Effects of the valsartan recall on heart failure patients: A nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: Valsartan is commonly used for cardiac conditions. In 2018, the Food and Drug Administration recalled generic valsartan due to the detection of impurities. Our objective was to determine if heart failure patients receiving valsartan at the recall date had a greater likelihood of unfavorable outcomes than patients using comparable antihypertensives. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Datamart (July 2017-January 2019). Heart failure patients with commercial or Medicare Advantage insurance who received valsartan were compared to persons who received non-recalled angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin converting enzyme-inhibitors (ACE-Is) for 1 year prior and including the recall date. Outcomes included a composite for all-cause hospitalization, emergency department (ED), and urgent care (UC) use and a measure of cardiac events which included hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction and hospitalizations/ED/UC visits for stroke/transient ischemic attack, heart failure or hypertension at 6-months post-recall. Cox proportional hazard models with propensity score weighting compared the risk of outcomes between groups. RESULTS: Of the 87 130 adherent patients, 15% were valsartan users and 85% were users of non-recalled ARBs/ACE-Is. Valsartan use was not associated with an increased risk of all-cause hospitalization/ED/UC use six-months post-recall (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.96-1.03), compared with individuals taking non-recalled ARBs/ACE-Is. Similarly, cardiac events 6-months post-recall did not differ between individuals on valsartan and non-recalled ARBs/ACE-Is (HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.97-1.12). CONCLUSIONS: The valsartan recall did not affect short-term outcomes of heart failure patients. However, the recall potentially disrupted the medication regimens of patients, possibly straining the healthcare system.

Systematic review: Clinical phenotypes, histopathological features and prognosis of enteropathy due to angiotensin II receptor blockers.

BACKGROUND: Although enteropathy due to angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) has been known for over 10 years, clinicians' awareness of this condition is still low. AIMS: To systematically review the literature about clinical phenotypes, distribution of mucosal changes throughout the gastrointestinal tract and prognosis of enteropathy due to ARBs. METHODS: According to PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed and Embase for relevant articles up to November 6, 2023. We included full-text papers, letters, case reports and case series describing enteropathy due to ARBs. Patients were classified into subgroups based on endoscopic and histological findings of different regions of the gastrointestinal tract. The protocol was registered with Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/TK67C). RESULTS: We included 94 articles reporting 183 cases (101 female, mean age at diagnosis 69 ± 10 years). The clinical picture at diagnosis was characterised by severe diarrhoea (97%) and weight loss (84%, median -13 kg), leading to hospital admission in 167 (95%) patients. Olmesartan (90%) was most frequently implicated. Villous atrophy (VA) was reported in 164/183 (89%) patients. One hundred and nine had only VA, 12 had pan-gastrointestinal involvement, 23 had VA and gastric involvement and 19 had VA and colon involvement (predominantly microscopic colitis). Outcomes were reported for 178/183 (97%) patients, who all recovered clinically on ARBs withdrawal. Histological recovery occurred in all 96 patients with VA at baseline who underwent follow-up duodenal biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Enteropathy due to ARBs is characterised by severe malabsorption often requiring hospital admission and can involve the entire gastrointestinal tract. Clinician awareness can lead to prompt diagnosis and excellent prognosis.

Different Doses of Sacubitril/Valsartan Compared with Olmesartan in Patients with Essential Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Since sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) has neprilysin inhibition and angiotensin receptor-blocking properties, it is anticipated to have strong antihypertensive effects. However, there is not enough evidence to compare the safety and efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan to those of olmesartan in patients with hypertension. AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan versus olmesartan in patients with hypertension. METHODS: This study follows the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for relevant clinical trials. We extracted outcome endpoints regarding mean ambulatory systolic/diastolic blood pressure (maSBP/maDBP), mean sitting systolic/diastolic blood pressure (msSBP/msDBP), mean ambulatory/mean sitting pulse pressure (maPP/msPP), the proportion of patients achieving blood pressure control (< 140/90 mmHg), and adverse events. We used Review Manager Software for the conduction of the analysis of this study. The effect estimates of the studies were pooled as Mean difference or risk ratio and 95% confidence interval. We also conducted a subgroup analysis based on the dose of sacubitril/valsartan. RESULTS: A total of six clinical trials were included. The studies showed an overall low risk of bias. The pooled effect estimate revealed that sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduces maSBP, maDBP, maPP, msSBP, and msDBP measurements compared with olmesartan (p < 0.001). A significantly higher portion of patients achieved blood pressure control in the sacubitril/valsartan group (p < 0.001). The test of subgroup difference showed that 400 mg dose is significantly more effective than 200 mg dose in reducing maSBP. Regarding the safety profile, olmesartan was associated with more side effects due to drug discontinuation and more serious side effects. CONCLUSION: Sacubitril/valsartan or LCZ696 is more effective and safer than olmesartan for controlling blood pressure in patients with hypertension.

Research Progress in Pharmacological Mechanisms, Structure-Activity Relationship and Synthesis of Sartans.

The sartans are a new class of antihypertensive drugs as angiotensin II receptor blockers which possess plenty of advantages in treating hypertension and related pathologies. This review describes the clinical treatment, side effects, and potential therapeutic effects of sartans from 1995 to date. The synthesis, structural-activity and molecular docking with Angiotensin Type 1 receptor of imidazole derivatives, benzimidazole derivatives and other compounds are also described. With a clear Structure-Activity Relationship and abundant pharmacological effects, some types of novel Angiotensin Type 1 receptor antagonists are emerging gradually for further research in the meantime.

Effectiveness of losartan on infrapatellar fat pad/synovial fibrosis and pain behavior in the monoiodoacetate-induced rat model of osteoarthritis pain.

Infrapatellar fat pad (IFP)/ synovial fibrosis is closely associated with the clinical symptoms of joint pain and stiffness, which contribute to locomotor restriction in osteoarthritis (OA) patients. Hence, this study was designed to gain insight on whether losartan, a selective angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R) antagonist, has therapeutic benefit to reverse IFP/synovial fibrosis and secondarily to attenuate pain behavior. In male Wistar rats with monoiodoacetic acid (MIA)-induced IFP/synovial fibrosis, a possible role for increased AT1R expression in the pathogenesis of IFP/synovial fibrosis was assessed over an 8-week period. Pain behavior comprised static weight bearing and von Frey paw withdrawal thresholds (PWTs), which were assessed once or twice weekly, respectively. Groups of MIA-rats received oral losartan (30-mg/kg; n = 8 or 100-mg/kg; n = 9) or vehicle (n = 9) for 28-days according to a prevention protocol. Animals were euthanized on day 28 and various tissues (IFP/synovium, cartilage and lumbar dorsal root ganglia (DRGs)) were collected for histological, immunohistochemical and western blot analyses. Administration of once-daily losartan for 28-days dose-dependently attenuated the development of static weight bearing. This was accompanied by reduced IFP/synovial fibrosis and suppression of TGF-ß1 expression. Chronic treatment of MIA-rats with losartan had an anti-fibrotic effect and it attenuated pain behavior in this animal model.

Effect of Telmisartan on Walking Performance in Patients With Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: The TELEX Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with lower extremity peripheral artery disease (PAD) have reduced lower extremity perfusion, impaired lower extremity skeletal muscle function, and poor walking performance. Telmisartan (an angiotensin receptor blocker) has properties that reverse these abnormalities. Objective: To determine whether telmisartan improves 6-minute walk distance, compared with placebo, in patients with lower extremity PAD at 6-month follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: Double-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted at 2 US sites and involving 114 participants. Enrollment occurred between December 28, 2015, and November 9, 2021. Final follow-up occurred on May 6, 2022. Interventions: The trial randomized patients using a 2 × 2 factorial design to compare the effects of telmisartan plus supervised exercise vs telmisartan alone and supervised exercise alone and to compare telmisartan alone vs placebo. Participants with PAD were randomized to 1 of 4 groups: telmisartan plus exercise (n = 30), telmisartan plus attention control (n = 29), placebo plus exercise (n = 28), or placebo plus attention control (n = 27) for 6 months. The originally planned sample size was 240 participants. Due to slower than anticipated enrollment, the primary comparison was changed to the 2 combined telmisartan groups vs the 2 combined placebo groups and the target sample size was changed to 112 participants. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the 6-month change in 6-minute walk distance (minimum clinically important difference, 8-20 m). The secondary outcomes were maximal treadmill walking distance; Walking Impairment Questionnaire scores for distance, speed, and stair climbing; and the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey physical functioning score. The results were adjusted for study site, baseline 6-minute walk distance, randomization to exercise vs attention control, sex, and history of heart failure at baseline. Results: Of the 114 randomized patients (mean age, 67.3 [SD, 9.9] years; 46 were women [40.4%]; and 81 were Black individuals [71.1%]), 105 (92%) completed 6-month follow-up. At 6-month follow-up, telmisartan did not significantly improve 6-minute walk distance (from a mean of 341.6 m to 343.0 m; within-group change: 1.32 m) compared with placebo (from a mean of 352.3 m to 364.8 m; within-group change: 12.5 m) and the adjusted between-group difference was -16.8 m (95% CI, -35.9 m to 2.2 m; P = .08). Compared with placebo, telmisartan did not significantly improve any of the 5 secondary outcomes. The most common serious adverse event was hospitalization for PAD (ie, lower extremity revascularization, amputation, or gangrene). Three participants (5.1%) in the telmisartan group and 2 participants (3.6%) in the placebo group were hospitalized for PAD. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with PAD, telmisartan did not improve 6-minute walk distance at 6-month follow-up compared with placebo. These results do not support telmisartan for improving walking performance in patients with PAD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02593110.

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in the treatment of middle-aged and elderly patients with hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: With the increase of hypertensive patients worldwide, the need for better antihypertensive drugs to achieve blood pressure standards and reduce complications is of great clinical significance. As an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, sacubitril/valsartan has been widely used in the treatment of heart failure, but its efficacy and safety in the treatment of middle-aged and elderly hypertensive patients are still controversial. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan and other antihypertensive drugs in the treatment of middle-aged and elderly patients with hypertension. METHODS: The databases of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched from their establishment to February 2022 to collect the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of sacubitril/valsartan and other antihypertensive drugs in the treatment of middle-aged and elderly hypertensive patients. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to assess risk of bias for included studies, and the meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3. RESULTS: In all, 7 studies which met the criteria were included, with a total sample size of 3,323 patients, including 1,899 patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan, and 1,424 patients treated with angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs). The meta-analysis showed that compared with other antihypertensive drugs, sacubitril/valsartan can significantly reduce mean reductions in sitting systolic blood pressure [mean difference (MD) =-4.70, 95% confidence interval (CI): -5.79 to -3.61, P<0.001], mean reductions in sitting diastolic blood pressure (MD =-2.29, 95% CI: -2.53 to -2.04, P<0.001), 24-hour mean reductions in ambulatory systolic blood pressure (MD =-3.36, 95% CI: -4.08 to -2.64, P<0.001), and 24-hour mean reductions in ambulatory diastolic blood pressure (MD =-1.49, 95% CI: -1.99 to -0.99, P<0.001), while there was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events [odds ratio (OR) =1.14, 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.31, P=0.06], serious adverse events (OR =1.06, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.76, P=0.81), and discontinuations due to adverse events (OR =0.86, 95% CI: 0.51 to 1.46, P=0.58). DISCUSSION: Compared with other antihypertensive drugs, sacubitril/valsartan may be more effective in lowering blood pressure, and its safety may be comparable to that of ARBs. However, these results have to be confirmed by future RCTs with larger sample sizes and higher quality, and the long-term benefits of sacubitril/valsartan require further observation.

Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and manufacturing contamination: A retrospective National Register Study into suspected associated adverse drug reactions.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to determine if any suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) observed with the use of angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) could be linked to either (a) their unique respective physicochemical and pharmacological profiles and (b) the recently disclosed suspected carcinogenic manufacturing contaminants found in certain sartan drug class batches. METHODS: The pharmacology profiles of ARBs were data-mined from the Chemical Database of bioactive molecules with drug-like properties, European Molecular Biology Laboratory (ChEMBL). Suspected ADR data (from 01/2016-10/2022, inclusive) and prescribing rates of ARBs over a 5-year prescribing window (from 09/2016 to 08/2021, inclusive) were obtained via analysis of the United Kingdom Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Authority (MHRA) Yellow Card drug analysis profile and Open prescribing databases, respectively. RESULTS: The overall suspected ADRs and fatalities per 100 000 prescriptions identified across the ARBs studied were found to be different between the sartan drug class members (chi-squared test, P < .05). There is a greater relative rate of reports for valsartan across all investigated organ classes of ADRs, than other ARBs, despite valsartan's more limited pharmacological profile and similar physicochemical properties to other sartans. The disparity in ADR reporting rates with valsartan vs other ARBs could be due to the dissimilarity in formulation excipients, patient factors and publicity surrounding batch contaminations, amongst others. Cancer-related ADRs and fatalities per 100 000 prescriptions identified across the ARBs studied are not statistically significant (chi-squared test, P > .05) based on the datasets used over the 5-year period. CONCLUSION: No connection between ARB pharmacology and their suspected ADRs could be found. No conclusion between sartan batch contaminations and increased suspected cancer-related ADRs was found.

[Orolingual Angioedema after Recombinant Tissue Plasminogen Activator Treatment in Acute Cardiogenic Cerebral Embolism Patient Using Olmesartan: A Case Report].

Recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA), which is used to treat acute cerebral infarction, may cause angioedema immediately after administration particularly in patients who are taking angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. On the other hand, unlike ACE inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) do not act directly on bradykinin, and are therefore considered an alternative to ACE inhibitors in patients with bradykinin-related side effects. We report a case of orolingual angioedema in an 82-year-old male patient who is taking ARB, which occurred after rt-PA administration for acute cerebral infarction. The patient, who has been on medications for hypertension including ARB (olmesartan 40 mg/day) and for hyperuricemia, was transported to our hospital with the chief complaint of right conjugate deviation of the eyes and left hemiplegia. Head magnetic resonance imaging revealed cerebral infarction in the right mesencephalic artery area including the insular cortex. He was diagnosed with cardiogenic cerebral embolism, and rt-PA administration was started 4 h after onset. The patient developed eyelid edema 2.5 h after the start of administration, and orolingual angioedema and breathing difficulty 15.5 h after. The patient was treated with methylprednisolone, d-chlorpheniramine maleate, and famotidine, and the symptoms improved gradually in 1.5 h. We should pay attention to the occurrence of orolingual angioedema not only at the beginning of rt-PA administration but also for a long time thereafter when it is used in patients taking ARBs.

Renin Angiotensin Blockers and Cardiac Protection: From Basis to Clinical Trials.

Despite a similar beneficial effect on blood pressure lowering observed with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R) blocker (ARBs), several clinical trials and meta-analyses have reported higher cardiovascular mortality and lower protection against myocardial infarction with ARBs when compared with ACEIs. The European guidelines for the management of coronary syndromes and European guidelines on diabetes recommend using ARBs in patients who are intolerant to ACEIs. We reviewed the main pharmacological differences between ACEIs and ARBs, which could provide insights into the differences in the cardiac protection offered by these 2 drug classes. The effect of ACEIs on the tissue and plasma levels of bradykinin and on nitric oxide production and bioavailability is specific to the mechanism of action of ACEIs; it could account for the different effects of ACEIs and ARBs on endothelial function, atherogenesis, and fibrinolysis. Moreover, chronic blockade of AT1 receptors by ARBs induces a significant and permanent increase in plasma angiotensin II and an overstimulation of its still available receptors. In animal models, AT4 receptors have vasoconstrictive, proliferative, and inflammatory effects. Moreover, in models with kidney damage, atherosclerosis, and/or senescence, activation of AT2 receptors could have deleterious fibrotic, vasoconstrictive, and hypertrophic effects and seems prudent and reasonable to reserve the use of ARBs for patients who have presented intolerance to ACE inhibitors.

Covid-19-Induced Dysautonomia: A Menace of Sympathetic Storm.

Among the plethora of debilitating neurological disorders of COVID-19 syndrome in survivors, the scope of SARS-CoV-2-induced dysautonomia (DNS) is yet to be understood, though the implications are enormous. Herein, we present an inclusive mini-review of SARS-CoV-2-induced DNS and its associated complications. Although, the direct link between Covid-19 and DSN is still speculative, the hypothetical links are thought to be either a direct neuronal injury of the autonomic pathway or a para/post-infectious immune-induced mechanism. SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced stress may activate the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) leading to neuro-hormonal stimulation and activation of pro-inflammatory cytokines with further development of sympathetic storm. Sympathetic over-activation in Covid-19 is correlated with increase in capillary pulmonary leakage, alveolar damage, and development of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Furthermore, SARS-CoV-2 can spread through pulmonary mechanoreceptors and chemoreceptors to medullary respiratory center in a retrograde manner resulting in sudden respiratory failure. Taken together, DSN in Covid-19 is developed due to sympathetic storm and inhibition of Parasympathetic nervous system-mediated anti-inflammatory effect with development of cytokine storm. Therefore, sympathetic and cytokine storms together with activation of Renin-Angiotensin-System are the chief final pathway involved in the development of DSN in Covid-19.

Mujer de 70 años con diarrea crónica / 70-year-old woman with chronic diarrhea

Presentamos el caso de una paciente mujer de 70 años hipertensa en tratamiento con olmesartán desde hace un año, sin otros antecedentes personales de interés. Ingreso a cargo del servicio de Medicina Interna por cuadro constitucional a estudio consistente en la pérdida confirmada de peso de 13 kg, diarrea crónica, pérdida de apetito, astenia y dolor abdominal tipo cólico intermitente. Tras un primer despistaje en busca de proceso neoplásico, se pensó en otras posibles opciones (AU)

We present the clinical case of a seventy-year-old female patient with hypertension in treatment with olmesartan since one year ago and no other past medical history of interest. She was hospitalized in the internal medicine department in order to study constitutional symptoms which consisted of confirmed weight loss of 13 kg, chronic diarrhea, loss of appetite, asthenia, and intermittent colic-like abdominal pain. After an initial screening for neoplastic disease, other possible options were considered (AU)

Clinical Effectiveness of Sacubitril/Valsartan Among Patients Hospitalized for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

Background Sacubitril/Valsartan has been highly efficacious in randomized trials of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, the effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan in older patients hospitalized for HFrEF in real-world US practice is unclear. Methods and Results This study included Medicare beneficiaries age ≥65 years who were hospitalized for HFrEF ≤40% in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry between October 2015 and December 2018, and eligible for sacubitril/valsartan. Associations between discharge prescription of sacubitril/valsartan and clinical outcomes were assessed after inverse probability of treatment weighting and adjustment for other HFrEF medications. Overall, 1551 (10.9%) patients were discharged on sacubitril/valsartan. Of those not prescribed sacubitril/valsartan, 7857 (62.0%) were prescribed an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker. Over 12-month follow-up, compared with a discharge prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker, sacubitril/valsartan was independently associated with lower all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.94; P=0.004) but not all-cause hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.89-1.07; P=0.55) or heart failure hospitalization (adjusted HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.91-1.18; P=0.59). Patients prescribed sacubitril/valsartan versus those without a prescription had lower risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60-0.79; P<0.001), all-cause hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82-0.98; P=0.02), but not heart failure hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.82-1.08; P=0.40). Conclusions Among patients hospitalized for HFrEF, prescription of sacubitril/valsartan at discharge was independently associated with reduced postdischarge mortality compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker, and reduced mortality and all-cause hospitalization compared with no sacubitril/valsartan. These findings support the use of sacubitril/valsartan to improve postdischarge outcomes among older patients hospitalized for HFrEF in routine US clinical practice.

Real-world experience of angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) usage in Thailand: a single-center, retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has been revolutionized by angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI). ARNI has been shown to significantly reduce morbidity and mortality in a large, randomized controlled trial. However, real-world evaluation of ARNI with a diverse population is still limited. METHODS: HFrEF patients receiving angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) or standard HF treatment at a university hospital in Thailand were prospectively followed-up from January 2015 to December 2019. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalization. Survival analysis and the Cox proportional hazard model were used to compare clinical outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS: During a follow-up period of 12 months, the primary outcome occurred in 10 patients in the ARNI group (11.5%) and 28 in the standard treatment group (28.0%) (hazard ratio 0.34; 95% CI: 0.15-0.80; p = 0.013). After adjustment for confounding factors, ARNI was significantly associated with a significant reduction in the primary outcome (HR 0.32, 95% CI: 0.13-0.82, p = 0.017). In addition, ARNI was also significantly associated with a decrease in the clinical signs and symptoms of HF, including dyspnea, orthopnea, and fatigue. Orthostatic hypotension was more frequently reported among the ARNI group than among the standard treatment group. The rates of target dose achievement were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In real-world practice, ARNI use was associated with a significant reduction in both clinical outcomes and symptom improvement, while orthostatic hypotension was more common in patients in the ARNI group than in patients in the standard treatment group.

Safety and Efficacy of the Combination of Sacubitril/Valsartan and SGLT2i in HFrEF Patients (SECSI Registry).

ABSTRACT: Recent studies have proven benefit of SGLT2i drugs in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but their safety when combined with angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) has not been established. The Safety and Efficacy of the Combination of Sacubitril/Valsartan and SGLT2i in HFrEF Patients registry was conducted to address this issue. SECSI registry is a consecutive, observational, retrospective, multicentre study conducted in 3 Heart Failure Units in Spain. It included 144 HFrEF patients who were treated with ARNI and iSGLT2. Data were collected at baseline, month 2, and month 6. The primary endpoint was the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), after the initiation of ARNI and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). Secondary endpoints included potassium levels and functional class (New York Heart Association class). There were 3 prespecified subgroup analyses: Elderly patients (≥70 years), patients with chronic kidney disease (KDIGO classification G3), and the sequence of drug initiation. Mean age was 69.9 ± 10.1 years, and 110 (76.4%) were men. Left ventricular ejection fraction was 32 ± 7.8%, and most patients were symptomatic [123 (87.2%) New York Heart Association II/III/IV]. eGFR decreased at month 2 and this trend was maintained at month 6 [eGFR baseline 68.5 ± 17.3, month 2 62 ± 19.7 and month 6 64.7 ± 8.6 mL/min/1.73 m2 (P < 0.01 for both)]. In prespecified analysis, elder patients and those who simultaneously initiate both treatments showed the steeper decrease in eGFR. To conclude, co-administration of SGLT2i and ARNI in routine care in HFrEF patients produced a slight decrease in eGFR at 6 months of follow-up. This decrease was especially significant in elder patients and those who initiate both drugs simultaneously.