Ertugliflozin for Functional Mitral Regurgitation Associated With Heart Failure: EFFORT Trial.

BACKGROUND: The morbidity and mortality rates of patients with heart failure (HF) and functional mitral regurgitation (MR) remain substantial despite guideline-directed medical therapy for HF. We evaluated the efficacy of ertugliflozin for reduction of functional MR associated with HF with mild to moderately reduced ejection fraction. METHODS: The EFFORT trial (Ertugliflozin for Functional Mitral Regurgitation) was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial to examine the hypothesis that the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor ertugliflozin is effective for improving MR in patients with HF with New York Heart Association functional class II or III, 35%≤ejection fraction<50%, and effective regurgitant orifice area of chronic functional MR >0.1 cm2 on baseline echocardiography. We randomly assigned 128 patients to receive either ertugliflozin or placebo in addition to guideline-directed medical therapy for HF. The primary end point was change in effective regurgitant orifice area of functional MR from baseline to the 12-month follow-up. Secondary end points included changes in regurgitant volume, left ventricular (LV) volume indices, left atrial volume index, LV global longitudinal strain, and NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide). RESULTS: The treatment groups were generally well-balanced with regard to baseline characteristics: mean age, 66±11 years; 61% men; 13% diabetes; 51% atrial fibrillation; 43% use of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor; ejection fraction, 42±8%; and effective regurgitant orifice area, 0.20±0.12 cm2. The decrease in effective regurgitant orifice area was significantly greater in the ertugliflozin group than in the placebo group (-0.05±0.06 versus 0.03±0.12 cm2; P<0.001). Compared with placebo, ertugliflozin significantly reduced regurgitant volume by 11.2 mL (95% CI, -16.1 to -6.3; P=0.009), left atrial volume index by 6.0 mL/m2 (95% CI, -12.16 to 0.15; P=0.005), and LV global longitudinal strain by 1.44% (95% CI, -2.42% to -0.46%; P=0.004). There were no significant between-group differences regarding changes in LV volume indices, ejection fraction, or NT-proBNP levels. Serious adverse events occurred in one patient (1.6%) in the ertugliflozin group and 6 (9.2%) in the placebo group (P=0.12). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with functional MR associated with HF, ertugliflozin significantly improved LV global longitudinal strain and left atrial remodeling, and reduced functional MR. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors may be considered for patients with functional MR. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04231331.

The Efficacy and Tolerability of Irbesartan/Amlodipine Combination Therapy in Patients With Essential Hypertension Whose Blood Pressure Were not Controlled by Irbesartan Monotherapy.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of irbesartan (IRB) and amlodipine (AML) combination therapy in patients with essential hypertension whose blood pressure (BP) was not controlled by IRB monotherapy. METHODS: Two multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III studies were conducted in Korea (the I-DUO 301 study and the I-DUO 302 study). After a 4-week run-in period with either 150 mg IRB (I-DUO 301 study) or 300 mg IRB (I-DUO 302 study), patients with uncontrolled BP (ie, mean sitting systolic BP [MSSBP] ≥140 mmHg to <180 mmHg and mean sitting diastolic BP <110 mmHg) were randomized to the placebo, AML 5 mg, or AML 10 mg group. A total of 428 participants were enrolled in the 2 I-DUO studies. In the I-DUO 301 study, 271 participants were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive either IRB/AML 150/5 mg, IRB/AML 150/10 mg, or IRB 150 mg/placebo. In the I-DUO 302 study, 157 participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive IRB/AML 300/5 mg or IRB 300 mg/placebo. The primary endpoint was the change in MSSBP from baseline to week 8. Tolerability was assessed according to the development of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and clinically significant changes in physical examination, laboratory tests, pulse, and 12-lead electrocardiography. FINDINGS: In I-DUO 301, the mean (SD) changes of MSSBP at week 8 from baseline were -14.78 (12.35) mmHg, -21.47 (12.78) mmHg, and -8.61 (12.19) mmHg in the IRB/AML 150/5 mg, IRB/AML 150/10 mg, and IRB 150 mg/placebo groups, respectively. In I-DUO 302, the mean (SD) changes of MSSBP at week 8 from baseline were -13.30 (12.47) mmHg and -7.19 (15.37) mmHg in the IRB/AML 300/5 mg and IRB 300 mg/placebo groups, respectively. In both studies, all combination groups showed a significantly higher reduction in MSSBP than the IRB monotherapy groups (P < 0.001 for both). TEAEs occurred in 10.00%, 10.99%, and 12.22% of participants in the IRB/AML 150/5 mg, IRB/AML 150/10 mg, and IRB 150 mg/placebo groups, respectively, in I-DUO 301 and in 6.33% and 10.67% of participants in the IRB/AML 300/5 mg and IRB 300 mg/placebo groups, respectively, in I-DUO 302, with no significant between-group differences. Overall, there was one serious adverse event throughout I-DUO study. IMPLICATIONS: The combination of IRB and AML has superior antihypertensive effects compared with IRB alone over an 8-week treatment period, with placebo-like tolerability. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05476354 (I-DUO 301), NCT05475665 (I-DUO 302).