Self-administered intranasal etripamil using a symptom-prompted, repeat-dose regimen for atrioventricular-nodal-dependent supraventricular tachycardia (RAPID): a multicentre, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Etripamil is a fast-acting, intranasally administered calcium-channel blocker in development for on-demand therapy outside a health-care setting for paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of etripamil 70 mg nasal spray using a symptom-prompted, repeat-dose regimen for acute conversion of atrioventricular-nodal-dependent paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia to sinus rhythm within 30 min. METHODS: RAPID was a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial, conducted at 160 sites in North America and Europe as part 2 of the NODE-301 study. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years and had a history of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia with sustained, symptomatic episodes (≥20 min) as documented by electrocardiogram. Patients were administered two test doses of intranasal etripamil (each 70 mg, 10 min apart) during sinus rhythm; those who tolerated the test doses were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive response technology system to receive either etripamil or placebo. Prompted by symptoms of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia, patients self-administered a first dose of intranasal 70 mg etripamil or placebo and, if symptoms persisted beyond 10 min, a repeat dose. Continuously recorded electrocardiographic data were adjudicated, by individuals masked to patient assignment, for the primary endpoint of time to conversion of paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia to sinus rhythm for at least 30 s within 30 min after the first dose, which was measured in all patients who administered blinded study drug for a confirmed atrioventricular-nodal-dependent event. Safety outcomes were assessed in all patients who self-administered blinded study drug for an episode of perceived paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03464019, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Oct 13, 2020, and July 20, 2022, among 692 patients randomly assigned, 184 (99 from the etripamil group and 85 from the placebo group) self-administered study drug for atrioventricular-nodal-dependent paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia, with diagnosis and timing confirmed. Kaplan-Meier estimates of conversion rates by 30 min were 64% (63/99) with etripamil and 31% (26/85) with placebo (hazard ratio 2·62; 95% CI 1·66-4·15; p<0·0001). Median time to conversion was 17·2 min (95% CI 13·4-26·5) with the etripamil regimen versus 53·5 min (38·7-87·3) with placebo. Prespecified sensitivity analyses of the primary assessment were conducted to test robustness, yielding supporting results. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 68 (50%) of 99 patients treated with etripamil and 12 (11%) of 85 patients in the placebo group, most of which were located at the administration site and were mild or moderate, and all of which were transient and resolved without intervention. Adverse events occurring in at least 5% of patients treated with etripamil were nasal discomfort (23%), nasal congestion (13%), and rhinorrhea (9%). No serious etripamil-related adverse events or deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Using a symptom-prompted, self-administered, initial and optional-repeat-dosing regimen, intranasal etripamil was well tolerated, safe, and superior to placebo for the rapid conversion of atrioventricular-nodal-dependent paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia to sinus rhythm. This approach could empower patients to treat paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia themselves outside of a health-care setting, and has the potential to reduce the need for additional medical interventions, such as intravenous medications given in an acute-care setting. FUNDING: Milestone Pharmaceuticals.

Rationale and design of the NODE-303 study: evaluating the safety of symptom-prompted, self-administered etripamil for paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia episodes in real-world settings.

BACKGROUND: Paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (PSVT) is a common episodic arrhythmia characterized by unpredictable onset and burdensome symptoms including palpitations, dizziness, chest pain, distress, and shortness of breath. Treatment of acute episodes of PSVT in the clinical setting consists of intravenous adenosine, beta-blockers, and calcium channel blockers (CCBs). Etripamil is an intranasally self-administered L-type CCB in development for acute treatment of AV-nodal dependent PSVT in a nonmedical supervised setting. METHODS: This paper summarizes the rationale and study design of NODE-303 that will assess the efficacy and safety of etripamil. In the randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 RAPID trial, etripamil was superior to placebo in the conversion of single PSVT episodes by 30 minutes post initial dose when administered in the nonhealthcare setting; this study required a mandatory and observed test dosing prior to randomization. The primary objective of NODE-303 is to evaluate the safety of symptom-prompted, self-administered etripamil for multiple PSVT episodes in real-world settings, without the need for test dosing prior to first use during PSVT. Secondary endpoints include efficacy and disease burden. Upon perceiving a PSVT episode, the patient applies an electrocardiographic monitor, performs a vagal maneuver, and, if the vagal maneuver is unsuccessful, self-administers etripamil 70 mg, with an optional repeat dose if symptoms do not resolve within 10 minutes after the first dose. A patient may treat up to four PSVT episodes during the study. Adverse events are recorded as treatment-emergent if they occur within 24 hours after the administration of etripamil. RESULTS: Efficacy endpoints include time to conversion to sinus rhythm within 30 and 60 minutes after etripamil administration, and the proportion of patients who convert at 3, 5, 10, 20, 30, and 60 minutes. Patient-reported outcomes are captured by the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire, the Cardiac Anxiety Questionnaire, the Short Form Health Survey 36, the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication and a PSVT survey. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, these data will support the development of a potentially paradigm-changing long-term management strategy for recurrent PSVT.

Design and Rationale of a Phase 2 Study of NeurOtoxin (Botulinum Toxin Type A) for the PreVention of Post-Operative Atrial Fibrillation - The NOVA Study.

BACKGROUND: Post-operative AF (POAF) is the most common complication following cardiac surgery, occurring in 30% to 60% of patients undergoing bypass and/or valve surgery. POAF is associated with longer intensive care unit/hospital stays, increased healthcare utilization, and increased morbidity and mortality. Injection of botulinum toxin type A into the epicardial fat pads resulted in reduction of AF in animal models, and in two clinical studies of cardiac surgery patients, without new safety observations. METHODS: The objective of NOVA is to assess the use of AGN-151607 (botulinum toxin type A) for prevention of POAF in cardiac surgery patients. This randomized, multi-site, placebo-controlled trial will study one-time injections of AGN-151607 125 U (25 U / fat pad) and 250 U (50 U / fat pad) or placebo during cardiac surgery in ∼330 participants. Primary endpoint: % of patients with continuous AF ≥ 30 s. Secondary endpoints include several measures of AF frequency, duration, and burden. Additional endpoints include clinically important tachycardia during AF, time to AF termination, and healthcare utilization. Primary and secondary efficacy endpoints will be assessed using continuous ECG monitoring for 30 days following surgery. All patients will be followed for up to 1 year for safety. CONCLUSIONS: The NOVA Study will test the hypothesis that injections of AGN-151607 will reduce the incidence of POAF and associated resource utilization. If demonstrated to be safe and effective, the availability of a one-time therapy for the prevention of POAF would represent an important treatment option for patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Biased ligand of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor in patients with acute heart failure: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIB, dose ranging trial (BLAST-AHF).

AIMS: Currently, no acute heart failure (AHF) therapy definitively improves outcomes. Reducing morbidity and mortality from acute heart failure (AHF) remains an unmet need. TRV027 is a novel 'biased' ligand of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R), selectively antagonizing the negative effects of angiotensin II, while preserving the potential pro-contractility effects of AT1R stimulation. BLAST-AHF was designed to determine the safety, efficacy, and optimal dose of TRV027 to advance into future studies. METHODS AND RESULTS: BLAST-AHF was a multi-centre, international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group, phase IIb dose-ranging study, enrolling patients with AHF into 4 groups: placebo, 1, 5, or 25 mg/h of TRV027. Treatment was by IV infusion for 48-96 h. The primary composite endpoint was comprised of the following: (i) time from baseline to death through day 30, (ii) time from baseline to heart failure re-hospitalization through day 30, (iii) the first assessment time point following worsening heart failure through day 5, (iv) change in dyspnea visual analogue scale (VAS) score calculated as the area under the curve (AUC) representing the change from baseline over time from baseline through day 5, and (v) length of initial hospital stay (in days) from baseline. Analyses were by modified intention-to-treat. Overall, 621 patients were enrolled. After 254 patients, a pre-specified interim analysis resulted in several protocol changes, including a lower blood pressure inclusion criterion as well as a new allocation scheme of 2:1:2:1, overweighting both placebo, and the 5 mg/h dose. TRV027 did not confer any benefit over placebo at any dose with regards to the primary composite endpoint or any of the individual components. There were no significant safety issues with TRV027. CONCLUSION: In this phase IIb dose-ranging AHF study, TRV027 did not improve clinical status through 30-day follow-up compared with placebo.

Results of a curtailed randomized controlled trial, evaluating the efficacy and safety of azimilide in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: The SHIELD-2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Frequent hospital attendances in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) result in significant morbidity and health care costs. Current drugs to reduce ICD shocks and hospital visits have limited efficacy and considerable toxicity. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of azimilide, a novel oral class III antiarrhythmic, for use in ICD patients. METHODS: A total of 240 patients were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the effect of oral azimilide 75 mg daily in ICD patients with previously documented ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation, and a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%. The primary outcome metric was the adjudicated time-to-first unplanned cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization, or CV emergency department (ED) visit, or CV death. The trial was prematurely discontinued due to withdrawal of study sponsorship. RESULTS: Azimilide demonstrated numerical but statistically nonsignificant reductions in the primary composite outcome (odds ratio [OR] 0.79, 95% CI 0.44-1.44), unplanned CV hospitalizations (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.41-1.38), ED visits (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.35-1.31), and all-cause shocks (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.32-1.05). The incidence of adverse events was lower in the azimilide group. Neutropenia was not observed (absolute neutrophil count <1000 µ/L), and there was one possible torsade de pointes case that led to a successful ICD discharge. CONCLUSION: The SHIELD-2 trial was statistically underpowered due to early trial termination and did not meet its primary objective. Despite this limitation, azimilide showed promise as a safe and effective drug in reducing all-cause shocks, unplanned hospitalizations, and ED visits in ICD patients.

Efficacy and safety of nebivolol and valsartan as fixed-dose combination in hypertension: a randomised, multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: The fixed-dose combination of any two antihypertensive drugs from different drug classes is typically more effective in reducing blood pressure than a dose increase of component monotherapy. We assessed the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination of a vasodilating ß blocker (nebivolol) and an angiotensin II receptor blocker (valsartan) in adults with hypertension. METHODS: We did an 8-week, phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial at 401 US sites. Participants (age ≥18 years) with hypertension but with blood pressure less than 180/110 mm Hg were randomly assigned (2:2:2:2:2:2:2:1) by a 24-h interactive web response system in blocks of 15 to 4 weeks of double-blind treatment with nebivolol and valsartan fixed-dose combination (5 and 80 mg/day, 5 and 160 mg/day, or 10 and 160 mg/day), nebivolol (5 mg/day or 20 mg/day), valsartan (80 mg/day or 160 mg/day), or placebo. Doses were doubled in weeks 5-8; results are reported according to the final dose. Participants and research staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary and key secondary endpoints were changes from baseline to week 8 in diastolic and systolic blood pressure, respectively. The primary statistical comparison was between the highest fixed-dose combination dose and the highest monotherapy doses; lower doses were then compared if this comparison was positive (Hochberg method for multiple testing). Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat. Safety assessments included monitoring of adverse events. Continuous efficacy parameters were analysed using an ANCOVA model; binary outcomes were analysed using a logistic regression model. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01508026. FINDINGS: Between Jan 6, 2012, and March 15, 2013, 4161 patients were randomly assigned (277 to placebo and 554-555 to each active comparator group), 4118 of whom were included in the primary analysis. At week 8, the fixed-dose combination 20 and 320 mg/day group had significantly greater reductions in diastolic blood pressure from baseline than both nebivolol 40 mg/day (least-squares mean difference -1·2 mm Hg, 95% CI -2·3 to -0·1; p=0·030) and valsartan 320 mg/day (-4·4 mm Hg, -5·4 to -3·3; p<0·0001); all other comparisons were also significant, favouring the fixed-dose combinations (all p<0·0001). All systolic blood pressure comparisons were also significant (all p<0·01). At least one treatment-emergent adverse event was experienced by 30-36% of participants in each group. INTERPRETATION: Nebivolol and valsartan fixed-dose combination is an effective and well-tolerated treatment option for patients with hypertension. FUNDING: Forest Research Institute.

Plain language summary of the safety and effectiveness of etripamil for atrioventricular-nodal-dependent supraventricular tachycardia: the RAPID study.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a plain language summary of a clinical research study called RAPID. The study looked at the potential for how safe and effective etripamil was at stopping an episode of rapid heartbeats in people with atrioventricularnodal-dependent supraventricular tachycardia (AV-node-dependent SVT). An episode is used to describe the period of time when a person experiences an abnormally very fast heartbeat. This was done by comparing an investigational drug called etripamil with a placebo, each administered via a rapidly acting nasal spray. AV-node-dependent SVT affects the rhythm of the heart, causing it to suddenly beat rapidly. The condition often requires medical treatment to help return the heart to its normal, healthy heartbeat pattern and speed, called 'sinus rhythm'. Researchers are looking at ways of improving the management of supraventricular tachycardias (SVT) by reducing the need for patients to attend an urgent care clinic, emergency ward or hospital for treatment. In the RAPID study, participants used a nasal spray containing either 70 mg etripamil or a placebo solution when they experienced an episode of SVT. The researchers wanted to know how long it took for each participant's rapid heartbeat to return to sinus rhythm after administering the etripamil or placebo nasal spray. Participants in the study were considered successfully treated if their heartbeats returned to sinus rhythm for at least 30 seconds within 30 minutes of using the nasal spray. Although 30 seconds may seem brief, it's medically important because it shows that a person's heartbeat has been temporarily stabilized and returned to normal functioning. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Out of 99 people who used etripamil during an SVT episode, 63 participants (64%) experienced a return to sinus rhythm for at least 30 seconds within 30 minutes after using the nasal spray. In contrast, 26 out of 85 participants (31%) who used the placebo nasal spray experienced a return to sinus rhythm for at least 30 seconds within 30 minutes after use. Furthermore, the average time taken for the return to sinus rhythm was 17 minutes for the etripamil group which was 3-times faster than the placebo group at 53 minutes. Also, in the study no serious side effects occurred that were related to etripamil. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: The RAPID study supports the potential that etripamil may be safe and well tolerated by participants as a treatment for episodes of rapid heartbeat in people with AV-node-dependent SVT. The results also showed a significant improvement in symptoms following treatment with etripamil.

Multicenter, Phase 2, Randomized Controlled Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Etripamil Nasal Spray for the Acute Reduction of Rapid Ventricular Rate in Patients With Symptomatic Atrial Fibrillation (ReVeRA-201).

BACKGROUND: Despite chronic therapies, atrial fibrillation (AF) leads to rapid ventricular rates (RVR) often requiring intravenous treatments. Etripamil is a fast-acting, calcium-channel blocker administered intranasally affecting the atrioventricular node within minutes. METHODS: Reduction of Ventricular Rate in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation evaluated the efficacy and safety of etripamil for the reduction of ventricular rate (VR) in patients presenting urgently with AF-RVR (VR ≥110 beats per minute [bpm]), was randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, and conducted in Canada and the Netherlands. Patients presenting urgently with AF-RVR were randomized (1:1, etripamil nasal spray 70 mg: placebo nasal spray). The primary objective was to demonstrate the effectiveness of etripamil in reducing VR in AF-RVR within 60 minutes of treatment. Secondary objectives assessed achievement of VR <100 bpm, reduction by ≥10% and ≥20%, relief of symptoms and treatment effectiveness; adverse events; and additional measures to 360 minutes. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients were randomized, 56 dosed with etripamil (n=27) or placebo (n=29). The median age was 65 years; 39% were female patients; proportions of AF types were similar between groups. The difference of mean maximum reductions in VR over 60 minutes, etripamil versus placebo, adjusting for baseline VR, was -29.91 bpm (95% CI, -40.31 to -19.52; P<0.0001). VR reductions persisted up to 150 minutes. Significantly greater proportions of patients receiving etripamil achieved VR reductions <100 bpm (with longer median duration <100 bpm), or VR reduction by ≥10% or ≥20%, versus placebo. VR reduction ≥20% occurred in 66.7% of patients in the etripamil arm and no patients in placebo. Using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication-9, there was significant improvement in satisfaction on symptom relief and treatment effectiveness with etripamil versus placebo. Serious adverse events were rare; 1 patient in the etripamil arm experienced transient severe bradycardia and syncope, assessed as due to hypervagotonia. CONCLUSIONS: Intranasal etripamil 70 mg reduced VR and improved symptom relief and treatment satisfaction. These data support further development of self-administered etripamil for the treatment of AF-RVR. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT04467905.

Refinement of the magnetic resonance diffusion-perfusion mismatch concept for thrombolytic patient selection: insights from the desmoteplase in acute stroke trials.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The DIAS-2 study was the only large, randomized, intravenous, thrombolytic trial that selected patients based on the presence of ischemic penumbra. However, DIAS-2 did not confirm the positive findings of the smaller DEDAS and DIAS trials, which also used penumbral selection. Therefore, a reevaluation of the penumbra selection strategy is warranted. METHODS: In post hoc analyses we assessed the relationships of magnetic resonance imaging-measured lesion volumes with clinical measures in DIAS-2, and the relationships of the presence and size of the diffusion-perfusion mismatch with the clinical effect of desmoteplase in DIAS-2 and in pooled data from DIAS, DEDAS, and DIAS-2. RESULTS: In DIAS-2, lesion volumes correlated with National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) at both baseline and final time points (P<0.0001), and lesion growth was inversely related to good clinical outcome (P=0.004). In the pooled analysis, desmoteplase was associated with 47% clinical response rate (n=143) vs 34% in placebo (n=73; P=0.08). For both the pooled sample and for DIAS-2, increasing the minimum baseline mismatch volume (MMV) for inclusion increased the desmoteplase effect size. The odds ratio for good clinical response between desmoteplase and placebo treatment was 2.83 (95% confidence interval, 1.16-6.94; P=0.023) for MMV >60 mL. Increasing the minimum NIHSS score for inclusion did not affect treatment effect size. CONCLUSIONS: Pooled across all desmoteplase trials, desmoteplase appears beneficial in patients with large MMV and ineffective in patients with small MMV. These results support a modified diffusion-perfusion mismatch hypothesis for patient selection in later time-window thrombolytic trials. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique Identifiers: NCT00638781, NCT00638248, NCT00111852.

Clinical and Microbiological Outcomes of Ceftazidime-Avibactam Treatment in Adults with Gram-Negative Bacteremia: A Subset Analysis from the Phase 3 Clinical Trial Program.

INTRODUCTION: This exploratory analysis assessed efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with Gram-negative bacteremia treated with ceftazidime-avibactam or comparator across five phase 3, randomized, controlled, multi-center trials in adults with complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI), complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI)/pyelonephritis, hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). METHODS: In each trial, RECLAIM and RECLAIM 3 (cIAI; NCT01499290/NCT01726023), REPRISE (cIAI/cUTI; NCT01644643), RECAPTURE (cUTI; NCT01595438/NCT01599806), and REPROVE (HAP/VAP; NCT01808092), patients were randomized 1:1 to intravenous ceftazidime-avibactam (plus metronidazole for those with cIAI) or comparators (carbapenems in > 97% patients) for 5-21 days. Efficacy assessments included clinical and microbiological responses at the test-of-cure visit in the pooled Gram-negative extended microbiologically evaluable (GNeME) population (bacteremia subset). Safety outcomes were summarized for patients with positive bacterial blood culture(s) at baseline who received ≥ 1 dose of study treatment. RESULTS: The overall safety population included 4050 patients (ceftazidime-avibactam, n = 2024; comparator, n = 2026). The GNeME population (bacteremia subset) comprised 101 patients (ceftazidime-avibactam, n = 54; comparator, n = 47). Clinical cure rates (all indications combined) were 47/54 (87.0%) for ceftazidime-avibactam and 39/47 (83.0%) for comparators; favorable microbiological response rates were 43/54 (79.6%) and 32/47 (68.1%), respectively. Clinical and microbiological responses in the bacteremia subset were generally similar to those in the overall set. The pattern of adverse events in patients with bacteremia was similar between treatment groups and was consistent with the known safety profile of ceftazidime-avibactam. CONCLUSION: This analysis provides supportive evidence of the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam in patients with Gram-negative bacteremia associated with cIAI, cUTI/pyelonephritis, or HAP/VAP.

Relationship between baseline systolic blood pressure and long-term outcomes in acute heart failure patients treated with TRV027: an exploratory subgroup analysis of BLAST-AHF.

INTRODUCTION: TRV027, a 'biased' ligand of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R), did not affect a composite clinical outcome at 30 days in a phase 2b acute heart failure (AHF) trial (BLAST-AHF). METHODS: Post-hoc analyses from BLAST-AHF (n = 618) examined the effects of TRV027 by baseline systolic blood pressure (SBP) on changes in renal function and 180-day outcomes. Interactions between baseline SBP and select endpoints were identified utilizing a subpopulation treatment effect pattern plots (STEPP) analysis, then grouping of patients by SBP tertile: < 127, ≥ 127 to < 140, and ≥ 140 mmHg. RESULTS: A trend towards increased creatinine in the first 3 days was noted in the lower SBP tertile, while in those in the higher two tertiles, TRV027, especially the 1 mg/h dose, reduced creatinine at days 5 and 30. Beneficial effects on 180-day all-cause mortality and cardiovascular (CV) death or readmission were observed in the two higher SBP tertiles (SBP ≥ 127 mmHg) in the TRV027 1 mg/h dose group (all-cause mortality HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.14-1.06, p = 0.056; CV death or HF/RF rehospitalization HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.28-1.01, p = 0.049), while more adverse outcomes were observed in patients in the lower SBP tertile. CONCLUSIONS: This post-hoc analysis of the BLAST-AHF study suggests contrasting effects of TRV027 by baseline SBP, with trends towards lower 180-day event rates in patients enrolled with higher baseline SBP, especially when given lower doses of TRV027.

Efficacy of nebivolol-valsartan single-pill combination in obese and nonobese patients with hypertension.

Antihypertensive efficacy of single-pill combinations (SPCs) consisting of a ß1 -selective adrenergic blocker with vasodilatory properties via ß3 -agonism (nebivolol) and an angiotensin II receptor blocker (valsartan) was demonstrated in an 8-week phase 3 trial (NCT01508026). In this post hoc analysis, seated blood pressure, heart rate, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, plasma aldosterone, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and safety measures were assessed in obese (body mass index >32 kg/m2 ; n=1823) and nonobese (body mass index <27 kg/m2 ; n=847) adults with hypertension (stage I or II) treated with nebivolol-valsartan SPCs, nebivolol or valsartan monotherapy, or placebo. At week 8, reductions from baseline in blood pressure and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring were greater with SPCs and most nebivolol and valsartan monotherapy doses vs placebo regardless of obesity status. Aldosterone declined with all active treatments and estimated glomerular filtration rate remained steady. The nebivolol-valsartan 5/80 mg/d SPC was efficacious regardless of degree of obesity.

Correlations of plasma renin activity and aldosterone concentration with ambulatory blood pressure responses to nebivolol and valsartan, alone and in combination, in hypertension.

After demonstration of the antihypertensive efficacy of the combination of the beta-blocker nebivolol and the angiotensin receptor blocker valsartan in an 8-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (N = 4161), we now report the effects of this treatment on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in a substudy (n = 805). Plasma renin activity increased with valsartan (54%-73%) and decreased with nebivolol (51%-65%) and the combination treatment (17%-39%). Plasma aldosterone decreased with individual treatments (valsartan, 11%-22%; nebivolol, 20%-26%), with the largest reduction (35%) observed with maximum combination dose (20 mg nebivolol/320 mg valsartan). Baseline ln(plasma renin activity) correlated with the 8-week reductions in 24-hour systolic and diastolic BP following treatments with the combination (all doses combined, P = .003 and P < .001) and nebivolol (both, P < .001), but not with valsartan. Baseline ln(aldosterone) correlated with 24-hour systolic and diastolic BP reductions following combination treatment only (P < .001 and P = .005). The implications of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system effects of this beta blocker-angiotensin receptor blocker combination should be explored further.