Evaluación clínica y económica del uso de sacubitrilo/valsartán en la insuficiencia cardiaca aguda / Clinical and economic evaluation of the use of sacubitril/valsartan in acute heart failure

CONTEXTO: La ICA se define como la aparición rápida o gradual de signos o síntomas de IC, lo bastante graves para que el paciente necesite atención médica urgente que lleva al ingreso hospitalario no planificado o a la atención en el servicio de urgencias. Los pacientes con ICA requieren evaluación urgente y el inicio o la intensificación del tratamiento, incluidos fármacos intravenosos y procedimientos. La ICA es la mayor causa de hospitalizaciones de personas de más de 65 años y se asocia con tasas elevadas de muerte y reingreso. La mortalidad hospitalaria varía entre el 4 y el 10%. La mortalidad al año después del alta puede ser del 25 al 30%, con tasa de reingreso superior a 45%. La ICA se puede presentar como una primera manifestación de la IC (de novo) o, más frecuentemente, como consecuencia de una descompensación aguda de la IC crónica. Comparados con los pacientes con descompensación aguda de la IC crónica, los pacientes con IC de nueva aparición pueden tener una tasa más alta de mortalidad hospitalaria, pero las tasas de mortalidad y reingresos después del alta son más bajas. Factores extrínsecos pueden precipitar, pero no causar la ICA en pacientes con disfunción cardiaca preexistente. La gravedad clínica y la evolución en el hospital están determinadas por la compleja interacción entre los factores precipitantes, el sustrato cardiaco y las comorbilidades del paciente. El proceso diagnóstico de la ICA comienza en el momento del primer contacto médico y continúa durante las fases iniciales, a efectos de identificar la presentación clínica, diagnosticar y tratar en el momento oportuno las posibles causas, los factores desencadenantes y las comorbilidades que pudieran suponer riesgo para la vida. Además de los signos clínicos, el proceso diagnóstico incluye ECG y la ecocardiografía, siempre que sea posible. Pueden hacerse pruebas adicionales como radiografía de tórax y ecografía pulmonar para confirmar el diagnóstico de ICA. Se deben medir las concentraciones plasmáticas de péptido natriurético (BNP, NT-proBNP o MR-proANP) cuando el diagnóstico sea incierto. Las concentraciones normales de péptido natriurético hacen poco probable el diagnóstico de ICA. Se pueden describir cuatro presentaciones clínicas con algunos solapamientos entre ellas: 1. Insuficiencia cardiaca en descompensación aguda 2. Edema pulmonar agudo 3. Insuficiencia ventricular derecha aislada 4. Choque cardiogênico. MÉTODOS: Para dar respuesta a la pregunta propuesta, se realizó una búsqueda sistemática en las bases de datos de Pubmed, CENTRAL (Cochrane), y de la Biblioteca Médica de Salud (BVS), utilizando tesauros (MeSH), así como términos libres sin limitaciones por edad, sexo, año de publicación, tipo de estudio, ni idioma. Se utilizan las siguientes palabras clave: acute heart failure, acute descompensated heart failure, insuficiencia cardiaca aguda, insuficiencia cardiaca crónica descompensada, LCZ696, ARNi, sacubitrilo, valsartán, sacubitrilo/valsartán. Para los aspectos económicos se utilizaron los siguientes términos: acute heart failure, sacubitrilo/valsartán, cost analysis, cost effectiveness, cost utility, cost benefit, economic evaluation, budget impact, health technology assessment en las bases de datos de Pubmed, y BVS. RESULTADOS: Se evaluaron tanto de forma conjunta como separada los desenlaces de mortalidad y rehospitalización. En su evaluación en conjunto, la mortalidad por todas las causas o rehospitalización por insuficiencia cardiaca o implantación de dispositivo de asistencia ventricular o el ingreso a lista de espera para trasplante cardiaco, S/V fue superior a enalapril en pacientes adultos con insuficiencia cardiaca aguda (de novo o con empeoramiento de insuficiencia cardiaca crónica) con fracción de eyección ≤40%, con diferencia estadísticamente significativa. De igual forma, al analizar el desenlace compuesto simplificado de muerte por causas cardiovasculares o rehospitalización por insuficiencia cardiaca, en la misma población, mostró superioridad frente a enalapril, sin importar la dosis alcanzada, de acuerdo a los resultados de 2 ensayos clínicos y 1 estudio de cohorte. Al realizar el análisis por subpoblaciones, de acuerdo a un ensayo clínico, en pacientes con insuficiencia cardiaca crónica descompensada o con empeoramiento, no hubo significancia estadística. De acuerdo a un ensayo clínico, hay ciertos factores agravantes que aumentan el riesgo de mortalidad cardiovascular y rehospitalización por insuficiencia cardiaca, estos son: admisión a terapia intensiva en el primer internamiento, nivel de NT-proBNP >2701 pg/mL, puntuación de congestión ≥4 y presentar ≥1 hospitalización por insuficiencia cardiaca en el año previo. Lo cual se confirma en otro ensayo clínico que demostró que los pacientes con un nivel de NT-proBNP alto presentan un riesgo de rehospitalización por insuficiencia cardiaca o muerte cardiovascular mayor que los que presentan niveles bajos. De forma similar, aquellos pacientes que tuvieron descenso de NT-proBNP secundario a S/V mostraron un menor riesgo de rehospitalización por insuficiencia cardiaca o muerte cardiovascular. De igual forma, se observó que los pacientes con insuficiencia cardiaca de novo, o näive a tratamiento con iECA/ARA, presentaron mejores respuestas con S/V, al compararse contra enalapril, al reducir el riesgo del desenlace compuesto muerte cardiovascular y rehospitalización por insuficiencia cardiaca. El efecto benéfico de S/V sobre el riesgo de hospitalización por todas las causas y de muerte, así como hospitalización y muerte cardiovascular no difirió entre los pacientes con ICA con distintas fracciones de eyección (≤40% o >40%). Por otra parte, se documentó que los pacientes con enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica, o insuficiencia renal, tuvieron los peores resultados en mortalidad por todas las causas, mortalidad cardiovascular o en el desenlace compuesto de mortalidad cardiovascular o rehospitalización por insuficiencia cardiaca. CONCLUSIONES: Se realizó un análisis que demuestra la eficacia de Sacubitrilo/Valsartán en la insuficiencia cardiaca aguda con fracción de eyección reducida, ya que disminuye la tasa de rehospitalización y la mortalidad a mediano plazo. Se tiene que considerar sus posibles efectos adversos (hipotensión sintomática) al utilizarse en pacientes con cifras tensionales bajas y debe de mantenerse la farmacovigilancia debido a los reportes de demencia en su uso crónico. Se analizaron tres estudios de costo efectividad para medir el impacto económico por la introducción de Sacubitrilo-Valsartán desde la perspectiva del sistema de salud; mientras que en el estudio de Perera, (2019) (realizado en Australia), S/V no fue costo efectivo en comparación con enalapril debido a los altos costos; en los estudios de Krittayaphong, (2021) y Tianyang (2023) realizados en China y Tailandia, respectivamente, S/V resultó ser una opción costo-efectiva en comparación con enalapril, estos resultados pueden ser debido a los bajos precios de compra y a los parámetros clínicos locales, por lo que, los resultados dependen en gran medida de algunas variables como la mortalidad, costos y solo son aplicables en los países en donde se realizaron los estudios (China, Tailandia y Australia).

Low- vs high-dose ARNI effects on clinical status, exercise performance and cardiac function in real-life HFrEF patients.

PURPOSE: Only a few studies are available on dose-related effects of sacubitril/valsartan (angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibition (ARNI)) in real-life patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We sought to investigate clinical and functional effects in real-life HFrEF patients receiving ARNI at a different cumulative dose. METHODS: This was an observational study in consecutive outpatients admitted for HFrEF from October 2017 to June 2019. The PARADIGM criteria were needed for enrolment. ARNI was uptitrated according to blood pressure, drug tolerability, renal function and kaliemia. At least 10-month follow-up was required in each patient. Clinical assessment, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) score, 6-min walk test and strain echocardiography were performed in each patient on a regular basis during the observational period. At the end of the study, patients were divided into two groups based on the median yearly dose of the ARNI medication. RESULTS: A total of 90 patients, 64 ± 11 years, 82% males, were enrolled. The cut-off dose was established in 75 mg BID, and the study population was divided into group A (≤ 75 mg), 52 patients (58%), and group B (> 75 mg), 38 patients (42%). The follow-up duration was 12 months (range 11-13). NYHA class, KCCQ score and 6MWT performance ameliorated in both groups, with a quicker time to benefit in group B. The proportion of patients walking > 350 m increased from 21 to 58% in group A (p < 0.001), and from 29 to 82% in group B (p < 0.001). A positive effect was also disclosed in the left ventricular remodelling, strain deformation and diastolic function. CONCLUSION: One-year ARNI treatment was effective in our real-life HFrEF patient population, leading to clinical and functional improvement in both study groups, slightly greater and with a shorter time to benefit in group B.

Impact of sacubitril/valsartan on implantable defibrillator eligibility in heart failure: a real-world experience.

OBJECTIVE: Current guidelines recommend an implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) in patients with symptomatic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF; left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] ≤35%) despite ≥3 months of optimal medical therapy. Recent observations demonstrated that sacubitril/valsartan induces beneficial reverse cardiac remodeling in eligible HFrEF patients. Given the pivotal role of LVEF in the selection of ICD candidates, we sought to assess the impact of sacubitril/valsartan on ICD eligibility and its predictors in HFrEF patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 48 chronic HFrEF patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan and previously implanted with an ICD in primary prevention. We assumed that ICD was no longer necessary if LVEF improved >35% (or >30% if asymptomatics) at follow-up. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 11 months, sacubitril/valsartan induced a significant drop in LV end-systolic volume (-16.7 ml/m2, p=0.023) and diameter (-6.8 mm, p=0.022), resulting in a significant increase in LVEF (+3.9%, p<0.001). As a consequence, 40% of previously implanted patients resulted no more eligible for ICD at follow-up. NYHA class improved in 50% of the population. A dose-dependent effect was noted, with higher doses associated to more reverse remodeling. Among patients deemed no more eligible for ICD, lower NYHA class (odds ratio (OR) 3.73 [95% CI 1.05; 13.24], p=0.041), better LVEF (OR 1.23 [95% CI 1.01; 1.48], p=0.032) and the treatment with the intermediate or high dose of sacubitril/valsartan (OR 5.60 [1.15; 27.1], p=0.032) were the most important predictors of status change. CONCLUSIONS: In symptomatic HFrEF patients, sacubitril/valsartan induced beneficial cardiac reverse remodeling and improved NYHA class. These effects resulted in a significant reduction of patients deemed eligible for ICD in primary prevention.

Valsartan in early-stage hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a randomized phase 2 trial.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is often caused by pathogenic variants in sarcomeric genes and characterized by left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy, myocardial fibrosis and increased risk of heart failure and arrhythmias. There are no existing therapies to modify disease progression. In this study, we conducted a multi-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of the angiotensin II receptor blocker valsartan in attenuating disease evolution in early HCM. In total, 178 participants with early-stage sarcomeric HCM were randomized (1:1) to receive valsartan (320 mg daily in adults; 80-160 mg daily in children) or placebo for 2 years ( NCT01912534 ). Standardized changes from baseline to year 2 in LV wall thickness, mass and volumes; left atrial volume; tissue Doppler diastolic and systolic velocities; and serum levels of high-sensitivity troponin T and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic protein were integrated into a single composite z-score as the primary outcome. Valsartan (n = 88) improved cardiac structure and function compared to placebo (n = 90), as reflected by an increase in the composite z-score (between-group difference +0.231, 95% confidence interval (+0.098, +0.364); P = 0.001), which met the primary endpoint of the study. Treatment was well-tolerated. These results indicate a key opportunity to attenuate disease progression in early-stage sarcomeric HCM with an accessible and safe medication.

Clinical evidence of initiating a very low dose of sacubitril/valsartan: a prospective observational analysis.

Sacubitril/valsartan is superior to enalapril in reducing the risks of cardiovascular death and preventing hospitalization in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, patients often do not receive sacubitril/valsartan because of concerns about hypotension. We examined the feasibility of initiating sacubitril/valsartan at a very low dose (VLD) in potentially intolerant patients with HFrEF and subsequent dose up-titration, treatment persistence and outcomes. We analyzed 206 patients with HFrEF grouped according to starting sacubitril/valsartan dose. The VLD group (n = 106) commenced 25 mg twice daily, and the standard-dose (SD) group (n = 100) started on ≥ 50 mg twice daily. Baseline systolic blood pressure was 103 ± 12 mmHg vs. 119 ± 14 mmHg in the SD group (P < 0.001). The maximal target dose achievement rate was higher in the SD group (27.0% vs 9.4%, p = 0.001) and the VLD group experienced more dose up-titrations and fewer down-titrations than the SD group. The VLD group had a decrease in N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) similar to the SD group and a similar increase in left ventricular ejection fraction. There were no significant differences in symptomatic hypotension, worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, cardiovascular mortality, and rehospitalization due to HF between the two groups during follow-up period. In patients considered by the treating physician likely to be intolerant of sacubitril/valsartan, initiation with 25 mg twice daily was generally possible and patients remained in therapy, with similar decreases in NT-proBNP and increases in left ventricular ejection fraction to those observed in patients receiving SD sacubitril/valsartan.

Early treatment with combination of SS31 and entresto effectively preserved the heart function in doxorubicin-induced dilated cardiomyopathic rat.

BACKGROUND: This study tested the hypothesis that early administration of SS31 and entresto (En) was superior to either one alone on preserving the heart function in setting of dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) induced by doxorubicin (Dox) [accumulated dosage of 12.5 mg/kg/administered by intraperitoneal (IP) at 4 separated time points within 20 days] in rat. METHODS AND RESULTS: Adult-male SD rats (n = 40) were equally categorized into groups 1 (sham-control), 2 (DCM), 3 (DCM + SS31/0.7 mg/kg/day/IP, since day-14 after DCM induction to day-60), 4 [DCM + En (30 mg/kg/day/orally since day-14 after DCM induction to day-60)] and 5 (DCM + combined SS31-En), and animals were euthanized by day 60. By day 60, left-ventricular ejection-fraction (LVEF) was highest in group 1, lowest in group 2 and significantly higher in group 5 than in groups 3 and 4 (all p < 0.0001), but it showed no difference between groups 3/4. The microscopic study showed that the fibrosis area/cardiomyocyte size and DNA-damaged (γ-H2AX+)/inflammatory (CD14+//CD68+) markers, and flow analysis of inflammatory (Ly6G+/MPO+/CD11b/c+) and early/late apoptosis (AN-V+/PI-//AN-V+/PI+) cells exhibited an opposite pattern of LVEF among the five groups (all p < 0.0001). The protein expressions of inflammatory upstream (TLR2/TLR4/MyD88/Mal/ TRAF6/IKK-α/IKK-ß) and downstream (p-NF-κb/TNF-α/IL-1ß/MMP-9), oxidative-stress/mitochondrial-damaged (NOX-1/NOX-2/cytosolic cytochrome-C/cyclophilin-D/DRP1) and autophagic/apoptotic (ratio of LC3B-II/LC3B-I and mitochondrial-Bax/caspase3/9) signaling pathways also exhibited an opposite pattern of LVEF among the five groups (all p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Combined SS31-En therapy was superior to either one alone on protecting the heart structural and functional integrities against Dox-induced DCM damage.

Blocking angiotensin 2 receptor attenuates diabetic nephropathy via mitigating ANGPTL2/TL4/NF-κB expression.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic nephropathy (DN) is a consequence of diabetes mellitus (DM) and is associated with early changes in renal angiotensin II (ANG II). These changes were evaluated using ANG II blocker valsartan early from week two of diabetes (experiment I, renoprotective) and late from week nine of diabetes (experiment II, renotherapeutic) to the end of both experiments at week twelve. METHODS AND RESULTS: In both experiments, adult male Wister rats were divided into (i) vehicle group; (ii) valsartan received oral 30 mg/Kg/day; (iii) diabetic received single 50 mg/Kg intraperitoneal streptozotocin injection; (iv) renoprotection, diabetic rats received valsartan treated in experiments I and II. DM effects on urine albumin excretion, blood pressure, and renal ANG II were measured. Urinary nephrin, kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), renal angiopoietin-like protein 2 (ANGPTL2), and toll-like receptor 4 (TLR 4) mRNA expression were tested. DM-initiated fibrotic markers integrin, α-smooth muscle actin expression, and collagen IV and apoptotic protein caspase 3 were tested. DM induced early changes starting from week four in the tested variables. At week twelve, in both experiments, valsartan intervention showed a significant reduction in ANG II, ANGPTL2, TLR 4 and integrin expression and improvement in albuminuria, blood pressure, urinary biomarkers, fibrotic and apoptotic markers. CONCLUSIONS: Changes leading to DN starts early in the disease course and ANG II reduction decreased the expression of ANGPTL2 and integrin which preserve the glomerular barrier. Blocking ANG II was able to decrease TLR 4 and inflammatory cytokines leading to decreasing DN.

Synchronized determination of sacubitril and valsartan with some co-administered drugs in human plasma via UPLC-MS/MS method using solid-phase extraction.

An accurate and sensitive UPLC-MS/MS method was developed and validated for the simultaneous estimation of the newly developed combination of sacubitril and valsartan and the co-administered drugs nebivolol, chlorthalidone and esomeprazole in human plasma. Solid-phase extraction was conducted for the purification and extraction of the drugs from human plasma. Chromatographic separation was carried out on an Agilent SB-C18 (1.8 µm, 2.1 × 50 mm) column using losartan as internal standard. Isocratic elution was applied using acetonitrile-0.1% formic acid in water (85: 15, v/v) as mobile phase. Detection was carried out using a triple-quadrupole tandem mass spectrometer using multiple reaction monitoring, at positive mode at m/z 412.23 → 266.19 for sacubitril, m/z 436.29 → 235.19 for valsartan, m/z 405.8 → 150.98 for nebivolol, m/z 346.09 → 198 for esomeprazole and a selected combination of two fragments m/z 423.19 → 207.14 and 423.19 → 192.2 for losartan (internal standard), and in negative ionization mode at m/z 337.02 → 190.12 for chlorthalidone. The method was linear over the concentration ranges 30-2,000 ng/ml for sacubitril, 70-2,000 ng/ml for valsartan, esomeprazole and chlorthalidone and 70-5,000 pg/ml for nebivolol. The developed method is sensitive and selective and could be applied for dose adjustment, bioavailability and drug-drug interaction studies.

Effect of Neprilysin Inhibition on Left Ventricular Remodeling in Patients With Asymptomatic Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction Late After Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction after myocardial infarction are at a high risk of developing heart failure. The addition of neprilysin inhibition to renin angiotensin system inhibition may result in greater attenuation of adverse LV remodeling as a result of increased levels of substrates for neprilysin with vasodilatory, antihypertrophic, antifibrotic, and sympatholytic effects. METHODS: We performed a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-comparator trial comparing sacubitril/valsartan 97/103 mg twice daily with valsartan 160 mg twice daily in patients ≥3 months after myocardial infarction with a LV ejection fraction ≤40% who were taking a renin angiotensin system inhibitor (equivalent dose of ramipril ≥2.5 mg twice daily) and a ß-blocker unless contraindicated or intolerant. Patients in New York Heart Association class ≥II or with signs and symptoms of heart failure were excluded. The primary outcome was change from baseline to 52 weeks in LV end-systolic volume index measured using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Secondary outcomes included other magnetic resonance imaging measurements of LV remodeling, change in NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I, and a patient global assessment of change questionnaire. RESULTS: From July 2018 to June 2019, we randomized 93 patients with the following characteristics: mean age, 60.7±10.4 years; median time from myocardial infarction, 3.6 years (interquartile range, 1.2-7.2); mean LV ejection fraction, 36.8%±7.1%; and median NT-proBNP, 230 pg/mL (interquartile range, 124-404). Sacubitril/valsartan, compared with valsartan, did not significantly reduce LV end-systolic volume index; adjusted between-group difference, -1.9 mL/m2 (95% CI, -4.9 to 1.0); P=0.19. There were no significant between-group differences in NT-proBNP, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I, LV end-diastolic volume index, left atrial volume index, LV ejection fraction, LV mass index, or patient global assessment of change. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with asymptomatic LV systolic dysfunction late after myocardial infarction, treatment with sacubitril/valsartan did not have a significant reverse remodeling effect compared with valsartan. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03552575.

Sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril on exercise capacity in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study.

Sacubitril/valsartan reduces mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) when compared with enalapril. However, it is unknown the effect of both treatments on exercise capacity. We compared sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril in patients with HFrEF based on peak oxygen consumption (VO2) and 6-minute walk test (6-MWT). METHODS: We included 52 participants with HFrEF with a left ventricular ejection fraction <40% to receive either sacubitril/valsartan (target dose of 400 mg daily) or enalapril (target dose of 40 mg daily). Peak VO2 was measured by using cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Six-minute walk test was also performed. RESULTS: At 12 weeks, the sacubitril/valsartan (mean dose 382.6 ± 57.6 mg daily) group had increased peak VO2 of 13.1% (19.35 ± 0.99 to 21.89 ± 1.04 mL/kg/min) and enalapril (mean dose 34.4 ± 9.2 mg daily) 5.6% (18.58 ± 1.19 to 19.62 ± 1.25 mL/kg/min). However, no difference was found between groups (P = .332 interaction). At 24 weeks, peak VO2 increased 13.5% (19.35 ± 0.99 to 21.96 ± 0.98 mL/kg/min) and 12.0% (18.58 ± 1.19 to 20.82 ± 1.18 mL/kg/min) in sacubitril/valsartan (mean dose 400 ± 0 mg daily) and enalapril (mean dose 32.7 ± 11.0 mg daily), respectively. However, no differences were found between groups (P= .332 interaction). At 12 weeks, 6-MWT increased in both groups (sacubitril/valsartan: 459 ± 18 to 488 ± 17 meters [6.3%] and enalapril: 443 ± 22 to 477 ± 21 meters [7.7%]). At 24 weeks, sacubitril/valsartan increased 18.3% from baseline (543 ± 26 meters) and enalapril decreased slightly to 6.8% (473 ± 31 meters), but no differences existed between groups (P= .257 interaction). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan did not substantially improve peak VO2 or 6-MWT after 12 or 24 weeks in participants with HFrEF. (NEPRIExTol-HF Trial, ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03190304).

Sacubitril/valsartan treatment has differential effects in modulating diabetic kidney disease in db/db mice and KKAy mice compared with valsartan treatment.

Although renin-angiotensin blockade has shown beneficial outcomes in patients with diabetes, renal injury progresses in most of these patients. Therefore, there remains a need for new therapeutic targets in diabetic kidney disease. Enhancement of vasoactive peptides, such as natriuretic peptides, via neprilysin inhibition, has been a new approach. A first-in-class drug, sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val), a combination of the angiotensin II receptor blocker Val and neprilysin inhibitor prodrug Sac, has been shown to be more effective than renin-angiotensin blockade alone in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. In this study, we tested the effects of Sac/Val in diabetic kidney disease. We administered Sac/Val or Val to two type 2 diabetes mouse models, db/db mice or KKAy mice. After 3 mo of treatment, Sac/Val attenuated the progression of proteinuria, glomerulosclerosis, and podocyte loss in both models of diabetic mice. Val shared a similar improvement but to a lesser degree in some parameters compared with Sac/Val. Sac/Val but not Val decreased the blood glucose level in KKAy mice. Sac/Val exerted renal protection through coordinated effects on antioxidative stress and anti-inflammation. In both diabetic models, we revealed a new mechanism to cause inflammation, self-DNA-activated cGMP-AMP synthase-stimulator of interferon genes (cGAS-STING) signaling, which was activated in diabetic kidneys and prevented by Sac/Val or Val treatment. The present data suggest that Sac/Val has sufficient therapeutical potential to counter the pathophysiological effects of diabetic kidney disease, and its effectiveness could be better than Val alone.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The first-in-class drug sacubitril/valsartan, a combination of the angiotensin II receptor blocker valsartan and neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril, was tested for its effects in diabetic kidney disease using db/db mice and KKAy mice. We found that Sac/Val has sufficient therapeutical potential to counter the pathophysiological effects of diabetic kidney disease. We further revealed a new mechanism to cause inflammation, self-DNA-activated cGAS-STING signaling, which was activated in diabetic kidneys and prevented by sacubitril/valsartan or valsartan treatment.

Renal protective effect of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure.

Sacubitril/valsartan is a combined neprilysin inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker designed for treatment of heart failure (HF). Nonetheless, its renal protective effect remained an issue of debate. This retrospective cohort study investigated the renal protective effect of sacubitril/valsartan in HF patients. HF patients on sacubitril/valsartan or valsartan for > 30 days were matched for gender, age, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) to be enrolled into analysis. The follow-up period was 18 months. The outcomes included end eGFR, renal function decline defined as 20% reduction of eGFR, mortality, and HF-related hospitalization. Each group had 137 patients after matching. The mean age was 72.7 years and 65.7% were male. Mean eGFR was 70.9 mL/min/1.73 m2 and LVEF was 54.0% at baseline. Overall, the eGFR of sacubitril/valsartan groups was significantly higher than valsartan group at the end (P < 0.01). Subgroup analysis showed that the difference in eGFR was significant in subgroups with LVEF ≥ 40% or eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Multivariate Cox regression model showed that sacubitril/valsartan group had significantly reduced risk for renal function decline (hazard ratio: 0.5, 95% confidence interval: 0.3-0.9). Kaplan-Meier curve showed no difference in the risk for cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality or HF-related hospitalization. We showed renal protective effect of neprilysin inhibition in HF patients and specified that subgroups with LVEF ≥ 40% or eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 were sensitive to this effect, suggesting an optimal subgroup of this treatment.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Insights From PARADIGM-HF.

Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common comorbidity in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, associated with undertreatment and worse outcomes. New treatments for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction may be particularly important in patients with concomitant COPD. Methods and Results We examined outcomes in 8399 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, according to COPD status, in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Blocker-Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) trial. Cox regression models were used to compare COPD versus non-COPD subgroups and the effects of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril. Patients with COPD (n=1080, 12.9%) were older than patients without COPD (mean 67 versus 63 years; P<0.001), with similar left ventricular ejection fraction (29.9% versus 29.4%), but higher NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; median, 1741 pg/mL versus 1591 pg/mL; P=0.01), worse functional class (New York Heart Association III/IV 37% versus 23%; P<0.001) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Score (73 versus 81; P<0.001), and more congestion and comorbidity. Medical therapy was similar in patients with and without COPD except for beta-blockade (87% versus 94%; P<0.001) and diuretics (85% versus 80%; P<0.001). After multivariable adjustment, COPD was associated with higher risks of heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR], 1.32; 95% CI, 1.13-1.54), and the composite of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.34), but not cardiovascular death (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.94-1.30), or all-cause mortality (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.99-1.31). COPD was also associated with higher risk of all cardiovascular hospitalization (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.05-1.31) and noncardiovascular hospitalization (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.29-1.64). The benefit of sacubitril/valsartan over enalapril was consistent in patients with and without COPD for all end points. Conclusions In PARADIGM-HF, COPD was associated with lower use of beta-blockers and worse health status and was an independent predictor of cardiovascular and noncardiovascular hospitalization. Sacubitril/valsartan was beneficial in this high-risk subgroup. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01035255.

Evaluation of Drug Dissolution Rate in Co-amorphous and Co-crystal Binary Drug Delivery Systems by Thermodynamic and Kinetic Methods.

In order to better explain and predict the dissolution characteristics of binary drug delivery systems (BDDSs), the dissolution behaviors of co-crystal (CC) and co-amorphous (CA) systems of sacubitril (SCB) and valsartan (VST) were evaluated in vitro and in vivo by thermodynamic and kinetic methods. The CCs of SCB and VST were prepared into a CA state through rotary evaporation. Solid-state properties were systematically evaluated. Herein, based on the results from previous studies of single-phase systems, we used thermodynamic methods to evaluate the increase in drug dissolution rate after BDDSs change from the crystalline to the amorphous state. After comparing the predicted and measured dissolution rate enhancement of the CC and CA systems, this paper attempts to explain the dissolution rate characteristics of the BDDSs. We then evaluated the bioavailability of two BDDSs in beagle dogs to confirm that there was no discrepancy in vivo with the results obtained in vitro. The results exhibited that there is strong intermolecular interaction between SCB and VST and good physical stability for the CA system. Compared with the CC, the bioavailability of SCB and VST in the CA system increased by 313.9% and 130.5%, respectively. The predicted dissolution rate ratio between CC and CA systems and their actual intrinsic dissolution rates differed by only a factor of 2.5, demonstrating the good correlation between the predicted and measured values. In the future, this method could be expanded to a variety of new samples and exciting drug prospects.

Scientific hypothesis and rational pharmacological for the use of sacubitril/valsartan in cardiac damage caused by COVID-19.

On March 11, 2020 the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the state of global pandemic caused by the new SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19). To date, no antivirals directed against SARS-CoV-2 or effective vaccines to combat the viral infection are available. Severe acute respiratory syndrome caused by SARS-CoV-2 is treated empirically with antivirals, anti-inflammatory, anticoagulants. The approval of an effective vaccine still takes time. In this state, it may be useful to find new therapeutic solutions from drugs already on the market. Recent hypotheses suggest that the use of AT-1 receptor antagonists (ARB) in combination with neprilisin inhibitors (NEPi) could indirectly provide clinical benefits to patients with SARS-CoV-2 and cardiac involvement. In this article we investigate and describe a possible innovative pharmacological approach for the treatment of the most severe stages of COVID-19 infection.

Determinants of maximal dose titration of sacubitril/valsartan in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Little information is available about the tolerability of uptitration to the maximal dose of sacubitril/valsartan and the predictors and clinical correlates of achieving such a dose. METHODS: All consecutive heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who received sacubitril/valsartan for a class-IB indication in a tertiary heart failure clinic were retrospectively analysed. Predictors of maximal uptitration including associated changes in clinical parameters were assessed in patients with at least 1 follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 401 HFrEF-patients received sacubitril/valsartan. Uptitration was possible in 41% and up to 32% of patients tolerated the maximal dose of sacubitril/valsartan. Younger age (HR = 0.862; CI = 0.751-0.989), higher systolic-blood-pressure (HR = 1.077; CI = 1.014-1.137), lower serum creatinine (HR = 0.064; CI = 0.005-0.822), and higher previous dose of renin-angiotensin-system-inhibitors (RASi [HR = 1.065; CI = 1.016-1.115]) independently predicted a higher odds of tolerating a maximal dose of sacubitril/valsartan. Patients who were seen more frequently in a structured heart failure clinic were also more likely to receive a maximal dose (p = .038). Patient assigned to the maximal dose, were more often able to reduce their loop diuretic dose (p = .001) and more often had an increase in serum creatinine (p = .011), without a higher risk for hyperkalemia (p = .524). An improvement in New York Heart Association class and the rate of heart failure hospitalisations was observed in all patients, independent of the sacubitril/valsartan dose. CONCLUSION: Uptitration to the maximal dose of sacubitril/valsartan is possible in up to 32% of real-world HFrEF-patients in our cohort, which relates to both patient characteristics' as well as heart failure care-related factors.

Relative Efficacy of Sacubitril-Valsartan, Vericiguat, and SGLT2 Inhibitors in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sacubitril/valsartan, vericiguat, and the sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) dapagliflozin and empagliflozin proved effective in phase 3 trials on heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS: We compared the treatment arms (sacubitril/valsartan, vericiguat, and SGLT2i) with the respective control arms (standard-of-care [SOC]) through a network meta-analysis of the phase 3 trials (PARADIGM-HF, VICTORIA, DAPA-HF, EMPEROR-Reduced), a phase 2 trial on vericiguat and the HFrEF subgroup of DECLARE-TIMI 58. RESULTS: There was a trend towards decreased risk of cardiovascular (CV) death or HF hospitalization with SGLT2i than sacubitril/valsartan (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.05) and vericiguat (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.94). A non-significant effect of SGLT2i on CV mortality compared to sacubitril/valsartan (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.24) and vericiguat (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.22) was found. SGLT2i demonstrated the greatest effect on HF hospitalization (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.77) over the SOC, as well as a significant benefit over vericiguat (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.89), but not over sacubitril/valsartan (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.02). SGLT2i were ranked as the most effective therapy, followed by sacubitril/valsartan and vericiguat. CONCLUSIONS: Based on an indirect comparison, SGLT2i therapy is not associated with a significantly lower risk of CV death or HF hospitalization or CV death alone compared to sacubitril/valsartan or vericiguat. The risk of HF hospitalization does not differ significantly between patients on SGLT2i or sacubitril/valsartan, while dapagliflozin is superior to vericiguat. REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO ID 186351.

Effects of sacubitril/valsartan on ventricular remodeling in patents with left ventricular systolic dysfunction following acute anterior wall myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of sacubitril/valsartan (Sal/Val) on left ventricular (LV) remodeling in patients with LV systolic dysfunction following acute anterior wall myocardial infarction (AAMI). METHODS: AAMI patients with LV systolic dysfunction were enrolled in this study. All patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. After hemodynamic stabilization, patients were randomly assigned either to group T (Sal/Val treatment) or group C (enalapril treatment). Changes in echocardiographic parameters and plasma biochemical markers were used to evaluate the effects of Sal/Val on LV remodeling and cardiac function. The incidence of major cardiac adverse events (MACEs) and adverse reactions during follow-ups was also recorded. RESULTS: In total, 137 eligible patients were prospectively included. Compared to group C, LV ejection fraction significantly improved (P < 0.05), while the LV end-systolic volume index and wall motion score index showed a tendency to decrease in group T. There was no difference in the LV end-diastolic volume index between groups. During follow-ups, the plasma N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and soluble suppression of tumorigenesis-2 levels in both groups decreased (all P < 0.05), and the change was more prominent in group T. Additionally, drug-related adverse effects were similar between the two groups (P > 0.05); however, the incidence of MACEs was lower in group T than in group C (39.71% vs. 53.62%, P = 0.103), although the difference was insignificant. CONCLUSION: Sac/Val attenuated LV remodeling and dysfunction and was safe and effective in LV systolic dysfunction patients post AAMI.