Letermovir and tacrolimus interaction effects in hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients receiving moderate cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitors for antifungal prophylaxis.

INTRODUCTION: Letermovir inhibits cytomegalovirus replication and is approved for the prevention of cytomegalovirus infection in cytomegalovirus seropositive hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients. Studies have found that letermovir coadministration has minimal effect on tacrolimus levels prior to the start of voriconazole, a strong cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 inhibitor. However, data are lacking for hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients receiving letermovir and tacrolimus with moderate CYP 3A4 inhibitors as antifungal prophylaxis. METHODS: In this retrospective single-center analysis, we reviewed the charts of 92 consecutive adult allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients receiving letermovir, tacrolimus, and moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors for antifungal prophylaxis. RESULTS: Tacrolimus concentration/dose (C/D) ratios were evaluated for the first 7 days pre-letermovir and for the first and second 7-day periods after letermovir. The tacrolimus mean C/D ratios [(ng/mL)/(mg/kg/day)] increased significantly with the addition of letermovir: 172.99 (95% confidence interval (CI): 158.2-187.78) pre-letermovir, 268.66 (95% CI: 244.34-292.98) first-week letermovir, and 312.19 (95% CI: 279.39-344.99) second-week letermovir (P < 0.001). The average dosages (mg/kg) of tacrolimus also decreased significantly across the three-time intervals (P < 0.001). Only four patients experienced clinically significant cytomegalovirus reactivation which required systemic treatment. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate a reduction in tacrolimus dosing requirements for patients receiving tacrolimus and letermovir with concomitant moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors. The results of this interaction suggest that frequent monitoring of tacrolimus trough levels is warranted when starting letermovir and that empiric reduction of tacrolimus dosing upon letermovir initiation should be considered.

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure compared to renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Introduction: Heart failure (HF) is still a major cause of morbidity and mortality all over the world. Aim of the study was to assess the benefits and harms of sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) in patients with HF. Material and methods: We systematically searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating S/V vs. ACEI or ARB in acute or chronic HF in August 2021. Primary outcomes were HF hospitalisations and cardiovascular (CV) mortality; secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, biomarkers, and renal function. Results: We selected 11 RCTs (n = 18766) with 2-48 months follow-up. Five RCTs had ACEIs as control, 5 RCTs had ARBs as control, and one RCT had both ACEI and ARB as control. Compared to ACEI or ARB, S/V reduced HF hospitalisations by 20% (HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.68-0.94; 3 RCTs; I2 = 65%; high CoE), CV mortality by 14% (HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.73-1.01; 2 RCTs; I2 = 57%; high CoE), and all-cause mortality by 11% (HR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.78-1.00; 3 RCTs; I2 = 36%; high CoE). S/V reduced NTproBNP (SMD = -0.34, 95% CI: -0.52 to -0.16; 3 RCTs; I2 = 62%) and hs-TNT (ratio of differences = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.79-0.88; 2 RCTs; I2 = 0%), and caused a decline in renal function by 33% (HR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.39-1.14; 2 RCTs; I2 = 78%; high CoE). S/V increased hypotension (RR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.33-2.15; 9 RCTs; I2 = 65%; high CoE). Hyperkalaemia and angioedema events were similar. Effects were in the same direction when stratified by type of control (ACEI vs. ARB). Conclusions: Sacubitril/valsartan had better clinical, intermediate, and renal outcomes in HF in comparison to ACEI or ARB. There was no difference in angioedema and hyperkalaemia events, but there were more hypotension events.