonstrated promise in managing acute heart failure (HF). However, despite favorable evidence from clinical trials for the use of sacubitril/valsartan in AMI, its overall efficacy remains a subject of debate. Hence, we conducted this review and meta-analysis, by adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and aligned with European Society of Cardiology recommendations, to compare sacubitril/valsartan with traditional ACEI/ARB treatments for AMI. We employed Review Manager 5.4 for statistical analysis, the Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 was utilized for quality assessment, and publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this meta-analysis. Our findings revealed that participants treated with sacubitril experienced significantly improved outcomes in terms of HF (OR=0.79; 95% CI: 0.66-0.95; p=0.01; I2=23%), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels (MD = -1.58; 95% CI: -1.78 to -1.37, p<0.00001; I2=97%), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (OR=0.84; 95% CI: 0.72-0.99; p=0.03; I2=44%). However, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (MD=3.68; 95% CI: 3.35-4.01, p<0.00001; I2=71%) showed greater improvement in the control group compared to the experimental group. Our meta-analysis suggests that sacubitril offers a favorable balance between safety and effectiveness. Sacubitril significantly improved outcomes in terms of HF, MACE, and NT-proBNP levels when compared to the control group. However, improvement in LVEF was notably higher in the control group over the sacubitril/valsartan group.

Implementation of evidence-based heart failure management: Regional variations between Japan and the USA

The implementation of optimal medical therapy is a crucial step in the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Over the prior three decades, there have been substantial advancements in this field. Early and accurate detection and diagnosis of the disease allow for the appropriate initiation of optimal therapies. The initiation and uptitration of optimal medical therapy including renin-angiotensin system inhibitor, beta-blocker, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor in the early stage would prevent the progression and morbidity of HF. Concurrently, individualized surveillance to recognize and treat signs of disease progression is critical given the progressive nature of HF, even among stable patients on optimal therapy. However, there remains a wide variation in regional practice regarding the initiation, titration, and long-term monitoring of this therapy. To cover the differences in approaches toward HFrEF management and the implementation of guideline-based medical therapy, we discuss the current evidence in this arena, differences in present guideline recommendations, and compare practice patterns in Japan and the USA using a case of new-onset HF as an example. We will discuss pros and cons of the way HF is managed in each region, and highlight potential areas for improvement in care.

Impact of sacubitril/valsartan on cardiac and systemic hypoxia in chronic heart failure

In heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction, Sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) increased proBNP T71 glycosylation, which is regulated negatively by hypoxia via miR-30a in vitro. Using a cohort of 73 HFrEF patients who were transitioned from standard HF medication to S/V, we found that the increase in proBNP T71 glycosylation after S/V was associated with a decrease in cardiac hypoxia. We further found that plasma levels of K709-acteylated HIF1α, HIF-regulated and HIF-independent biomarkers also evolved consistently with a decrease in hypoxia. We further confirmed that biomarker changes were related to hypoxia, in a rat model subjected to isobaric hypoxia. We measured them in rats subjected to isobaric hypoxia. Overall, these data strongly suggest that optimally treated HFrEF patients exhibited subclinical hypoxia that is improved by S/V. The data also posit proBNP T71 glycosylation as a biomarker of cardiac hypoxia.

Underrepresentation of Women in Reduced Ejection Heart Failure Clinical Trials With Improved Mortality or Hospitalization

BACKGROUND

There are established sex-specific differences in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) outcomes. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) based on cardiovascular outcome benefits, typically either reduced cardiovascular mortality or hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), influence current guidelines for therapy.

OBJECTIVES

The authors evaluate the representation of women in HFrEF RCTs that observed reduced all-cause or cardiovascular mortality or HHF.

METHODS

We queried Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Excerpta Medica dataBASE, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, and PubMed for HFrEF RCTs that reported a statistically significant benefit of intervention resulting in improved mortality or HHF published from 1980 to 2021. We estimated representation using the participation-to-prevalence ratio (PPR). A PPR of 0.8 to 1.2 was considered representative.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 33 RCTs. Women represented only 23.2% of all enrolled participants (n = 24,366/104,972), ranging from 11.4% to 40.1% per trial. Overall PPR was 0.58, with per-trial PPR estimates ranging from 0.29 to 1.00. Only 5 trials (15.2%) had a PPR of women representative of the disease population. Representation did not change significantly over time. The proportion of women in North American trials was significantly greater than trials conducted in Europe (P = 0.03). The proportion of women was greater in industry trials compared to government-funded trials (P = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Women are underrepresented in HFrEF RCTs that have demonstrated mortality or HHF benefits and influence current guidelines. Representation is key to further delineation of sex-specific differences in major trial results. Sustained efforts are warranted to ensure equitable and appropriate inclusion of women in HFrEF trials.

B-Type Natriuretic Peptide Inhibits the Expression and Function of SERCA2a in Heart Failure

B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) possesses protective cardiovascular properties; however, there has not been sufficient serious consideration of the side effects of BNP. As for sarcoplasmic/endoplasmic reticulum calcium ATPase 2a (SERCA2a), it was once considered a new target for the treatment of heart failure (HF). Nevertheless, clinical trials of SERCA2a gene therapy in HF have finally become unsuccessful. Research has found that elevated BNP levels and decreased SERCA2a expression are two important HF characteristics, which are always negatively correlated. We hypothesize that BNP inhibits SERCA2a expression and, therefore, exerts negative effects on SERCA2a expression and function.The effects of BNP on endogenous SERCA2a expression and function were tested in mice with HF induced by transverse aortic constriction and neonatal rat cardiomyocytes (NRCM). Furthermore, to verify the effects of BNP on exogenous SERCA2a gene transduction efficacy, BNP was added to the myocardium and cardiomyocytes infected with an adenovirus overexpressing SERCA2a.In vivo, BNP levels were increased, SERCA2a expression was reduced in both the BNP intervention and HF groups, and BNP reduced the overexpressed exogenous SERCA2a protein in the myocardium. Our in vitro data showed that BNP dose-dependently inhibited the total and exogenous SERCA2a expression in NRCM by activating the cGMP-dependent protein kinase G. BNP also inhibited the effects of SERCA2a overexpression on Ca2+ transience in NRCM.The expression and function of endogenous and exogenous SERCA2a are inhibited by BNP. The opposite relationship between BNP and SERCA2a should be given serious attention in the treatment of HF via BNP or SERCA2a gene therapy.

Long-Term Treatment With Sacubitril/Valsartan in Japanese Patients With Chronic Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction - Open-Label Extension of the PARALLEL-HF Study

BACKGROUND

The PARALLEL-HF study assessed the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril in Japanese patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This open-label extension (OLE) assessed long-term safety with sacubitril/valsartan.Methods and Results: This study enrolled 150 patients who received sacubitril/valsartan 50 or 100 mg, b.i.d., in addition to optimal background heart failure (HF) therapy. A dose level of sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg, b.i.d., was targeted by Week 8. At OLE baseline, higher concentrations of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and urine cGMP, and lower concentrations of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), were observed in the sacubitril/valsartan core group (patients who received sacubitril/valsartan in both the core and extension study) than in the enalapril core group (patients who received enalapril in the core study and were then transitioned to sacubitril/valsartan). The mean exposure to study drug was 98.9%. There was no trend of worsening of HF at Month 12. No obvious changes in cardiac biomarkers were observed, whereas BNP and urine cGMP increased and NT-proBNP decreased in the enalapril core group, which was evident at Weeks 2-4 and sustained to Month 12.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term sacubitril/valsartan at doses up to 200 mg, b.i.d., has a positive risk-benefit profile; it was safe and well tolerated in Japanese patients with chronic HFrEF.

Sacubitril/valsartan reverses cardiac structure and function in experimental model of hypertension-induced hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

This study evaluated the effect of sacubtril/valsartan on cardiac remodeling, molecular and cellular adaptations in experimental (rat) model of hypertension-induced hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Thirty Wistar Kyoto rats, 10 healthy (control) and 20 rats with confirmed hypertension-induced hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HpCM), were used for this study. The HpCM group was further subdivided into untreated and sacubitril/valsartan-treated groups. Myocardial structure and function were assessed using echocardiography, Langendorff's isolated heart experiment, blood sampling and qualitative polymerase chain reaction. Echocardiographic examinations revealed protective effects of sacubitril/valsartan by improving left ventricular internal diameter in systole and diastole and fractional shortening. Additionally, sacubitril/valsartan treatment decreased systolic and diastolic blood pressures in comparison with untreated hypertensive rats. Moreover, sacubitril/valsartan treatment reduced oxidative stress and apoptosis (reduced expression of Bax and Cas9 genes) compared to untreated rats. There was a regular histomorphology of cardiomyocytes, interstitium, and blood vessels in treated rats compared to untreated HpCM rats which expressed hypertrophic cardiomyocytes, with polymorphic nuclei, prominent nucleoli and moderately dilated interstitium. In experimental model of hypertension-induced hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, sacubitril/valsartan treatment led to improved cardiac structure, haemodynamic performance, and reduced oxidative stress and apoptosis. Sacubitril/valsartan thus presents as a potential therapeutic strategy resulted in hypertension-induced hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.

Concomitant medication in patients with bradykinin-mediated angioedema - there's more than ACE inhibitors

Bradykinin-mediated angioedema is a rare, non-allergic, potentially life-threatening disease. ACE inhibitor-induced angioedema and hereditary angioedema (HAE) are the two most common presentations. Therapeutic options, pathophysiology and diagnosis continue to be investigated, with considerable progress in HAE over the last few decades. For all patients with bradykinin-mediated angioedema, there are several medications that should be avoided or administered with caution. Some of the triggering medications are well known, while others are suspected or of unknown significance. A common denominator is that there is no approved therapy for bradykinin-mediated angioedema as a drug side effect. Some medications, such as tissue plasminogen activator, have a higher incidence of angioedema with potential airway compromise than ACE inhibitors, although this fact is widely underappreciated. In this review, we aim to summarize what is currently known and recommended about concomitant medication in HAE patients and the interaction of other bradykinin-influencing drugs.

Medikamente als Auslöser Bradykinin-vermittelter Angioödeme - mehr als ACE-Hemmer

Bradykinin‐vermittelte Angioödeme sind seltene, nichtallergische und potenziell lebensbedrohliche Krankheiten. Die beiden bekanntesten Formen sind das ACE‐Hemmer‐induzierte Angioödem und das hereditäre Angioödem (HAE). Die therapeutischen Möglichkeiten, die Pathophysiologie und die Diagnostik werden weiter erforscht, wobei beim HAE in den letzten Jahrzehnten erhebliche Fortschritte erzielt wurden. Für alle Patienten mit Bradykinin‐vermittelten Angioödemen gibt es Medikamente, die vermieden oder mit Vorsicht verabreicht werden sollten. Einige dieser auslösenden Medikamente sind gut bekannt, bei anderen wird ein Zusammenhang vermutet oder ihre Bedeutung ist unbekannt. Ein gemeinsamer Nenner ist, dass es keine zugelassene Therapie für das Bradykinin‐vermittelte Angioödem als Arzneimittelnebenwirkung gibt. Bei einigen Medikamenten, wie dem gewebespezifischen Plasminogenaktivator, ist die Inzidenz von Angioödemen mit möglicher Beeinträchtigung der Atemwege höher als bei ACE‐Hemmern, wobei diese Tatsache weitgehend unterschätzt wird. In dieser Übersichtsarbeit fassen wir zusammen, was derzeit über die Begleitmedikation bei HAE‐Patienten und die Interaktion mit anderen Bradykinin‐beeinflussenden Medikamenten bekannt ist und empfohlen wird.

Do Heart Failure Biomarkers Influence Heart Failure Treatment Response?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Heart failure (HF) is one of the leading causes of cardiac morbidity and mortality around the world. Our evolving understanding of the cellular and molecular pathways of HF has led to the identification and evaluation of a growing number of HF biomarkers. Natriuretic peptides remain the best studied and understood HF biomarkers, with demonstrated clinical utility in the diagnosis and prognostication of HF. Less commonly understood is the utility of HF biomarkers for guiding and monitoring treatment response. In this review, we outline the current HF biomarker landscape and identify novel biomarkers that have potential to influence HF treatment response.

RECENT FINDINGS

An increasing number of biomarkers have been identified through the study of HF mechanisms. While these biomarkers hold promise, they have not yet been proven to be effective in guiding HF therapy. A more developed understanding of HF mechanisms has resulted in an increased number of available pharmacologic HF therapies. In the past, biomarkers have been useful for the diagnosis and prognostication of HF. Future evaluation on their use to guide pharmacologic therapy is ongoing, and there is promise that biomarker-guided therapy will allow clinicians to begin personalizing treatment for their HF patients.

Clinical benefits of angiotensin receptor-Neprilysin inhibitor in adults with congenital heart disease

BACKGROUND

There are limited data about the clinical benefits of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) in adults with congenital heart disease (CHD). The purpose of the study was to assess the clinical benefits (chamber function and heart failure indices) of ARNI in adults with CHD.

METHOD

In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the temporal change in chamber function and heart failure indices between 35 patients that received ARNI for >6 months, and a propensity matched control group (n = 70) of patients that received angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin-II receptor blocker (ACEI/ARB) within the same period.

RESULTS

Of the 35 patients in the ARNI group, 21 (60%) had systemic left ventricle (LV) while 14 (40%) had systemic right ventricle (RV). Compared to the ACEI/ARB group, the ARNI group had greater relative improvement in LV global longitudinal strain (GLS) (28% versus 11% increase from baseline, p < 0.001) and RV-GLS (11% versus 4% increase from baseline, p < 0.001), and greater relative improvement in New York Heart Association functional class (-14 versus -2% change from baseline, p = 0.006) and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels (-29% versus -13% change from baseline, p < 0.001). These results were consistent across different systemic ventricular morphologies.

CONCLUSIONS

ARNI was associated with improvement in biventricular systolic function, functional status, and neurohormonal activation, suggesting prognostic benefit. These results provide a foundation for a randomized clinical trial to empirically test the prognostic benefits of ARNI in adults with CHD, as the next step towards evidence-based recommendations for heart failure management in this population.

Cost-utility analysis of valsartan, enalapril, and candesartan in patients with heart failure in Iran

BACKGROUND

Today, heart failure is one of the leading causes of death and disability in most developed and developing countries. By 2030, more than 23.3 million people are projected to die of cardiovascular diseases each year, and the prevalence of heart failure is expected to increase by 25%. One of the preventive interventions is pharmacological interventions which can be used to reduce the complications of cardiovascular diseases such as heart failure. One of the most important pharmacological interventions in patients with heart failure is the use of antihypertensive drugs such as candesartan, enalapril, and valsartan. This study aimed to compare the cost-utility of candesartan, enalapril, and valsartan in patients with heart failure using the Markov model in Iran in 2020.

METHODS

In the present study, a four-state Markov model was designed to compare the cost-utility of candesartan, enalapril, and valsartan for a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 heart failure patients older than 24 years. The payers' perspective was used to calculate the costs. The Markov states included outpatients with heart failure, patients with heart failure admitted to general hospital wards, patients with heart failure admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs), and death. The effectiveness measure in this study was the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to determine the robustness of the results. The TreeAge Pro 2011 software was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

The results showed that the average expected costs and QALYs were 119645.45 USD and 16.15 for valsartan, 113,019.68 USD and 15.16 for enalapril, and 113,093.37 USD and 15.06 for candesartan, respectively. Candesartan was recognized as the dominated option. Because the calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) value (6,692.69 USD) was less than the threshold value (7,256 USD), valsartan was cost-effective compared to enalapril. The results of the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed that at the threshold of 7,256 USD, valsartan had a 60% chance of being cost-effective compared to enalapril. The results of one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. Moreover, the results showed that ICU (1,112 USD) had the highest cost among cost items.

CONCLUSION

According to the results, it is recommended that health policymakers consider the use of valsartan by cardiologists when designing clinical guidelines for the treatment of patients with heart failure.

Similarities and distinctions between acetazolamide and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors in patients with acute heart failure: Key insights into ADVOR and EMPULSE

Both acetazolamide and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors block sodium reabsorption in the proximal renal tubule primarily through inhibition of sodium-hydrogen exchanger isoform 3 (NHE3), but neither SGLT2 inhibitors nor acetazolamide produce a sustained natriuresis due to compensatory upregulation of sodium reabsorption at distal nephron sites. Nevertheless, acetazolamide and SGLT2 inhibitors have been used as adjunctive therapy to loop diuretics in states where NHE3 is upregulated, e.g. acute heart failure. Two randomized controlled trials have been carried out with acetazolamide in acute heart failure (DIURESIS-CHF and ADVOR). In ADVOR, acetazolamide improved physical signs of fluid retention, but this finding could not be explained by the modest observed diuretic effect. Acetazolamide did not produce a natriuresis in the DIURESIS-CHF trial, and in ADVOR, immediate effects on symptoms and body weight were not reported, and the drug had no effect on morbidity or mortality after 90 days. Three randomized controlled trials have been carried out with empagliflozin (EMPAG-HF, EMPA-RESPONSE-AHF and EMPULSE) in acute heart failure. The EMPULSE trial did not report effects on diuresis or in changes in physical signs of congestion during the first week of treatment, but in EMPAG-HF and EMPA-RESPONSE-AHF, empagliflozin had no effect of dyspnoea, urinary sodium excretion or body weight during the first 4 days. In the EMPULSE trial, empagliflozin improved health status at 15 days and reduced the risk of worsening heart failure events at 90 days, but these effects are similar in magnitude and time course to the early statistical significance on the risk of heart failure hospitalizations achieved within 14-30 days in the major trials of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with chronic heart failure. Neurohormonal inhibitors produce this early effect in the absence of a diuresis. Additionally, in numerous randomized controlled trials, in-hospital diuretic intensification has not reduced the risk of major heart failure events, even when treatment is sustained. These findings, taken collectively, suggest that any immediate diuretic effects of acetazolamide and SGLT2 inhibitors in acute heart failure are not likely to influence the short- or long-term clinical course of patients.

Revisiting Diagnosis and Treatment of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Current Practice and Novel Perspectives

Sarcomeric hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a prevalent genetic disorder characterised by left ventricular hypertrophy, myocardial disarray, and an increased risk of heart failure and sudden cardiac death. Despite advances in understanding its pathophysiology, treatment options for HCM remain limited. This narrative review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of current clinical practice and explore emerging therapeutic strategies for sarcomeric HCM, with a focus on cardiac myosin inhibitors. We first discuss the conventional management of HCM, including lifestyle modifications, pharmacological therapies, and invasive interventions, emphasizing their limitations and challenges. Next, we highlight recent advances in molecular genetics and their potential applications in refining HCM diagnosis, risk stratification, and treatment. We delve into emerging therapies, such as gene editing, RNA-based therapies, targeted small molecules, and cardiac myosin modulators like mavacamten and aficamten, which hold promise in modulating the underlying molecular mechanisms of HCM. Mavacamten and aficamten, selective modulators of cardiac myosin, have demonstrated encouraging results in clinical trials by reducing left ventricular outflow tract obstruction and improving symptoms in patients with obstructive HCM. We discuss their mechanisms of action, clinical trial outcomes, and potential implications for the future of HCM management. Furthermore, we examine the role of precision medicine in HCM management, exploring how individualised treatment strategies, including exercise prescription as part of the management plan, may optimise patient outcomes. Finally, we underscore the importance of multidisciplinary care and patient-centred approaches to address the complex needs of HCM patients. This review also aims to encourage further research and collaboration in the field of HCM, promoting the development of novel and more effective therapeutic strategies, such as cardiac myosin modulators, to hopefully improve the quality of life and outcome of patients with sarcomeric HCM.

Time to benefit of heart rate reduction with ivabradine in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

In the SHIFT (Systolic Heart failure treatment with the If inhibitor ivabradine Trial, ISRCTN70429960) study, ivabradine reduced cardiovascular death or heart failure (HF) hospitalizations in patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in sinus rhythm and with a heart rate (HR) ≥70 bpm. In this study, we sought to determine the clinical significance of the time durations of HR reduction and the significant treatment effect on outcomes among patients with HFrEF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The time to statistically significant reduction of the primary outcome (HF hospitalization and cardiovascular death) and its components, all-cause death, and HF death, were assessed in a post-hoc analysis of the SHIFT trial in the overall population (HR ≥70 bpm) and at HR ≥75 bpm, representing the approved label in many countries. Compared to placebo, the primary outcome and HF hospitalizations were significantly reduced at 102 days, while there was no effect on cardiovascular death, all-cause death, and HF death at HR ≥70 bpm. In the population with a baseline HR ≥75 bpm, a reduction of the primary outcome occurred after 67 days, HF hospitalization after 78 days, cardiovascular death after 169 days, death from HF after 157 days and all-cause death after 169 days.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with ivabradine should not be deferred in patients in sinus rhythm with a HR of ≥70 bpm to reduce the primary outcome and HF hospitalizations, in particular in patients with HR ≥75 bpm. At HR ≥75 bpm, the time to risk reduction was shorter for reduction of hospitalization and mortality outcomes in patients with HFrEF after initiation of guideline-directed medication, including beta-blockers at maximally tolerated doses.

Possible role of LCZ696 in atherosclerosis: new inroads and perspective

LCZ696 blocks both angiotensin receptor type 1 (ATR1) and neprilysin (NEP), which are intricate in the degradation of natriuretic peptides (NPs) and other endogenous peptides. It has been shown NEP inhibitors and LCZ696 could be effectively in the management of atherosclerosis (AS). However, the underlying mechanism of LCZ696 in AS is needed to be clarified entirely. Hence, this review is directed to reconnoiter the mechanistic role of LCZ696 in AS. The anti-inflammatory role of LCZ696 is related to the inhibition of transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β)-activated kinase 1 (TAK) and nod-like receptor pyrin 3 receptor (NLRP3) inflammasome. Moreover, LCZ696, via inhibition of pro-inflammatory cytokines, oxidative stress, apoptosis and endothelial dysfunction can attenuate the development and progression of AS. In conclusion, LCZ696 could be effective in the management of AS through modulation of inflammatory and oxidative signaling. Preclinical and clinical studies are recommended in this regard.

Critical Analysis of the Effects of SGLT2 Inhibitors on Renal Tubular Sodium, Water and Chloride Homeostasis and Their Role in Influencing Heart Failure Outcomes

SGLT2 (sodium-glucose cotransporter 2) inhibitors interfere with the reabsorption of glucose and sodium in the early proximal renal tubule, but the magnitude and duration of any ensuing natriuretic or diuretic effect are the result of an interplay between the degree of upregulation of SGLT2 and sodium-hydrogen exchanger 3, the extent to which downstream compensatory tubular mechanisms are activated, and (potentially) the volume set point in individual patients. A comprehensive review and synthesis of available studies reveals several renal response patterns with substantial variation across studies and clinical settings. However, the common observation is an absence of a large acute or chronic diuresis or natriuresis with these agents, either when given alone or combined with other diuretics. This limited response results from the fact that renal compensation to these drugs is rapid and nearly complete within a few days or weeks, preventing progressive volume losses. Nevertheless, the finding that fractional excretion of glucose and lithium (the latter being a marker of proximal sodium reabsorption) persists during long-term treatment with SGLT2 inhibitors indicates that pharmacological tolerance to the effects of these drugs at the level of the proximal tubule does not meaningfully occur. This persistent proximal tubular effect of SGLT2 inhibitors can be hypothesized to produce a durable improvement in the internal set point for volume homeostasis, which may become clinically important during times of fluid expansion. However, it is difficult to know whether a treatment-related change in the volume set point actually occurs or contributes to the effect of these drugs to reduce the risk of major heart failure events. SGLT2 inhibitors exert cardioprotective effects by a direct effect on cardiomyocytes that is independent of the presence of or binding to SGLT2 or the actions of these drugs on the proximal renal tubule. Nevertheless, changes in the volume set point mediated by SGLT2 inhibitors might potentially act cooperatively with the direct favorable molecular and cellular effects of these drugs on cardiomyocytes to mediate their benefits on the development and clinical course of heart failure.

The emerging role of sacubitril/valsartan in pulmonary hypertension with heart failure

Pulmonary hypertension due to left heart disease (PH-LHD) represents approximately 65%-80% of all patients with PH. The progression, prognosis, and mortality of individuals with left heart failure (LHF) are significantly influenced by PH and right ventricular (RV) dysfunction. Consequently, cardiologists should devote ample attention to the interplay between HF and PH. Patients with PH and HF may not receive optimal benefits from the therapeutic effects of prostaglandins, endothelin receptor antagonists, or phosphodiesterase inhibitors, which are specific drugs for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Sacubitril/valsartan, the angiotensin receptor II blocker-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), was recommended as the first-line therapy for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) by the 2021 European Society of Cardiology Guidelines. Although ARNI is effective in treating left ventricular (LV) enlargement and lower ejection fraction, its efficacy in treating individuals with PH and HF remains underexplored. Considering its vasodilatory effect at the pre-capillary level and a natriuretic drainage role at the post-capillary level, ARNI is believed to have a broad range of potential applications in treating PH-LHD. This review discusses the fundamental pathophysiological connections between PH and HF, emphasizing the latest research and potential benefits of ARNI in PH with various types of LHF and RV dysfunction.

Early Initiation of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitor Leads to a Shorter Hospital Stay in Patients With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure

Background: The efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in patients with acute chronic heart failure (HF) is increasingly being reported. However, it is not clear when SGLT2i should be initiated in patients with acute decompensated HF (ADHF) after hospitalization. We retrospectively analyzed ADHF patients with newly prescribed SGLT2i. Methods and Results: Among the 694 patients hospitalized due to HF between May 2019 and May 2022, data were extracted for 168 patients with newly prescribed SGLT2i during the index hospitalization. These patients were divided into 2 groups: and early group (92 patients who started SGLT2i within 2 days of admission) and a late group (76 patients who started SGLT2i after 3 days). Clinical characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups. The date of cardiac rehabilitation initiation was significantly earlier in the early than late group (2.5±1.2 vs. 3.8±2.2 days; P<0.001). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the early group (16.4±6.5 vs. 24.2±16.0 days; P<0.001). Although there were significantly fewer HF readmissions within 3 months in the early group (2.1% vs. 10.5%; P=0.044), the association disappeared in a multivariate analysis including clinical confounders. Conclusions: Early initiation of SGLT2i may shorten hospital stays.

Regression of cardiac hypertrophy in health and disease: mechanisms and therapeutic potential

Left ventricular hypertrophy is a leading risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Although reverse ventricular remodelling was long thought to be irreversible, evidence from the past three decades indicates that this process is possible with many existing heart disease therapies. The regression of pathological hypertrophy is associated with improved cardiac function, quality of life and long-term health outcomes. However, less than 50% of patients respond favourably to most therapies, and the reversibility of remodelling is influenced by many factors, including age, sex, BMI and disease aetiology. Cardiac hypertrophy also occurs in physiological settings, including pregnancy and exercise, although in these cases, hypertrophy is associated with normal or improved ventricular function and is completely reversible postpartum or with cessation of training. Studies over the past decade have identified the molecular features of hypertrophy regression in health and disease settings, which include modulation of protein synthesis, microRNAs, metabolism and protein degradation pathways. In this Review, we summarize the evidence for hypertrophy regression in patients with current first-line pharmacological and surgical interventions. We further discuss the molecular features of reverse remodelling identified in cell and animal models, highlighting remaining knowledge gaps and the essential questions for future investigation towards the goal of designing specific therapies to promote regression of pathological hypertrophy.

Atrial Natriuretic Peptides as a Bridge between Atrial Fibrillation, Heart Failure, and Amyloidosis of the Atria

ANP is mainly synthesized by the atria, and upon excretion, it serves two primary purposes: vasodilation and increasing the renal excretion of sodium and water. The understanding of ANP's role in cardiac systems has improved considerably in recent decades. This review focuses on several studies demonstrating the importance of analyzing the regulations between the endocrine and mechanical function of the heart and emphasizes the effect of ANP, as the primary hormone of the atria, on atrial fibrillation (AF) and related diseases. The review first discusses the available data on the diagnostic and therapeutic applications of ANP and then explains effect of ANP on heart failure (HF) and atrial fibrillation (AF) and vice versa, where tracking ANP levels could lead to understanding the pathophysiological mechanisms operating in these diseases. Second, it focuses on conventional treatments for AF, such as cardioversion and catheter ablation, and their effects on cardiac endocrine and mechanical function. Finally, it provides a point of view about the delayed recovery of cardiac mechanical and endocrine function after cardioversion, which can contribute to the occurrence of acute heart failure, and the potential impact of restoration of the sinus rhythm by extensive ablation or surgery in losing ANP-producing sites. Overall, ANP plays a key role in heart failure through its effects on vasodilation and natriuresis, leading to a decrease in the activity of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, but it is crucial to understand the intimate role of ANP in HF and AF to improve their diagnosis and personalizing the patients' treatment.

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.

Sudden cardiac death prevention in the era of novel heart failure medications

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) occurs unexpectedly and is usually a result of ventricular arrhythmia in patients with structural heart disease. The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), with or without biventricular pacing, has been proven to be protective for heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction of <35 % (HFrEF). This device therapy prevents SCD, with additional optimal medications, namely angiotensin-converting enzyme-inhibitors, angiotensin-II receptor-blockers, beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor-antagonists. HFrEF patients present the majority of SCD incidents, as they are characterized by cardiac fibrosis, the main arrhythmogenic element. The introduction of angiotensin-receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors and guanylate-cyclase stimulators was associated with reduction of SCD. Additionally, clinical trials have evaluated the improved outcome of these new medications on left ventricular ejection fraction, arrhythmias and HFrEF. These beneficial effects could possibly lead to important changes in decision-making on ICD implantation for primary prevention in patients with HFrEF and reduce the need for device therapy. In this review, we highlight the pathophysiological mechanisms of the new drug agents, and evaluate the possible effect they could have on the role of device therapy as a primary prevention of SCD.

Deconvolution of BNP and NT-proBNP Immunoreactivities by Mass Spectrometry in Heart Failure and Sacubitril/Valsartan Treatment

BACKGROUND

Elevated BNP and the N-terminal fragment of the proBNP (NT-proBNP) are hallmarks of heart failure (HF). Generally, both biomarkers parallel each other. In patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan, BNP remained stable while NT-proBNP decreased. As BNP and NT-proBNP assays have limited specificity due to cross-reactivity, we quantified by mass spectrometry (MS) the contributing molecular species.

METHODS

We included 356 healthy volunteers, 100 patients with acute dyspnoea (49 acute decompensated HF; 51 dyspnoea of non-cardiac origin), and 73 patients with chronic HF and reduced ejection fraction treated with sacubitril/valsartan. BNP and NT-proBNP immunoreactivities (BNPir and NT-proBNPir) were measured by immunoassays (Abbott ARCHITECT and Roche Diagnostics proBNPII) and proBNP-derived peptides and glycosylation at serine 44 by MS on plasma samples.

RESULTS

BNPir corresponded to the sum of proBNP1-108, BNP1-32, BNP3-32, and BNP5-32 (R2 = 0.9995), while NT-proBNPir corresponded to proBNP1-108 and NT-proBNP1-76 not glycosylated at serine 44 (R2 = 0.992). NT-proBNPir was better correlated (R2 = 0.9597) than BNPir (R2 = 0.7643) with proBNP signal peptide (a surrogate of proBNP production). In patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan, non-glycosylated NT-proBNP1-76 remained constant (P = 0.84) despite an increase in NT-proBNP1-76 and its glycosylation (P < 0.0001). ProBNP1-108 remained constant (P = 0.12) while its glycosylation increased (P < 0.0001), resulting in a decrease in non-glycosylated proBNP1-108 (P < 0.0001), and in NT-proBNPir.

CONCLUSIONS

Glycosylation interfered with NT-proBNPir measurement, explaining the discrepant evolution of these 2 biomarkers in patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan. Both BNPir and NT-proBNPir are surrogates of proBNP1-108 production, NT-proBNPir being more robust in the clinical contexts studied.

Cost-Effectiveness of Comprehensive Quadruple Therapy for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is one of the most costly and deadly chronic disease states. The cost effectiveness of a comprehensive quadruple therapy regimen for HFrEF has not been studied.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to determine the cost-effectiveness of quadruple therapy comprised of beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, and sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors vs regimens composed of only beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (triple therapy), and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and beta-blockers (double therapy).

METHODS

Using a 2-state Markov model, the authors performed a cost-effectiveness study using simulated populations of 1,000 patients with HFrEF based on the participants in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure) trial and compared them by treatment strategy (quadruple therapy vs triple and double therapy) from a United States health care system perspective. The authors also performed 10,000 probabilistic simulations.

RESULTS

Treatment with quadruple therapy resulted in an increase of 1.73 and 2.87 life-years compared with triple therapy and double therapy, respectively, and an increase in quality-adjusted life-years of 1.12 and 1.85 years, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of quadruple therapy vs triple therapy and double therapy were $81,000 and $51,081, respectively. In 91.7% and 99.9% of probabilistic simulations quadruple therapy had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of <$150,000 compared with triple therapy and double therapy, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

At current pricing, the use of quadruple therapy in patients with HFrEF was cost effective compared with triple therapy and double therapy. These findings highlight the need for improved access and optimal implementation of comprehensive quadruple therapy in eligible patients with HFrEF.

Misconceptions and Facts about Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is a significant driver of morbidity and mortality. There are common misconceptions regarding the disease processes underlying heart failure and best practices for therapy. The terms heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and left ventricular systolic dysfunction are not interchangeable terms. Key therapies for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction target the underlying disease processes, not the left ventricular ejection fraction alone. The absence of congestion does not rule out heart failure. Patients with cardiac amyloidosis can also present with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. A rise in serum creatinine in acute heart failure exacerbation is not associated with tubular injury. Guideline directed medical therapy should be continued during acute exacerbations of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and should be started in the same hospitalization in new diagnoses. Marginal blood pressure is not a relative contraindication to optimal guideline directed medical therapy. Guideline directed medical therapy should be continued even if ejection fraction improves. There are other therapies that provide significant benefit besides the four key medications in guideline directed medical therapy.

What Is the Clinical Utility of Cardiac Troponins in Heart Failure? Are They Modifiable Beyond Their Prognostic Value?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the role of cardiac troponin (cTn) for prognosis in acute and chronic heart failure, and for predicting heart failure; and to explore the association between troponin and response to heart failure therapies, with an eye toward a possible role for troponin in a personalized approach to heart failure management, beyond prognosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

A number of therapies, including the neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, have recently been shown to improve outcomes in heart failure patients. Most studies suggest that these agents improve outcomes regardless of baseline cTn concentration, but have greater absolute benefit among patients with highest cTn and baseline risk. Troponin is prognostic across the heart failure spectrum, but whether it can significantly help with heart failure prevention and with tailoring and guiding heart failure treatments and interventions remains unknown.

Sacubitril-valsartan versus enalapril for the treatment of acute decompensated heart failure in Chinese settings: A cost-effectiveness analysis

Background: The episode of acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is the main cause of hospitalization for heart failure (HF). Sacubitril-valsartan has been proven to be effective in reducing the risks of hospitalization for HF in ADHF. When to initiate sacubitril-valsartan in ADHF to make it the most cost-effective in China remains unclear. Methods: A lifetime Markov model with a 1-month cycle length was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of early or late initiation of sacubitril-valsartan versus enalapril in ADHF. Early initiation of sacubitril-valsartan meant that it was initiated after stabilization from ADHF, and late initiation of sacubitril-valsartan meant that it was initiated after stabilization from HF, which includes no hospitalization for at least three consecutive months. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as the ratio of incremental cost to incremental effectiveness. The secondary outcomes were total costs and total effectiveness. Three times of per capita GDP of China in 2021 was set as the willingness-to-pay threshold. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were employed to test the robustness of the results. Results: The early initiation of sacubitril-valsartan treatment resulted in an ICER of 3,662.4 USD per quality-adjusted life year, lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold, and the late initiation of sacubitril-valsartan treatment gained an ICER of 4,444.4 USD/QALY, still lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that our results were robust, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that early initiation of sacubitril-valsartan in ADHF was cost-effective under a 97.4% circumstance. Conclusion: Early initiation of sacubitril-valsartan after stabilization of ADHF is highly cost-effective compared with the use of enalapril; late initiation of sacubitril-valsartan after stabilization of HF is still cost-effective but not as cost-effective as early initiation of sacubitril-valsartan in ADHF. For Chinese ADHF patients, the time to initiate sacubitril-valsartan should be when the patient is stabilized from ADHF rather than when stabilized from HF, from the perspective of economic evaluation.

Estimating the Time to Benefit for Therapies in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Case Study of Sacubitril-Valsartan Using Reconstructed Data from a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Foundational therapies in heart failure improve clinical outcomes in heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Underuse of these life-prolonging heart failure therapies, such as sacubitril-valsartan, is common in older adults and has been associated with worse clinical outcomes. Characterizing the early benefits seen with these therapies might help increase their uptake in older adults.

OBJECTIVE

We applied several methods to estimate the time to benefit of an HFrEF therapy, using sacubitril-valsartan as a case study.

METHODS

PARADIGM-HF was a randomized controlled study on sacubitril-valsartan versus enalapril in stable, ambulatory HFrEF patients (n = 8399). The primary endpoint, a composite of death from cardiovascular causes or a first hospitalization for heart failure, was significantly reduced (sacubitril-valsartan (21.8%) versus enalapril (26.5%), hazard ratio (HR) 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-0.87). We extracted and tabulated the Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves of the primary endpoint. An individual patient dataset was then reconstructed. The following methods were applied to explore the time to benefit of sacubitril-valsartan versus enalapril: visual estimation of the point of divergence of the KM curves, statistical process control (SPC), unadjusted landmark analyses using Cox proportional hazards analysis with 30-day increments until significance was persistently achieved, and comparing the survival probabilities of the extracted life tables.

RESULTS

Six raters visually estimated the time to benefit at a median of 60 days (interquartile range 38-10 days). Using SPC we found an early benefit from 28 days on, using the longest predefined control period of 28 days. An absolute risk reduction of 1 and 2% was found after 59 and 250 days, respectively. The reconstructed dataset provided a similar HR of 0.8004 (95% CI 0.7331-0.8739). Landmark analyses persistently showed statistical significance from 390 days and later. Survival probabilities differed from 35 days onward.

CONCLUSION

Using multiple approaches, the earliest benefit of sacubitril-valsartan compared to enalapril in stable HFrEF was found at about 1 month after initiation.

Heart Failure Duration and Mechanistic Efficacy of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Although sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val) is indicated for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), gaps in care continue to exist for those with newer onset HFrEF vs those with longer durations of disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We categorized 794 persons with HFrEF (EF of ≤40%) according to a HF duration of less than 12 months, 12-24 months, 24-60 months, and more than> 60 months. After the initiation of Sac/Val, concentrations of N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide, high sensitivity cardiac troponin T, and soluble ST2 were measured, and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire 23 scores were obtained serially from baseline to 12 months. The left ventricular ejection fraction was measured by echocardiography. Significant decreases in the concentrations of N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide, high sensitivity cardiac troponin T, and soluble ST2 were observed regardless of HF duration (P < .001). Comparable gains in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire 23 scores were achieved in all HF duration categories. Moreover, consistent reverse cardiac remodeling in all HF duration categories occurred, with the absolute left ventricular ejection fraction improvement by 12 months across HF duration groups of 12.2%, 6.9%, 8.5%, and 8.6% for HF duration of less than 12 months, 12-24 months, 24-60 months, and more than 60 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The initiation of Sac/Val decreases prognostic biomarkers, improves health status, and reverses cardiac remodeling processes, regardless of HF duration.

BRIEF LAY SUMMARY

We categorized 794 persons with heart failure owing to a low ejection fraction according to disease duration into 4 groups: less than 12 months, 12-24 months, 24-60 months, and more than 60 months. After the initiation of sacubitril/valsartan (Entresto), we found that regardless of the duration of heart failure significant improvements occurred in cardiac biomarkers, patients felt better with improved health status and on testing with cardiac ultrasound examination, improvement in heart size, and function occurred. These results suggest that, regardless of heart failure duration, patients with a reduced ejection fraction would benefit from use of sacubitril/valsartan for their care.

Estimation of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Using Cardiovascular Hemodynamic Parameters and Pulse Morphological Characteristics with Machine Learning Algorithms

It is estimated that 360,000 patients have suffered from heart failure (HF) in Taiwan, mostly those over the age of 65 years, who need long-term medication and daily healthcare to reduce the risk of mortality. The left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is an important index to diagnose the HF. The goal of this study is to estimate the LVEF using the cardiovascular hemodynamic parameters, morphological characteristics of pulse, and bodily information with two machine learning algorithms. Twenty patients with HF who have been treated for at least six to nine months participated in this study. The self-constructing neural fuzzy inference network (SoNFIN) and XGBoost regression models were used to estimate their LVEF. A total of 193 training samples and 118 test samples were obtained. The recursive feature elimination algorithm is used to choose the optimal parameter set. The results show that the estimating root-mean-square errors (ERMS) of SoNFIN and XGBoost are 6.9 ± 2.3% and 6.4 ± 2.4%, by comparing with echocardiography as the ground truth, respectively. The benefit of this study is that the LVEF could be measured by the non-medical image method conveniently. Thus, the proposed method may arrive at an application level for clinical practice in the future.

Influence of diabetes on sacubitril/valsartan titration and clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized for heart failure

AIMS

Diabetes mellitus is associated with worse outcomes and lower attainment of disease-modifying therapies in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This post hoc analysis of TRANSITION compared the patterns of tolerability and uptitration of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with HFrEF stabilized after hospital admission due to acute decompensated HF depending on the presence or absence of diabetes as a co-morbidity.

METHODS

TRANSITION, a randomized, open-label study compared sacubitril/valsartan initiation pre-discharge vs. post-discharge (up to14 days) in 991 patients hospitalized for acutely decompensated HFrEF. The impact of diabetes status on tolerability and safety was studied at 10-week and 26-week post-randomization.

RESULTS

Among the 991 patients analysed at baseline, 460 (46.4%) had diabetes and exhibited a higher risk profile. At 10 weeks, sacubitril/valsartan target dose (97/103 mg bid) was achieved in a similar proportion of patients in each subgroup, when initiated pre-discharge or post-discharge respectively [diabetes subgroup: 47% (n = 105/226) vs. 50% (n = 115/228); relative risk ratio (RRR), 0.923; P = 0.412; non-diabetes subgroup: 45% (n = 119/267) vs. 51% (n = 133/261); RRR, 0.878; P = 0.155]. The proportions of patients achieving and maintaining either 49/51 mg or 97/103 mg bid [diabetes subgroup: 61.1% (n = 138/226) vs. 67.5% (n = 154/228); RRR, 0.909; P = 0.175; non-diabetes subgroup: 62.9% [n = 168/267] vs 69.3% [n = 181/261]; RRR, 0.906; P = 0.118] or any dose for ≥2 weeks leading to Week 10 [diabetes subgroup: 85% (n = 192/226) vs. 88.2% (n = 201/228); RRR, 0.966; P = 0.356; non-diabetes subgroup: 86.9% (n = 232/267) vs. 90.8% (n = 237/261); RRR, 0.963; P = 0.215] were also similar in each subgroup, when initiated pre-discharge or post-discharge, respectively. At 10 weeks, hypotension and renal dysfunction rates were similar, although hyperkalaemia was higher among patients with diabetes (15.9% vs. 9.5%). The rate of permanent discontinuation due to adverse events was similar in the diabetes and non-diabetes subgroups at 10 weeks, respectively: pre-discharge (7.5% vs. 7.1%) or post-discharge (5.7% vs. 4.2%). Similar patterns of uptitration and tolerability were observed at 26 weeks. Cardiac biomarkers including NT-proBNP (P < 0.005) and hs-TnT (P < 0.005) reduced significantly from baseline levels in both subgroups at Weeks 4 and 10; however, the response was greater among patients without diabetes. Mortality (diabetes vs. non-diabetes subgroups: 3.3% vs 4.0%; P = 0.438) and HF rehospitalization (diabetes vs. non-diabetes subgroups: 36.3% vs. 33.0%; P = 0.295) did not differ between the groups at 26 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a higher risk profile among patients with diabetes, sacubitril/valsartan initiation either before or shortly after discharge in hospitalized patients with HFrEF resulted in comparable rates of dose up-titration and tolerability as in those without diabetes.

Outcomes with sacubitril/valsartan in outpatients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: The ARIADNE registry

AIMS

ARIADNE aimed to assess the association between effects of sacubitril/valsartan and no sacubitril/valsartan treatment and clinical characteristics, functional capacity, and clinical outcomes (cause-specific mortality and hospitalizations) in outpatients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS

ARIADNE was a prospective European registry of 9069 patients with HFrEF treated by office-based cardiologists or selected primary care physicians. Of the 8787 eligible for analysis, 4173 patients were on conventional HF treatment (non-S/V group), whereas 4614 patients were either on sacubitril/valsartan treatment at enrolment or started sacubitril/valsartan within 1 month of enrolment (S/V group). We also generated a restricted analysis set (rS/V) including only those 2108 patients who started sacubitril/valsartan treatment within the month prior to or after enrolment.

RESULTS

At the baseline, average age of patients enrolled in the study was 68 years, and 23.9% (2099/8787) were female. At the baseline, the proportions of patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class III symptoms were 30.9 (1288/4173), 42.8 (1974/4614), and 48.2% (1015/2108), in non-S/V, S/V, and rS/V groups, respectively. After 12 months of treatment, the proportion of patients with NYHA Class III at baseline who improved to Class II was 32.0% (290/907) in the non-S/V group vs. 46.3% (648/1399) in S/V group and 48.7% (349/717) in rS/V group. The overall mortality rate was 5.0 per 100 patient-years. Rates of HF hospitalizations were high (20.9, 20.3, and 21.2 per 100 patient-years in the non-S/V, S/V, and rS/V groups, respectively). Emergency room visits without hospitalization occurred in 3.9, 3.2, and 3.9% of patients in the non-S/V, S/V, and rS/V groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This large HFrEF European registry provides a contemporary outcome profile of outpatients with HFrEF treated with or without sacubitril/valsartan. In a real-world setting, sacubitril/valsartan was associated with an improvement of symptoms in patients with HFrEF compared with the conventional HFrEF treatment.

Progress and prospects of Sacubitril/Valsartan: Based on heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is present in nearly half of patients with heart failure. The prevalence of heart failure with normal or near-normal ejection fractions increases more rapidly than in patients with reduced ejection fractions. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), aldosterone antagonist, β-blocker, and calcium channel blocker have not shown significant efficacy in HFpEF clinical trials. Sacubitril/Valsartan, combined angiotensin receptor blocker (Valsartan) with neprilysin inhibitor (Sacubitril), was the first-of-its-kind angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) to be developed. It has shown significant efficacy on HFpEF in recent studies. It is considered that most of the current Sacubitril/Valsartan studies are still concentrated in the field of heart failure, especially heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This review discusses the latest advances in cardiovascular, renal, and metabolic aspects of Sacubitril/Valsartan, mainly in HFpEF, providing more evidence for further future research on Sacubitril/Valsartan and raising issues that should be paid attention. At the same time, this review will introduce the academic consensus on Sacubitril/Valsartan in treating HFpEF in China.

The Relationship between Angiotensin–Neprilysin Treatment, Echocardiographic Parameters, and NT-proBNP Levels in HFpEF Patients with Acute Decompensated Heart Failure

Background

The valsartan-sacubitril therapy improved the outcomes of patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) of a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). In ADHF patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), it is not yet clear whether the same treatment regimen may be safely used to treat ADHF.

Methods

For this study, HFpEF patients hospitalized due to ADHF were enrolled. Following hemodynamic stabilization, patients were randomized into two groups that were treated with enalapril or sacubitril-valsartan. In this trial, the primary efficacy outcomes were changes in echocardiographic parameters and NT-proBNP levels from baseline to 8 weeks treatment.

Results

ARNI treatment resulted in a significant decrease in NT-proBNP levels and an increase in LVEF in patients with HFpEF. However, HFpEF patients that underwent ARNI treatment achieved better outcomes than did patients that underwent ACEI treatment.

Conclusion

Sacubitril-valsartan treatment, which lowered NT-proBNP levels and improved cardiac function, was more effective in HFpEF patients with acute decompensated heart failure than enalapril.

Cardio-renal benefits of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: experience in daily clinical practice

Background

The association between cardiac complications, such as heart failure (HF), and chronic kidney disease (CKD) is well known. In this study, we examined the effectiveness and safety of treatment with neprilysin inhibition in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (stage 3b-4).

Methods

This single-centre, longitudinal, retrospective study of 31 months duration involved consecutive patients with CKD and HF with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who started treatment with sacubitril/valsartan. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR), cardiovascular risk factors, proteinuria, potassium, echocardiographic parameters and admissions for heart failure were analysed.

Results

The study comprised 25 patients with a median age of 73.2 ± 5.9 years. The most frequent aetiology of heart failure was ischemic heart disease. The median GFR was 29.4 ± 8.3 ml/min/1.73 m² and the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 36.4 ± 8.9%. The GFR improved after initiating the treatment (F = 3.396, p = 0.019), as did the LVEF at one year of follow-up (p = 0.018). The number of visits to the emergency department for heart failure was also reduced. No patients needed to start renal replacement therapy.

Conclusions

This study shows that sacubitril/valsartan may play a beneficial role in patients who have advanced CKD and HFrEF, with a satisfactory safety profile.

Consensus statement on the current pharmacological prevention and management of heart failure

Introduction: This consensus statement of Australian clinicians provides new recommendations for the pharmacological management of heart failure based on studies reported since the publication of the 2018 Australian heart failure guidelines.

Main recommendations:▪

Use of sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to prevent hospitalisation for heart failure in type 2 diabetes mellitus can be extended to patients with multiple cardiovascular risk factors, albuminuric chronic kidney disease, or atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

▪

New evidence supports the use of a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (finerenone) to prevent heart failure in type 2 diabetes mellitus associated with albuminuric chronic kidney disease.

▪

In addition to renin angiotensin system inhibitors (angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor preferred), beta blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, an SGLT2 inhibitor (dapagliflozin or empagliflozin) is recommended in all patients with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF ≤ 40%) (HFrEF). Lower quality evidence supports these therapies in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced LVEF (41‐49%) (HFmrEF).

▪

A soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator (vericiguat), selective cardiac myosin activator (omecamtiv mecarbil) and, if iron deficient, intravenous iron (ferric carboxymaltose) provide additional benefits in persistent HFrEF.

▪

An SGLT2 inhibitor (empagliflozin) should be considered in patients with heart failure with preserved LVEF (≥ 50%) (HFpEF).

Key changes in management from this statement: This document broadens the scope of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor use in patients with HFrEF and HFmrEF. SGLT2 inhibitor use expands to become a cornerstone therapy in HFrEF, with increasing evidence to support its use in HFmrEF and HFpEF.

Sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure: efficacy and safety in and outside clinical trials

Heart failure (HF) treatment has changed substantially over the last 30 years, leading to significant reductions in mortality and hospital admissions in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Currently, the optimization of guideline-directed chronic HF therapy remains the mainstay to further improve quality of life, mortality, and HF hospitalizations for patients with HFrEF. The angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) has an important role in the treatment of patients with HFrEF. The PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) randomized controlled trial has established solid evidence for the treatment of HFrEF in various subgroups. Apart from HFrEF, several studies have been conducted using S/V in various indications: patients hospitalized with acute decompensated HF, HF with preserved ejection fraction, acute myocardial infarction with reduced ejection fraction, uncontrolled and resistant hypertension, and chronic kidney disease. Data from the German Institute for Drug Use Evaluation reveal that implementation of S/V has increased steadily over time and, by the end of 2021, an estimated 266 000 patients were treated with S/V in Germany. The estimated cumulative real-world patient exposure is >5.5 million patient-treatment years worldwide. The number of patients treated with S/V largely exceeds the number of patients treated in clinical trials, and the current indication for S/V is larger than the strict inclusion/exclusion criteria of the randomized trials. Especially elderly patients, women, and patients with more and more severe comorbidities are underrepresented in the clinical trials. We therefore aimed to summarize the importance of S/V in HF in terms of efficacy and safety in clinical trials and daily clinical practice.

Sacubitril/Valsartan and Ivabradine Attenuate Left Ventricular Remodelling and Dysfunction in Spontaneously Hypertensive Rats: Different Interactions with the Renin–Angiotensin–Aldosterone System

This study investigated whether sacubitril/valsartan and ivabradine are able to prevent left ventricular (LV) fibrotic remodelling and dysfunction in a rat experimental model of spontaneous hypertension (spontaneously hypertensive rats, SHRs) and whether this potential protection is associated with RAAS alterations. Five groups of three-month-old male Wistar rats and SHRs were treated for six weeks as follows: untreated Wistar controls, Wistar plus sacubitril/valsartan, SHR, SHR plus sacubitril/valsartan, and SHR plus ivabradine. The SHRs developed a systolic blood pressure (SBP) increase, LV hypertrophy and fibrosis, and LV systolic and diastolic dysfunction. However, no changes in serum RAAS were observed in SHRs compared with the controls. Elevated SBP in SHRs was decreased by sacubitril/valsartan but not by ivabradine, and only sacubitril/valsartan attenuated LV hypertrophy. Both sacubitril/valsartan and ivabradine reduced LV collagen content and attenuated LV systolic and diastolic dysfunction. Sacubitril/valsartan increased the serum levels of angiotensin (Ang) II, Ang III, Ang IV, Ang 1-5, Ang 1-7, and aldosterone, while ivabradine did not affect the RAAS. We conclude that the SHR is a normal-to-low serum RAAS model of experimental hypertension. While the protection of the hypertensive heart in SHRs by sacubitril/valsartan may be related to an Ang II blockade and the protective Ang 1-7, the benefits of ivabradine were not associated with RAAS modulation.

B-Type Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) Revisited—Is BNP Still a Biomarker for Heart Failure in the Angiotensin Receptor/Neprilysin Inhibitor Era?

Simple Summary

Active BNP-32, less active proBNP-108, and inactive N-terminal proBNP-76 all circulate in the blood. The circulating protease neprilysin has lower substrate specificity for BNP than ANP, while proBNP and N-terminal proBNP are not degraded by neprilysin. Currently available BNP immunoassays react with both mature BNP and proBNP; therefore, measured plasma BNP is mature BNP + proBNP. Because ARNI administration increases mature BNP, measured plasma BNP initially increases with ARNI administration by the amount of the increase in mature BNP. Later, ARNI administration reduces myocardial wall stress, and the resultant reduction in BNP production more than offsets the increase of mature BNP due to inhibition of degradation by neprilysin, resulting in lower plasma BNP levels. In the ARNI era, BNP remains a useful biomarker for heart failure, though mild increases early during ARNI administration should be taken into consideration.

Abstract

Myocardial wall stress, cytokines, hormones, and ischemia all stimulate B-type (or brain) natriuretic peptide (BNP) gene expression. Within the myocardium, ProBNP-108, a BNP precursor, undergoes glycosylation, after which a portion is cleaved by furin into mature BNP-32 and N-terminal proBNP-76, depending on the glycosylation status. As a result, active BNP, less active proBNP, and inactive N-terminal proBNP all circulate in the blood. There are three major pathways for BNP clearance: (1) cellular internalization via natriuretic peptide receptor (NPR)-A and NPR-C; (2) degradation by proteases in the blood, including neprilysin, dipeptidyl-peptidase-IV, insulin degrading enzyme, etc.; and (3) excretion in the urine. Because neprilysin has lower substrate specificity for BNP than atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP), the increase in plasma BNP after angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) administration is much smaller than the increase in plasma ANP. Currently available BNP immunoassays react with both mature BNP and proBNP. Therefore, BNP measured with an immunoassay is mature BNP + proBNP. ARNI administration increases mature BNP but not proBNP, as the latter is not degraded by neprilysin. Consequently, measured plasma BNP initially increases with ARNI administration by the amount of the increase in mature BNP. Later, ARNI reduces myocardial wall stress, and the resultant reduction in BNP production more than offsets the increase in mature BNP mediated by inhibiting degradation by neprilysin, which lowers plasma BNP levels. These results suggest that even in the ARNI era, BNP can be used for diagnosis and assessment of the pathophysiology and prognosis of heart failure, though the mild increases early during ARNI administration should be taken into consideration.