Aliskiren alone or in combination with enalapril vs. enalapril among patients with chronic heart failure with and without diabetes: a subgroup analysis from the ATMOSPHERE trial.

AIMS: Because of concerns about the safety of aliskiren in patients with diabetes, study treatment was stopped prematurely in the Aliskiren Trial of Minimizing OutcomeS for Patients with HEart failuRE (ATMOSPHERE). We examined outcomes and treatment effect in these patients compared with those without diabetes. METHODS AND RESULTS: ATMOSPHERE included 7016 patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) randomly assigned to enalapril plus aliskiren, aliskiren alone, or enalapril. At baseline, 1944 (27.7%) patients had diabetes. Median follow-up was shorter in patients with diabetes compared with those without (24 months vs. 46 months). Among patients with diabetes, the primary endpoint of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 216 patients (33.1%) in the enalapril group (reference), 172 (27.4%) in the aliskiren group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-1.00; P = 0.053], and 196 (29.5%) in the combination group (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.71-1.04; P = 0.13). The effects of the treatments studied did not differ significantly compared with patients without diabetes. In patients with diabetes, aliskiren monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of symptomatic hypotension compared to enalapril [42 (6.7%) vs. 65 (10.0%); P = 0.04], whereas other adverse events were generally balanced between the three groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with HFrEF and diabetes, there was no signal of harm and a trend towards benefit when direct renin inhibition monotherapy was compared with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, whereas combined aliskiren and enalapril treatment led to more adverse events with no improvement in outcomes. Treatment effects did not differ in patients with diabetes compared with those without. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00853658.

Aliskiren, Enalapril, or Aliskiren and Enalapril in Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with chronic heart failure, angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors reduce mortality and hospitalization, but the role of a renin inhibitor in such patients is unknown. We compared the ACE inhibitor enalapril with the renin inhibitor aliskiren (to test superiority or at least noninferiority) and with the combination of the two treatments (to test superiority) in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction. METHODS: After a single-blind run-in period, we assigned patients, in a double-blind fashion, to one of three groups: 2336 patients were assigned to receive enalapril at a dose of 5 or 10 mg twice daily, 2340 to receive aliskiren at a dose of 300 mg once daily, and 2340 to receive both treatments (combination therapy). The primary composite outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 36.6 months, the primary outcome occurred in 770 patients (32.9%) in the combination-therapy group and in 808 (34.6%) in the enalapril group (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.03). The primary outcome occurred in 791 patients (33.8%) in the aliskiren group (hazard ratio vs. enalapril, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.10); the prespecified test for noninferiority was not met. There was a higher risk of hypotensive symptoms in the combination-therapy group than in the enalapril group (13.8% vs. 11.0%, P=0.005), as well as higher risks of an elevated serum creatinine level (4.1% vs. 2.7%, P=0.009) and an elevated potassium level (17.1% vs. 12.5%, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic heart failure, the addition of aliskiren to enalapril led to more adverse events without an increase in benefit. Noninferiority was not shown for aliskiren as compared with enalapril. (Funded by Novartis; ATMOSPHERE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00853658.).

The Aliskiren Trial to Minimize OutcomeS in Patients with HEart failure trial (ATMOSPHERE): revised statistical analysis plan and baseline characteristics.

AIMS AND METHODS: To: (i) describe the baseline characteristics of patients in ATMOSPHERE and the changes in the planned analysis of ATMOSPHERE resulting from the mandated discontinuation of study treatment in patients with diabetes; (ii) compare the baseline characteristics of patients in ATMOSPHERE with those in the Prospective comparison of Angiotensin Receptor neprilysin inhibitors with Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure trial (PARADIGM-HF); and (iii) compare the characteristics of patients with and without diabetes at baseline in ATMOSPHERE. RESULTS: A total of 7063 patients were randomized into ATMOSPHERE April 2009-April 2014 at 755 sites in 43 countries. Their average age was 63 years and 78% were men. ATMOSPHERE patients were generally similar to those in PARADIGM-HF although fewer had diabetes, renal dysfunction, and were treated with a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. In ATMOSPHERE, patients with diabetes differed in numerous ways from those without. Patients with diabetes were older and had worse heart failure status but a similar left ventricular ejection fraction (mean 28%); they had a higher body mass index and more co-morbidity, especially hypertension and coronary heart disease. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate was slightly lower in those with diabetes compared with those without. CONCLUSION: ATMOSPHERE will determine whether patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (particularly those without diabetes) benefit from the addition of a direct renin inhibitor to standard background therapy, including an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, beta-blocker, and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. ATMOSPHERE will also determine whether aliskiren alone is superior to, or at least non-inferior to, enalapril.

A multicenter study of the tolerability of tirofiban versus placebo in patients undergoing planned intracoronary stent placement.

BACKGROUND: The use of intravenous glycoprotein IIb/IIIa-receptor antagonists has been shown to improve outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA). Tirofiban has shown benefit in a wide range of patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes. Although this agent has been used in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, a literature search identified no prospective data comparing tirofiban with placebo in patients undergoing planned intracoronary stent placement. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the tolerability of tirofiban in patients undergoing percutaneous intervention with planned intracoronary stent placement. METHODS: This was a multinational, multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients scheduled to undergo PTCA with planned intracoronary stent placement. Patients were randomized in a 3:2 ratio to receive tirofiban as an intravenous bolus (10 microg/kg over 3 minutes) and maintenance infusion (0.10 microg/kg per minute for 36 hours) or a bolus and infusion of placebo. All patients received periprocedural aspirin and heparin and an optional postprocedural thienopyridine (ticlopidine or clopidogrel). Laboratory and safety monitoring were performed throughout the 36 hours after the procedure and at hour 40 or hospital discharge. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with bleeding, defined according to Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) trial criteria. The number of patients with cardiac events (death, myo- cardial infarction, urgent revascularization) during the first 30 days after stent placement was also assessed. RESULTS: Eight hundred ninety-four patients (536 tirofiban, 358 placebo) were enrolled, all of whom received aspirin and heparin periprocedurally and optional ticlopidine or clopidogrel after the procedure. No significant between-group differences were observed in the incidence of TIMI major bleeding (0.2% tirofiban, 0.6% placebo) or any TIMI bleeding (3.2% and 1.7%, respectively). The incidence of TIMI minor bleeding was higher with tirofiban than with placebo (2.8% vs 0.6%). The 30-day incidence of the composite end point of any cardiac event was 3.9% in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: On a background of concomitant aspirin, heparin, and a thienopyridine, tirofiban was generally well tolerated in patients undergoing PTCA with planned intracoronary stent placement. Further investigation is needed to ascertain the optimal dosing of tirofiban and heparin to achieve reductions in ischemic complications of intracoronary stenting with an acceptable incidence of bleeding complications.