Comparison between beta-blockers and calcium channel blockers in patients with atrial fibrillation according to renal function.

BACKGROUND: Rate control is the most commonly employed first-line management strategy for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Principal agents used to control heart rate (HR) include beta-blockers (BB) and nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (ND-CCB). However, there is a paucity of published studies of the differences between those drugs in CKD patients. HYPOTHESIS: The present study aimed to investigate the differences, in terms of hospitalizations due to a poor HR control, in patients with AF under a rate-control strategy according to glomerular filtration rate (GFR). METHODS: The study cohort included 2804 AF patients under rate-control regime (BB or ND-CCB) between January 2014 and April 2020. The end point, determined by competing risk regression, was hospitalizations for AF with rapid ventricular response (RVR), slow ventricular response (SVR), and need for pacemaker. RESULTS: On multivariate analysis, there were no statistical differences between ND-CCB and BB for subjects with GFR > 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (subdistribution heart rate [sHR] 0.850, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61-1.19; p = .442) and GFR 30-59 mL/min/1.73 m2 (sHR 1.242, 95% CI: 0.80-1.63; p = .333), while in patients with GFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2, ND-CCB therapy was associated with increased hospitalizations due to poor HR control (sHR 4.53, 95% CI: 1.19-17.18; p = .026). CONCLUSION: In patients with GFR ≥ 30 mL/min/1.73 m2, the choice of ND-CCB or BB had no impact on hospitalizations due to poor HR control, while in GFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2, a possible association was detected. The effects of these drugs on GFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 would require further investigation.

The current position of ß-blockers in hypertension: guidelines and clinical practice.

The benefits of improved clinical outcomes through blood pressure (BP) reduction have been proven in multiple clinical trials and meta-analyses. The new (2023) guideline from the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) includes ß-blockers within five main classes of antihypertensive agents suitable for initiation of antihypertensive pharmacotherapy and for combination with other antihypertensive agents. This is in contrast to the 2018 edition of ESH guidelines that recommended ß-blockers for use primarily in patients with compelling indications such as cardiovascular comorbidities, e.g. coronary heart disease, heart failure. This change was based on the fact that the magnitude of BP reduction is the most important factor for adverse cardiovascular outcomes, over and above the precise manner in which reduced BP is achieved. The ESH guideline also supports the use of ß-blockers for patients with resting heart rate (>80 bpm); high resting heart rate is a sign of sympathetic overactivity, an important driver of adverse cardiac remodelling in the setting of hypertension and heart failure. Hypertension management guidelines support for the use of combination therapies for almost all patients with hypertension, ideally within a single-pill combination to optimise adherence to therapy. Where a ß-blocker is prescribed, the inclusion of a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker within a combination regimen is rational. These agents together reduce both peripheral and central BP, which epidemiological studies have shown is important for reducing the burden of premature morbidity and mortality associated with uncontrolled hypertension, especially strokes.

Initiation and continuation of pharmacological therapies in patients hospitalized for heart failure in Japan.

Currently, the utilization patterns of medications for heart failure (HF) after worsening HF events remain unelucidated in Japan. Here, we conducted a retrospective cohort study evaluating the changes in HF drug utilization patterns in 6 months before and after hospitalizations for HF. The adherence to newly initiated HF medications was evaluated based on the proportion of days covered (PDC) and persistence as continuous treatment episodes among new users. The study included 9091 patients hospitalized for HF between January 2016 and September 2019, including 2735 (30.1%) patients who were newly prescribed at least one HF medication after hospitalization. Despite increases in the use of foundational HF therapy (beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists), 35.6% and 7.6% of patients were treated with the HF foundational monotherapy or diuretics alone after hospitalization, respectively. The mean PDC of newly initiated HF medications ranged from 0.57 for thiazide diuretics to 0.77 for sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Continuous use of HF medications during the first year after initiation was observed in 30-60% of patients. The mean PDC and one-year continuous HF medication use were consistently lower in patients aged ≥ 75 years and in patients with a history of HF hospitalization for all HF medication classes except for tolvaptan and digoxin. Despite the guideline recommendations of HF pharmacotherapy, both treatment and adherence were suboptimal after HF hospitalization, especially in vulnerable populations such as older patients and those with prior HF hospitalizations.

Beta-Blockers after Myocardial Infarction and Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Most trials that have shown a benefit of beta-blocker treatment after myocardial infarction included patients with large myocardial infarctions and were conducted in an era before modern biomarker-based diagnosis of myocardial infarction and treatment with percutaneous coronary intervention, antithrombotic agents, high-intensity statins, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system antagonists. METHODS: In a parallel-group, open-label trial performed at 45 centers in Sweden, Estonia, and New Zealand, we randomly assigned patients with an acute myocardial infarction who had undergone coronary angiography and had a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 50% to receive either long-term treatment with a beta-blocker (metoprolol or bisoprolol) or no beta-blocker treatment. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or new myocardial infarction. RESULTS: From September 2017 through May 2023, a total of 5020 patients were enrolled (95.4% of whom were from Sweden). The median follow-up was 3.5 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.7). A primary end-point event occurred in 199 of 2508 patients (7.9%) in the beta-blocker group and in 208 of 2512 patients (8.3%) in the no-beta-blocker group (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 1.16; P = 0.64). Beta-blocker treatment did not appear to lead to a lower cumulative incidence of the secondary end points (death from any cause, 3.9% in the beta-blocker group and 4.1% in the no-beta-blocker group; death from cardiovascular causes, 1.5% and 1.3%, respectively; myocardial infarction, 4.5% and 4.7%; hospitalization for atrial fibrillation, 1.1% and 1.4%; and hospitalization for heart failure, 0.8% and 0.9%). With regard to safety end points, hospitalization for bradycardia, second- or third-degree atrioventricular block, hypotension, syncope, or implantation of a pacemaker occurred in 3.4% of the patients in the beta-blocker group and in 3.2% of those in the no-beta-blocker group; hospitalization for asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in 0.6% and 0.6%, respectively; and hospitalization for stroke in 1.4% and 1.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute myocardial infarction who underwent early coronary angiography and had a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (≥50%), long-term beta-blocker treatment did not lead to a lower risk of the composite primary end point of death from any cause or new myocardial infarction than no beta-blocker use. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; REDUCE-AMI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03278509.).

The clinical value of ß-blockers in patients with stable angina.

Stable angina, one manifestation of chronic coronary syndrome (CCS), is characterised by intermittent episodes of insufficient blood supply to the myocardium, provoking symptoms of myocardial ischaemia, particularly chest pain. These attacks usually occur during exercise or stress. Anti-ischaemic drugs are the mainstay of pharmacologic management of CCS with symptoms of angina. ß-blockers reduce heart rate and myocardial contractility, thus reducing myocardial oxygen consumption. These drugs have been shown to ameliorate the frequency of anginal attacks and to improve exercise capacity in these patients. Current management guidelines include ß-blockers as a first-line management option for most patients with CCS and symptoms of myocardial ischaemia, alongside dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCB). The presence of comorbid angina and heart failure is a strong indication for starting with a ß-blocker. ß-blockers are also useful in the management of angina symptoms accompanied by a high heart rate, hypertension (with or without a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system [RAS] blocker or CCB), or microvascular angina (with a RAS blocker and a statin). A ß-blocker is not suitable for a patient with low heart rate (<50 bpm), although use of a ß-blocker may be supported by a pacemaker if the ß-blocker is strongly indicated) and should be used at a low dose only in patients with low blood pressure.

Heart failure management with ß-blockers: can we do better?

Heart failure (HF) is associated with disabling symptoms, poor quality of life, and a poor prognosis with substantial excess mortality in the years following diagnosis. Overactivation of the sympathetic nervous system is a key feature of the pathophysiology of HF and is an important driver of the process of adverse remodelling of the left ventricular wall that contributes to cardiac failure. Drugs which suppress the activity of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, including ß-blockers, are foundation therapies for the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and despite a lack of specific outcomes trials, are also widely used by cardiologist in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Today, expert opinion has moved away from recommending that treatment for HF should be guided solely by the LVEF and interventions should rather address signs and symptoms of HF (e.g. oedema and tachycardia), the severity of HF, and concomitant conditions. ß-blockers improve HF symptoms and functional status in HF and these agents have demonstrated improved survival, as well as a reduced risk of other important clinical outcomes such as hospitalisation for heart failure, in randomised, placebo-controlled outcomes trials. In HFpEF, ß-blockers are anti-ischemic and lower blood pressure and heart rate. Moreover, ß-blockers also reduce mortality in the setting of HF occurring alongside common comorbid conditions, such as diabetes, CKD (of any severity), and COPD. Higher doses of ß-blockers are associated with better clinical outcomes in populations with HF, so that ensuring adequate titration of therapy to their maximal (or maximally tolerated) doses is important for ensuring optimal outcomes for people with HF. In principle, a patient with HF could have combined treatment with a ß-blocker, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor/neprilysin inhibitor, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, and a SGLT2 inhibitor, according to tolerability.

Beta-blockers or Placebo for Primary Prophylaxis (BOPPP) of oesophageal varices: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Liver disease is within the top five causes of premature death in adults. Deaths caused by complications of cirrhosis continue to rise, whilst deaths related to other non-liver disease areas are declining. Portal hypertension is the primary sequelae of cirrhosis and is associated with the development of variceal haemorrhage, ascites, hepatic encephalopathy and infection, collectively termed hepatic decompensation, which leads to hospitalisation and mortality. It remains uncertain whether administering a non-selective beta-blocker (NSBB), specifically carvedilol, at an earlier stage, i.e. when oesophageal varices are small, can prevent VH and reduce all-cause decompensation (ACD). METHODS/DESIGN: The BOPPP trial is a pragmatic, multicentre, placebo-controlled, triple-blinded, randomised controlled trial (RCT) in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Patients aged 18 years or older with cirrhosis and small oesophageal varices that have never bled will be recruited, subject to exclusion criteria. The trial aims to enrol 740 patients across 55 hospitals in the UK. Patients are allocated randomly on a 1:1 ratio to receive either carvedilol 6.25 mg (a NSBB) or a matched placebo, once or twice daily, for 36 months, to attain adequate power to determine the effectiveness of carvedilol in preventing or reducing ACD. The primary outcome is the time to first decompensating event. It is a composite primary outcome made up of variceal haemorrhage (VH, new or worsening ascites, new or worsening hepatic encephalopathy (HE), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), hepatorenal syndrome, an increase in Child-Pugh grade by 1 grade or MELD score by 5 points, and liver-related mortality. Secondary outcomes include progression to medium or large oesophageal varices, development of gastric, duodenal, or ectopic varices, participant quality of life, healthcare costs and transplant-free survival. DISCUSSION: The BOPPP trial aims to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of carvedilol in patients with cirrhosis and small oesophageal varices to determine whether this non-selective beta-blocker can prevent or reduce hepatic decompensation. There is clinical equipoise on whether intervening in cirrhosis, at an earlier stage of portal hypertension, with NSBB therapy is beneficial. Should the trial yield a positive result, we anticipate that the administration and use of carvedilol will become widespread with pathways developed to standardise the administration of the medication in primary care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been approved by the National Health Service (NHS) Research Ethics Committee (REC) (reference number: 19/YH/0015). The results of the trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Participants will be informed of the results via the BOPPP website ( www.boppp-trial.org ) and partners in the British Liver Trust (BLT) organisation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EUDRACT reference number: 2018-002509-78. ISRCTN reference number: ISRCTN10324656. Registered on April 24 2019.

Enteropathy and intestinal malabsorption in patients treated with antihypertensive drugs. A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate differences in the incidence of enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption in patients taking angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), calcium channel blocker (CCB), and beta blockers (BBs) at a single center in Korea. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we utilized data from the Yangsan electronic medical records to identify 129,169 patients. These individuals were prescribed olmesartan, other ARBs, ACEI, CCB, and BBs between November 2008 and February 2021. RESULTS: Of the 44,775 patients, 51 (0.11%) were observed to have enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption. Compared with the ACEI group, the adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for enteropathy and intestinal malabsorption were OR=1.313 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.188-6.798], p=0.893) for olmesartan, OR=0.915 (95% CI: [0.525-1.595], p=0.754) for the other ARBs, OR=0.928 (95% CI: [0.200-4.307]; p=0.924) for the CCB, and OR=0.663 (95% CI: [0.151-2.906]; p=0.586) for the BBs group. These findings were adjusted for factors such as age, gender, duration of antihypertensive medication, and comorbidities. CONCLUSION: In a retrospective cohort study of patients on antihypertensive medications, no significant difference was found in the incidence of enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption when ACEI was compared to olmesartan, other ARBs, CCB, and BBs.

Rationale for the Inclusion of ß-Blockers Among Major Antihypertensive Drugs in the 2023 European Society of Hypertension Guidelines.

We address the reasons why, unlike other guidelines, in the 2023 guidelines of the European Society of Hypertension ß-blockers (BBs) have been regarded as major drugs for the treatment of hypertension, at the same level as diuretics, calcium channel blockers, and blockers of the renin-angiotensin system. We argue that BBs, (1) reduce blood pressure (the main factor responsible for treatment-related protection) not less than other drugs, (2) reduce pooled cardiovascular outcomes and mortality in placebo-controlled trials, in which there has also been a sizeable reduction of all major cause-specific cardiovascular outcomes, (3) have been associated with a lower global cardiovascular protection in 2 but not in several other comparison trials, in which the protective effect of BBs versus the other major drugs has been similar or even greater, with a slightly smaller or no difference of global benefit in large trial meta-analyses and a similar protective effect when comparisons extend to BBs in combination versus other drug combinations. We mention the large number of cardiac and other comorbidities for which BBs are elective drugs, and we express criticism against the exclusion of BBs because of their lower protective effect against stroke in comparison trials, because, for still uncertain reasons, differences in protection against cause-specific events (stroke, heart failure, and coronary disease) have been reported for other major drugs. These partial data cannot replace global benefits as the main deciding factor for drug choice, also because in the general hypertensive population whether and which type of event might occur is unknown.

Propranolol monotherapy in angiosarcoma - A window-of-opportunity study (PropAngio).

BACKGROUND: Angiosarcoma is a rare and aggressive cancer of the endothelial cells. Propranolol, a non-selective ß-blocker, was able to initiate apoptosis in angiosarcoma cell lines and its anti-tumor activity has been described in several case reports. The aim of this trial was to prospectively evaluate the anti-tumor activity of propranolol monotherapy in patients with angiosarcoma before proceeding to standard of care treatment. METHODS: Propranolol was dosed 80 mg to 240 mg/day for 3 to 6 weeks according to a dose titration schedule. The primary endpoint was clinical response (response according to RECIST 1.1 or stable disease with improvement of cutaneous lesions) in at least three patients. Exploratory objectives included histologic response (>30% decrease in Ki-67), FDG PET response, and ß-receptor expression levels. RESULTS: Fourteen patients were enrolled. The median duration of treatment was 26 days (range 21-42 days). The median highest propranolol dose was 160 mg/day (range 80 - 240 mg). Two patients showed clinical response (14%, 95% CI 3-100%). One of these patients showed a partial metabolic response on PET-CT. None of the tumors showed histologic response. The most common adverse event was grade 1/2 bradycardia (86%). There were no grade ≥ 3 adverse events. ADRB2 was overexpressed in 16 out of 18 tumors, in both responders and non-responders. None of the tumors showed ADRB1 overexpression. CONCLUSIONS: This window-of-opportunity trial did not show clinical efficacy of propranolol monotherapy. However, two out of 14 patients did show clinical benefit. ADRB1/2 expression did not correlate with clinical response.

Pediatric Beta Blocker Therapy: A Comprehensive Review of Development and Genetic Variation to Guide Precision-Based Therapy in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults.

Beta adrenergic receptor antagonists, known as beta blockers, are one of the most prescribed medications in both pediatric and adult cardiology. Unfortunately, most of these agents utilized in the pediatric clinical setting are prescribed off-label. Despite regulatory efforts aimed at increasing pediatric drug labeling, a majority of pediatric cardiovascular drug agents continue to lack pediatric-specific data to inform precision dosing for children, adolescents, and young adults. Adding to this complexity is the contribution of development (ontogeny) and genetic variation towards the variability in drug disposition and response. In the absence of current prospective trials, the purpose of this comprehensive review is to illustrate the current knowledge gaps regarding the key drivers of variability in beta blocker drug disposition and response and the opportunities for investigations that will lead to changes in pediatric drug labeling.

The influence of carvedilol posology timing on clinically significant portal hypertension: insights from elastography measurements.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Carvedilol has emerged as the preferred ß-blocker for treating portal hypertension. However, there is still a debate in dosing regimen, with a potential lower bioavailability in once-daily regimens. The aim of this study is to assess the acute effects of carvedilol posology in patients with clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH), as a surrogate marker of bioavailability. METHODS: In this experimental study, 34 patients with CSPH receiving carvedilol twice daily were asked to suppress the night dose of carvedilol, creating a standardized 24-hour dose interval. Spleen stiffness measurement (SSM) and liver stiffness measurement (LSM) by transient elastography (TE) were performed, with the exact interval between the last carvedilol administration and TE measurements consistently maintained at 24 hours and compared with values prior and under treatment. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were included, predominantly male (82.9%). SSM after suspending carvedilol for 24 hours [mean, 73.9kPa (SD, 17.0)] was significantly higher ( P < 0.001) than under treatment [mean, 56.3kPa (SD, 13.2)] and was not significantly different ( P = 0.908) from SSM prior to introduction of carvedilol [mean, 74.5kPa (SD, 12.4)]. Differences were also found in stratified analysis for carvedilol dosage, D'Amico classification stages, MELDNa scores, MELD3.0 scores, Child-Pugh class A and CSPH due to alcoholic cirrhosis. LSM after suspension was not significantly different from both under treatment and prior to treatment. CONCLUSION: The differences in SSM after skipping one dose of carvedilol show both the importance of strict adherence to the prescribed dosing regimen to achieve the expected therapeutic benefits and the impact of twice daily prescription in bioavailability throughout the day.

Optimal Medical Therapy for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease: Focus on Anti-anginal Therapy.

Chronic coronary disease (CCD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The most common symptom of CCD is exertional angina pectoris, a discomfort in the chest that commonly occurs during activities of daily life. Patients are dismayed by recurring episodes of angina and seek medical help in preventing or minimizing episodes. Angina occurs when the coronary arteries are unable to supply sufficient blood flow to the cardiac muscle to meet the metabolic needs of the left ventricular myocardium. While lifestyle changes and aggressive risk factor modification play a critical role in the management of CCD, management of angina usually requires pharmacologic therapy. Medications such as beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, nitrates, ranolazine, and others ultimately work to improve the mismatch between myocardial blood flow and metabolic demand. This manuscript briefly describes the pathophysiologic basis for symptoms of angina, and how currently available anti-anginal therapies contribute to preventing or minimize the occurrence of angina.

Treatment of Chronic Heart Failure in Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease: The HAKA Multicenter Retrospective Real-World Study.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic heart failure (HF) has high rates of mortality and hospitalization in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (aCKD). However, randomized clinical trials have systematically excluded aCKD population. We have investigated current HF therapy in patients receiving clinical care in specialized aCKD units. METHODS: The Heart And Kidney Audit (HAKA) was a cross-sectional and retrospective real-world study including outpatients with aCKD and HF from 29 Spanish centers. The objective was to evaluate how the treatment of HF in patients with aCKD complied with the recommendations of the European Society of Cardiology Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of HF, especially regarding the foundational drugs: renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi), angiotensin receptor blocker/neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI), beta-blockers (BBs), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). RESULTS: Among 5,012 aCKD patients, 532 (13%) had a diagnosis of HF. Of them, 20% had reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), 13% mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF), and 67% preserved EF (HFpEF). Only 9.3% of patients with HFrEF were receiving quadruple therapy with RASi/ARNI, BB, MRA, and SGLT2i, but the majority were not on the maximum recommended doses. None of the patients with HFrEF and CKD G5 received quadruple therapy. Among HFmrEF patients, approximately half and two-thirds were receiving RASi and/or BB, respectively, while less than 15% received ARNI, MRA, or SGLT2i. Less than 10% of patients with HFpEF were receiving SGLT2i. CONCLUSIONS: Under real-world conditions, HF in aCKD patients is sub-optimally treated. Increased awareness of current guidelines and pragmatic trials specifically enrolling these patients represent unmet medical needs.

Managing hyperkalemia in patients with heart failure on guideline-directed medical therapy: challenges and opportunities.

Heart failure is a chronic and invalidating syndrome that affects tens of millions of people worldwide with significant socio-economic ramifications for the health care systems. Significant progress in the understanding of the pathophysiology of heart failure has allowed the gradual introduction of several drug classes for the management of such patients. Beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, and sodium-glucose-cotransporter 2 inhibitors are all considered pillars of the guideline-directed medical therapy for heart failure. Despite remarkable improvements in the morbidity and mortality of heart failure, however, many patients still develop clinically significant hyperkalemia during combined treatment with those four pharmacological pillars. The consequence is often a down-titration or discontinuation of one or more crucial drugs, which in turns leads to a considerable increase in the risk of cardiovascular events, dialysis, and all-cause mortality. This paper will explore novel approaches for the management of hyperkalemia in heart failure, including closer monitoring of potassium levels, early review of drugs that might increase the risk of hyperkalemia, and pharmacological treatment of hyperkalemia, with a special emphasis on sodium-glucose-cotransporter 2 inhibitors and potassium-binding agents, including patiromer and sodium zirconium cyclosilicate.