Vericiguat for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

INTRODUCTION: Despite significant therapeutic advancements in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), the residual risk of all-cause mortality and hospitalizations remains high among patients with HFrEF. Vericiguat is a novel oral soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) stimulator which was approved by the US Food and Drug administration (FDA) in January 2021 for use in patients with symptomatic chronic HF and an ejection fraction less than 45% following a hospitalization for HF or the need for outpatient intravenous diuretics. AREAS COVERED: We provide a concise review of the pharmacology, clinical efficacy, and tolerability of vericiguat in HFrEF. We also discuss the role of vericiguat in current clinical practice. EXPERT OPINION: Vericiguat reduces the risk of cardiovascular mortality or HF hospitalizations by an absolute event-rate reduction of 4.2 events per 100 patient-years with a number needed to treat of 24 patients, on a background of guideline-directed medical therapy. Almost 90% of the patients with HFrEF were adherent to the 10 mg dose of vericiguat in the VICTORIA trial with a favorable tolerability and safety profile. Considering the high residual risk that persists in HFrEF, vericiguat has a role to improve outcomes among patients with worsening HFrEF.

Efficacy and safety of vericiguat in heart failure: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of vericiguat in patients with heart failure (HF). METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature review of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases up to 14 December 2022 for studies comparing vericiguat with placebo in patients with HF. Clinical data were extracted and cardiovascular deaths, adverse effects, and HF-related hospitalization were analyzed using Review Manager software (version 5.3), after quality assessment of the enrolled studies. RESULTS: Four studies (6705 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in the basic characteristics of the included studies. There was no significant difference in adverse effects between the vericiguat group and placebo group, and no significant differences between the groups in terms of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis indicated that vericiguat was not an effective drug for HF; however, more clinical trials are required to verify its efficacy.

Efficacy and safety of vericiguat in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction treated with sacubitril/valsartan: insights from the VICTORIA trial.

AIM: We assessed a subset of the 5040 patients in VICTORIA receiving sacubitril/valsartan, either at randomization (n = 731) or post-randomization drop-in use (n = 425), to evaluate the relationship between the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with vericiguat. METHODS AND RESULTS: The efficacy of vericiguat on the primary composite endpoint, heart failure (HF) hospitalization, and all-cause mortality was assessed. Safety outcomes included symptomatic hypotension, syncope, worsening renal function, and hyperkalaemia. At randomization, 731 patients received sacubitril/valsartan; they were more frequently from Western Europe or North America, had lower ejection fraction and systolic blood pressure, and more use of triple background HF therapy (65.9% vs. 58.6%), biventricular pacemakers (17.9% vs. 14.1%), or implantable cardioverter defibrillators (42.3% vs. 25.3%). For patients on versus not on sacubitril/valsartan at randomization, adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for vericiguat's treatment effect on the primary composite outcome, cardiovascular death, and HF hospitalization were 0.92 (0.71-1.19) versus 0.89 (0.80-0.98), 0.71 (0.45-1.12) versus 0.95 (0.82-1.11), and 0.98 (0.74-1.29) versus 0.87 (0.78-0.98), respectively. No significant interaction existed between sacubitril/valsartan and vericiguat's treatment effect (p-values for interaction: 0.81, 0.23 and 0.47, respectively). Post-randomization, more drop-in sacubitril/valsartan use occurred in those assigned to placebo (n = 238) versus vericiguat (n = 187) (p = 0.007). Symptomatic hypotension (21.0% vs. 23.1%; p = 0.41), renal dysfunction (29.9% vs. 31.9%; p = 0.50), and hyperkalaemia (10.3% vs. 7.9%; p = 0.20) in patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan (n = 992) for ≥3 months were not different by treatment arm. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant use of sacubitril/valsartan for at least 3 months did not alter the efficacy of vericiguat and was similarly safe and tolerated in both study arms. Sacubitril/valsartan was initiated more frequently after randomization in patients assigned to placebo versus vericiguat. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02861534.

Blood Pressure and Safety Events With Vericiguat in the VICTORIA Trial.

Background Although safety and tolerability of vericiguat were established in the VICTORIA (Vericiguat Global Study in Subjects With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction) trial in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, some subgroups may be more susceptible to symptomatic hypotension, such as older patients, those with lower baseline systolic blood pressure (SBP), or those concurrently taking angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors. We described the SBP trajectories over time and compared the occurrence of symptomatic hypotension or syncope by treatment arm in potentially vulnerable subgroups in VICTORIA. We also evaluated the relation between the efficacy of vericiguat and baseline SBP. Methods and Results Among patients receiving at least 1 dose of the study drug (n=5034), potentially vulnerable subgroups were those >75 years old (n=1395), those with baseline SBP 100-110 mm Hg (n=1344), and those taking angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (n=730). SBP trajectory was plotted as mean change from baseline over time. The treatment effect on time to symptomatic hypotension or syncope was evaluated overall and by subgroup, and the primary efficacy composite outcome (heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death) across baseline SBP was examined using Cox proportional hazards models. SBP trajectories showed a small initial decline in SBP with vericiguat in those >75 years old (versus younger patients), as well as those receiving angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (versus none), with SBP returning to baseline thereafter. Patients with SBP <110 mm Hg at baseline showed a trend to increasing SBP over time, which was similar in both treatment arms. Safety event rates were generally low and similar between treatment arms within each subgroup. In Cox proportional hazards analysis, there were similar numbers of safety events with vericiguat versus placebo (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.18; 95% CI, 0.99-1.39; P=0.059). No difference existed between treatment arms in landmark analysis beginning after the titration phase (ie, post 4 weeks) (adjusted HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.93-1.38; P=0.20). The benefit of vericiguat compared with placebo on the primary composite efficacy outcome was similar across the spectrum of baseline SBP (P for interaction=0.32). Conclusions These data demonstrate the safety of vericiguat in a broad population of patients with worsening heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, even among those predisposed to hypotension. Vericiguat's efficacy persisted regardless of baseline SBP. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02861534.