Effects of sacubitril/valsartan on both metabolic parameters and insulin resistance in prediabetic non-obese patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.

Background: The effects of sacubitril/valsartan (sac/val) on metabolic parameters and insulin resistance (IR) in non-obese/prediabetic patients have not been previously described. Aim: To evaluate the effects of sac/val on glycemic and metabolic parameters, Homeostatic Model Assessment of IR (HOMA-IR), and echocardiographic parameters in prediabetic patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods: Fifty-nine patients with HFrEF (EF < 35%) but without obesity and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus have been enrolled. All the patients at baseline and week 24 underwent complete anthropometrical evaluation and were subjected to an echocardiogram test. IR has been assessed by HOMA-IR. Results: After 24-week of treatment with sac/val, a significant reduction in fasting plasma glucose (109 ± 9 vs 103 ± 8 mg/dl, p < 0.0001), fasting plasma insulin (16 ± 4 vs 10 ± 4 UI/L), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) value (6% ± 0.5% vs 5.3% ± 0.3%, p < 0.0001) was observed. Similarly, we observed a significant improvement in IR (HOMA-IR, 4.4 ± 0.9 vs 2.5 ± 0.6, p < 0.0001). The echocardiogram evaluation showed a significant reduction of the left ventricular end-diastolic volume (168 ± 24 vs 158 ± 22 ml, p < 0.05), a significant reduction of the left ventricular end-systolic volume (111 ± 26 vs 98 ± 22 ml, p < 0.005), and a significant reduction of E/e' ratio. Sac/val use was also associated with an average 5.1% increase in ejection fraction. Conclusions: Our data seem to indicate that sal/val enhances metabolic control and improves insulin resistance also in prediabetic non-obese patients with HFrEF.

External applicability of the ISCHEMIA trial: an analysis of a prospective, nationwide registry of patients with stable coronary artery disease.

AIMS: We sought to assess the proportion of patients eligible for the ISCHEMIA trial and to compare the characteristics and outcomes of these patients with those without ISCHEMIA inclusion or with ISCHEMIA exclusion criteria in a contemporary, nationwide cohort of patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Among the 5,070 consecutive patients enrolled in the START registry, 4,295 (84.7%) did not fulfil the inclusion criteria (ISCHEMIA-Not Included or ISCHEMIA-Unclassifiable), 582 (11.5%) had exclusion criteria (ISCHEMIA-Excluded), and the remaining 193 (3.8%) were classified as ISCHEMIA-Like. At one year, the incidence of the primary outcome, a composite of death from cardiovascular (CV) causes, myocardial infarction (MI), or hospitalisation for unstable angina and heart failure, was 0.5% in the ISCHEMIA-Like versus 3.3% in other patients (p=0.03). The composite secondary outcome of CV mortality and MI occurred in 0.5% of the ISCHEMIA-Like patients and in 1.4% of the remaining patients (p=0.1). CONCLUSIONS: In a contemporary real-world cohort of stable CAD patients, only 4% resulted in being eligible for the ISCHEMIA trial. These patients presented an extremely low annual risk of adverse events, especially when compared with other groups of stable CAD patients.