1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impact of Sacubitril/Valsartan on Patient Outcomes in Heart Failure: Evidence to Date

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          With an estimated 6.2 million adults affected in the USA, heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity, mortality, and health-care costs, despite the use of guideline-based medical therapies. The search for a more efficient therapy was rekindled when findings from the Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor–Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) trial demonstrated evidence for cardiovascular and mortality benefit of sacubitril/valsartan, a dual angiotensin receptor blocker and neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), over enalapril (an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor) in patients with heart failure and reduced rjection fraction (HFrEF). Following the trial’s compelling results, recommendations for the use of sacubitril/valsartan as a replacement for an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and/or angiotensin receptor blocker were incorporated into the 2016 American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and the Heart Failure Society of America recommended (HFSA) guidelines for the management of heart failure. This review aims to gain insight into the benefits as well as limitations associated with the use of sacubitril/valsartan in the treatment of heart failure (HF) through exploration of various subgroup analyses of the PARADIGM-HF trial, subsequent retrospective analyses, and randomized controlled trials that followed this landmark trial.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effect of nesiritide in patients with acute decompensated heart failure.

          Nesiritide is approved in the United States for early relief of dyspnea in patients with acute heart failure. Previous meta-analyses have raised questions regarding renal toxicity and the mortality associated with this agent. We randomly assigned 7141 patients who were hospitalized with acute heart failure to receive either nesiritide or placebo for 24 to 168 hours in addition to standard care. Coprimary end points were the change in dyspnea at 6 and 24 hours, as measured on a 7-point Likert scale, and the composite end point of rehospitalization for heart failure or death within 30 days. Patients randomly assigned to nesiritide, as compared with those assigned to placebo, more frequently reported markedly or moderately improved dyspnea at 6 hours (44.5% vs. 42.1%, P=0.03) and 24 hours (68.2% vs. 66.1%, P=0.007), but the prespecified level for significance (P≤0.005 for both assessments or P≤0.0025 for either) was not met. The rate of rehospitalization for heart failure or death from any cause within 30 days was 9.4% in the nesiritide group versus 10.1% in the placebo group (absolute difference, -0.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.1 to 0.7; P=0.31). There were no significant differences in rates of death from any cause at 30 days (3.6% with nesiritide vs. 4.0% with placebo; absolute difference, -0.4 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.3 to 0.5) or rates of worsening renal function, defined by more than a 25% decrease in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (31.4% vs. 29.5%; odds ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.21; P=0.11). Nesiritide was not associated with an increase or a decrease in the rate of death and rehospitalization and had a small, nonsignificant effect on dyspnea when used in combination with other therapies. It was not associated with a worsening of renal function, but it was associated with an increase in rates of hypotension. On the basis of these results, nesiritide cannot be recommended for routine use in the broad population of patients with acute heart failure. (Funded by Scios; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00475852.).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Trends in patients hospitalized with heart failure and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction: prevalence, therapies, and outcomes.

            Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (EF) is a common syndrome, but trends in treatments and outcomes are lacking. We analyzed data from 275 hospitals in Get With the Guidelines-Heart Failure from January 2005 to October 2010. Patients were stratified by EF as reduced EF (EF <40% [HF-reduced EF]), borderline EF (40%≤EF<50% [HF-borderline EF]), or preserved (EF ≥50% [HF-preserved EF]). Using multivariable models, we examined trends in therapies and outcomes. Among 110 621 patients, 50% (55 083) had HF-reduced EF, 14% (15 184) had HF-borderline EF, and 36% (40 354) had HF-preserved EF. From 2005 to 2010, the proportion of hospitalizations for HF-preserved EF increased from 33% to 39% (P<0.0001). In multivariable analyses, use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers at discharge decreased in all EF groups, and β-blocker use increased. Patients with HF-preserved EF less frequently achieved blood pressure control (adjusted odds ratio, 0.44 versus HF-reduced EF; P<0.001) and were more likely discharged to skilled nursing (adjusted odds ratio, 1.16 versus HF-reduced EF; P<0.001). In-hospital mortality for HF-preserved EF decreased from 3.32% in 2005 to 2.35% in 2010 (adjusted odds ratio, 0.89 per year; P=0.01) but was stable for patients with HF-reduced EF (3.03%-2.83%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.93 per year; P=0.10). Hospitalization for HF-preserved EF is increasing relative to HF-reduced EF. Although in-hospital mortality for patients with HF-preserved EF declined over the study period, an important opportunity remains for identifying evidence-based therapies in patients with HF-preserved EF.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              2016 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update on New Pharmacological Therapy for Heart Failure: An Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Failure Society of America.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Ther Clin Risk Manag
                Ther Clin Risk Manag
                tcrm
                tcriskman
                Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
                Dove
                1176-6336
                1178-203X
                29 July 2020
                2020
                : 16
                : 681-688
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Cardiology, Westchester Medical Center , Valhalla, NY 10595, USA
                [2 ]Department of Medicine, New York Medical College , Valhalla, NY 10595, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Wilbert S Aronow Director of Cardiology Research, Department of Cardiology, Westchester Medical Center , Macy Pavilion, Room 141, Valhalla, NY10595, USATel +1 (914)-493-5311Fax +1 (914)-235-6274 Email wsaronow@aol.com
                Article
                224772
                10.2147/TCRM.S224772
                7405908
                © 2020 Akbar et al.

                This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms ( https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).

                Page count
                Figures: 0, References: 49, Pages: 8
                Funding
                Funded by: public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors;
                This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
                Categories
                Review

                Comments

                Comment on this article