Effects of Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Irbesartan in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease :  A Randomized Double-Blind Trial

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

Background:

Sacubitril/valsartan reduces the risk of cardiovascular mortality among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, but its effects on kidney function and cardiac biomarkers in people with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease are unknown.

Methods:

The UK HARP-III trial (United Kingdom Heart and Renal Protection-III), a randomized double-blind trial, included 414 participants with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) 20 to 60 mL/min/1.73 m ² who were randomly assigned to sacubitril/valsartan 97/103 mg twice daily versus irbesartan 300 mg once daily. The primary outcome was measured GFR at 12 months using ANCOVA with adjustment for each individual’s baseline measured GFR. All analyses were by intention to treat.

Results:

In total, 207 participants were assigned to sacubitril/valsartan and 207 to irbesartan. Baseline measured GFR was 34.0 (SE, 0.8) and 34.7 (SE, 0.8) mL/min/1.73 m ² , respectively. At 12 months, there was no difference in measured GFR: 29.8 (SE 0.5) among those assigned sacubitril/valsartan versus 29.9 (SE, 0.5) mL/min/1.73 m ² among those assigned irbesartan; difference, -0.1 (0.7) mL/min/1.73 m ² . Effects were similar in all prespecified subgroups. There was also no significant difference in estimated GFR at 3, 6, 9, or 12 months and no clear difference in urinary albumin:creatinine ratio between treatment arms (study average difference, -9%; 95% CI, -18 to 1). However, compared with irbesartan, allocation to sacubitril/valsartan reduced study average systolic and diastolic blood pressure by 5.4 (95% CI, 3.4–7.4) and 2.1 (95% CI, 1.0–3.3) mm Hg and levels of troponin I and N terminal of prohormone brain natriuretic peptide (tertiary end points) by 16% (95% CI, 8–23) and 18% (95% CI, 11–25), respectively. The incidence of serious adverse events (29.5% versus 28.5%; rate ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.75–1.53), nonserious adverse reactions (36.7% versus 28.0%; rate ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.96–1.90), and potassium ≥5.5 mmol/L (32% versus 24%, P =0.10) was not significantly different between randomized groups.

Conclusions:

Over 12 months, sacubitril/valsartan has similar effects on kidney function and albuminuria to irbesartan, but it has the additional effect of lowering blood pressure and cardiac biomarkers in people with chronic kidney disease.

Clinical Trial Registration:

URL: http://www.isrctn.com . Unique identifier: ISRCTN11958993.

Related collections

Most cited references 47

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Angiotensin–Neprilysin Inhibition versus Enalapril in Heart Failure

John J.V. McMurray, Milton Packer, Akshay S Desai … (2014)

We compared the angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 with enalapril in patients who had heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction. In previous studies, enalapril improved survival in such patients. In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 8442 patients with class II, III, or IV heart failure and an ejection fraction of 40% or less to receive either LCZ696 (at a dose of 200 mg twice daily) or enalapril (at a dose of 10 mg twice daily), in addition to recommended therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure, but the trial was designed to detect a difference in the rates of death from cardiovascular causes. The trial was stopped early, according to prespecified rules, after a median follow-up of 27 months, because the boundary for an overwhelming benefit with LCZ696 had been crossed. At the time of study closure, the primary outcome had occurred in 914 patients (21.8%) in the LCZ696 group and 1117 patients (26.5%) in the enalapril group (hazard ratio in the LCZ696 group, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.87; P<0.001). A total of 711 patients (17.0%) receiving LCZ696 and 835 patients (19.8%) receiving enalapril died (hazard ratio for death from any cause, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.93; P<0.001); of these patients, 558 (13.3%) and 693 (16.5%), respectively, died from cardiovascular causes (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.89; P<0.001). As compared with enalapril, LCZ696 also reduced the risk of hospitalization for heart failure by 21% (P<0.001) and decreased the symptoms and physical limitations of heart failure (P=0.001). The LCZ696 group had higher proportions of patients with hypotension and nonserious angioedema but lower proportions with renal impairment, hyperkalemia, and cough than the enalapril group. LCZ696 was superior to enalapril in reducing the risks of death and of hospitalization for heart failure. (Funded by Novartis; PARADIGM-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01035255.).

0 comments Cited 1222 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Chronic kidney disease and the risks of death, cardiovascular events, and hospitalization.

Alan S Go, Glenn Chertow, Dongjie Fan … (2004)

End-stage renal disease substantially increases the risks of death, cardiovascular disease, and use of specialized health care, but the effects of less severe kidney dysfunction on these outcomes are less well defined. We estimated the longitudinal glomerular filtration rate (GFR) among 1,120,295 adults within a large, integrated system of health care delivery in whom serum creatinine had been measured between 1996 and 2000 and who had not undergone dialysis or kidney transplantation. We examined the multivariable association between the estimated GFR and the risks of death, cardiovascular events, and hospitalization. The median follow-up was 2.84 years, the mean age was 52 years, and 55 percent of the group were women. After adjustment, the risk of death increased as the GFR decreased below 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area: the adjusted hazard ratio for death was 1.2 with an estimated GFR of 45 to 59 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.1 to 1.2), 1.8 with an estimated GFR of 30 to 44 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.7 to 1.9), 3.2 with an estimated GFR of 15 to 29 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 (95 percent confidence interval, 3.1 to 3.4), and 5.9 with an estimated GFR of less than 15 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 (95 percent confidence interval, 5.4 to 6.5). The adjusted hazard ratio for cardiovascular events also increased inversely with the estimated GFR: 1.4 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.4 to 1.5), 2.0 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.9 to 2.1), 2.8 (95 percent confidence interval, 2.6 to 2.9), and 3.4 (95 percent confidence interval, 3.1 to 3.8), respectively. The adjusted risk of hospitalization with a reduced estimated GFR followed a similar pattern. An independent, graded association was observed between a reduced estimated GFR and the risk of death, cardiovascular events, and hospitalization in a large, community-based population. These findings highlight the clinical and public health importance of chronic renal insufficiency. Copyright 2004 Massachusetts Medical Society