Sacubitril/valsartan in real-life European patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Epidemiology and risk factors for hyperkalaemia in heart failure

Patients with heart failure (HF), particularly those with impaired renal function receiving renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASis), are at risk of hyperkalaemia; when hyperkalaemia is severe, this can have serious clinical consequences. The incidence, prevalence, and risk factors for hyperkalaemia reported in randomized trials of RAASis may not reflect clinical practice due to exclusion of patients with elevated serum potassium (sK+ ) or severe renal impairment: information on patients managed in routine clinical care is important to understanding the actual burden of hyperkalaemia. This paper reviews the available clinical epidemiology data on hyperkalaemia in HF and considers areas requiring further research. Observational studies published since 2017 that focused on hyperkalaemia, included patients with HF, and had ≥1000 participants were considered. Hyperkalaemia occurrence in HF varied widely from 7% to 39% depending on the setting, HF severity, follow-up length, and concomitant medications. Rates were lowest in patients with newly diagnosed HF and highest in patients with greater disease severity; comorbidities, such as chronic kidney disease and diabetes, and RAASi use, reflected commonly identified risk factors for hyperkalaemia in patients with HF. Hyperkalaemia was most often mild; however, from the limited data available, persistence of mild hyperkalaemia was associated with an increased risk of mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events. There were also limited data available on the progression of hyperkalaemia. Recurrence was common, occurring in one-quarter to two-fifths of hyperkalaemia cases. Despite HF guidelines recommending close monitoring of sK+ , 55-93% of patients did not receive appropriate testing before or after initiation of RAASi or in follow-up to moderate/severe hyperkalaemia detection. Many of the observational studies were retrospective and from a single country. There is a need for international, prospective, longitudinal, observational studies, such as the CARE-HK in HF study (NCT04864795), to understand hyperkalaemia's prevalence, incidence, and severity; to identify and characterize cases that persist, progress, and recur; to highlight the importance of sK+ monitoring when using RAASi; and to assess the impact of newer HF therapies and potassium binders in clinical practice. Data from both clinical trials and observational studies with adjustments for confounding variables will be needed to assess the contribution of hyperkalaemia to clinical outcomes.

Management of Fluoropyrimidine-Induced Cardiac Adverse Outcomes Following Cancer Treatment

Advancements in cancer treatments have improved survival rates but have also led to increased cardiotoxicities, which can cause adverse cardiovascular events or worsen pre-existing conditions. Herein, cardiotoxicity is a severe adverse effect of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) therapy in cancer patients, with reported incidence rates ranging from 1 to 20%. Some studies have also suggested subclinical effects and there are reports which have documented instances of cardiac arrest or sudden death during 5-FU treatment, highlighting the importance of timely management of cardiovascular symptoms. However, despite being treated with conventional medical approaches for this cardiotoxicity, a subset of patients has demonstrated suboptimal or insufficient responses. The frequent use of 5-FU in chemotherapy and its association with significant morbidity and mortality indicates the need for a greater understanding of 5-FU-associated cardiotoxicity. It is essential to reduce the adverse effects of anti-tumor medications while preserving their efficacy, which can be achieved through drugs that mitigate toxicity associated with these drugs. Underpinning cardiotoxicity associated with 5-FU therapy also has the potential to offer valuable guidance in pinpointing pharmacological approaches that can be employed to prevent or ameliorate these effects. The present study provides an overview of management strategies for cardiac events induced by fluoropyrimidine-based cancer treatments. The review encompasses the underlying molecular and cellular mechanisms of cardiotoxicity, associated risk factors, and diagnostic methods. Additionally, we provide information on several available treatments and drug choices for angina resulting from 5-FU exposure, including nicorandil, ranolazine, trimetazidine, ivabradine, and sacubitril-valsartan, which have demonstrated potential in mitigating or protecting against chemotherapy-induced adverse cardiac effects.

Pharmacoutilization and adherence to sacubitril/valsartan in real world: the REAL.IT study in HFrEF

AIMS

The current European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines provide clear indications for the treatment of acute and chronic heart failure (HF). Nevertheless, there is a constant need for real-world evidence regarding the effectiveness, adherence, and persistence of drug therapy. We investigated the use of sacubitril/valsartan for the treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction in real-world clinical practice in Italy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An observational, retrospective, non-interventional cohort study based on electronic medical records from nine specialized hospital HF centres in Italy was carried out on patients with prescription of sacubitril/valsartan. Overall, 948 patients had a prescription of sacubitril/valsartan, with 924 characterized over 6 months and followed up for 12 months. Pharmacoutilization data at 1 year of follow-up were available for 225 patients {mean age 69.7 years [standard deviation (SD) = 10.8], 81.8% male}. Of those, 398 (45.2%) reached the target dose of sacubitril/valsartan of 97/103 mg in a mean time of 6.9 (SD = 6.2) weeks. Blood pressure and hypotension in 61 patients (65%) and worsening of chronic kidney disease in 10 patients (10.6%) were the main reasons for not reaching the target dose. Approximatively 50% of patients had a change in sacubitril/valsartan dose during follow-up, and 158 (70.2%) were persistent with the treatment during the last 3 months of follow-up. A sensitivity analysis (persistence during the last 4 months of follow-up) showed persistence for 162 patients (72.0%). Adherence data, available for 387 patients, showed full adherence for 205 (53%). Discontinuation (102/717 patients, 14.2%) was mainly due to hypotension and occurred after a mean time of 34.3 (SD = 28.7) weeks. During follow-up, out of 606 patients with available data, 434 patients (71.6%) had an HF add-on drug or drugs concomitant with sacubitril/valsartan. HF-related hospitalization during follow-up was numerically higher in non-persistent (16/67 patients, 23.9%) vs. patients persistent to sacubitril/valsartan (30/158, 19%) (P = 0.405).

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world data on the use of sacubitril/valsartan in clinical practice in Italy show a rapid titration to the target dose, high therapeutic adherence enabling a good level of therapeutic management in line with ESC guidelines for patients with reduced ejection fraction.

Real-world analysis of integration of sacubitril/valsartan into clinical practice in Saudi Arabia

Despite the demonstrated advantages of angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitors in the management of heart failure, the pivotal Angiotensin-Neprilysin Inhibition versus Enalapril in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) trial, which explored this class of medications, did not include individuals from Saudi Arabia. Recognizing that different nations and ethnic groups may exhibit unique characteristics, this study aimed to compare the demographics and outcomes of patients in Saudi Arabia who received sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val) with those enrolled in the PARADIGM-HF trial. In this retrospective, multicenter cohort study, we included all adult patients diagnosed with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) within a tertiary healthcare system in Saudi Arabia between January 2018 and December 2021 and were initiated on Sac/Val. The primary objective was to compare the patient characteristics of those initiating Sac/Val treatment with the participants in the PARADIGM-HF trial. The secondary endpoints included the initiation setting, dose initiation, and titration, as well as alterations in B-type natriuretic peptide and ejection fraction at the 6-month mark. Furthermore, we reported the hospitalization and mortality event rates at the 12-month time point. The study included 400 patients with HFrEF receiving Sac/Val. Compared with the PARADIGM-HF trial, the cohort had a younger mean age and a higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus. SAC/VAL was prescribed as the initial therapy for 34% of the patients, while the remaining participants were initially treated with either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker before transitioning to Sac/Val. Approximately 75% of patients were initiated on 100 mg Sac/Val twice daily, and 90% initiated therapy in the inpatient setting. The mean ejection fraction significantly improved from 26.5 ± 8.4% to 30.5 ± 6.4% at 6 months (P < .001), while the median B-type natriuretic peptide level change was not significant (P = .39). Our study revealed notable disparities in the baseline characteristics of patients with HFrEF compared with those in the PARADIGM-HF trial. These findings offer valuable real-world insights into the prescription patterns and outcomes of Sac/Val in patients with HFrEF in Saudi Arabia, an aspect not previously represented in the PARADIGM-HF study.

Multimorbidity in Heart Failure: Leveraging Cluster Analysis to Guide Tailored Treatment Strategies

REVIEW PURPOSE

This review summarises key findings on treatment effects within phenotypical clusters of patients with heart failure (HF), making a distinction between patients with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

FINDINGS

Treatment response differed among clusters; ACE inhibitors were beneficial in all HFrEF phenotypes, while only some studies show similar beneficial prognostic effects in HFpEF patients. Beta-blockers had favourable effects in all HFrEF patients but not in HFpEF phenotypes and tended to worsen prognosis in older, cardiorenal patients. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists had more favourable prognostic effects in young, obese males and metabolic HFpEF patients. While a phenotype-guided approach is a promising solution for individualised treatment strategies, there are several aspects that still require improvements before such an approach could be implemented in clinical practice. Stronger evidence from clinical trials and real-world data may assist in establishing a phenotype-guided treatment approach for patient with HF in the future.

Evaluation of early left-sided cardiac reverse remodeling under combined therapy of sacubitril-valsartan and spironolactone compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and spironolactone

We aimed to compare therapies of sacubitril/valsartan + spironolactone (S/V + S) with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors + spironolactone (ACEI + S) on the left-sided cardiac reverse remodeling (L-CRR). The second objective was to analyze the usefulness of GLS and LVEF in response to therapy.

Methods

78 patients (mean age 63.4 years, 20 females) with symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction were randomized to groups of equal numbers, i.e., 39 patients, and started on therapy of S/V + S or ACEI + S. Second evaluations were made after 6-8 weeks of therapy.

Results

GLS changed from -7.4% to -9.4% (18% improvement) in both arms equally. More than 50% of patients, initially with very severe systolic dysfunction (GLS > -8%), were reclassified to severe (GLS -8% to -12%). LVEF did not improve in any of the groups. The quality of life measured by MLHFQ and walking distance by 6-MWT increased. Positive correlations between GLS and 6MWT (r = 0.41, p = 0.02) and GLS and MHFLQ (r = 0.42, p = 0.03) were found. The S/V + S subgroup demonstrated improvements in LVEDV (Δ16.7 vs. 4.5 ml), E/e ratio (Δ 2.8 vs. 1.4), and LAVI (Δ 9.4 vs. 8.4 ml/m2) as compared to ACEI + S.

Conclusion

GLS, unlike LVEF, detects early changes in LV systolic function after 6-8 weeks of combined therapy, i.e., SV + S and ACE + S. GLS is more useful than LVEF in assessing early response to treatment. The effect of S/V + S and ACEI + S on LV systolic function was comparable, but the improvement in diastolic function as expressed by E/e', LAVI, and LVEDV was more pronounced with S/V + S.

Sacubitril/Valsartan in Heart Failure Hospitalization: Two Pills a Day to Keep Hospitalizations Away?

Heart failure (HF) is a clinical syndrome with signs and symptoms that result from any structural or functional deterioration of ventricular filling or ejection of blood. It is the final stage of various cardiovascular diseases (e.g., coronary artery disease, hypertension, previous myocardial infarction) and remains one of the leading causes of hospitalization. It poses severe health and economic burden worldwide. Patients usually present with shortness of breath due to impaired cardiac ventricular filling and decreased cardiac output. Cardiac remodeling due to the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system overactivation is the final pathological mechanism leading to these changes. The natriuretic peptide system is also activated to stop the remodeling. Sacubitril/valsartan, an angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor, has prompted a substantial conceptual change in HF treatment. Its primary mechanism is the inhibition of cardiac remodeling and the prevention of natriuretic peptide degradation by inhibiting the enzyme neprilysin. It is an efficacious, safe, and cost-effective therapy that improves the quality of life and survival rate in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction. It has been demonstrated to significantly reduce hospitalization rates and rehospitalization for HF when compared to enalapril. In this review, we have discussed the benefits of sacubitril/valsartan in treating patients with HFrEF, particularly in reducing hospitalizations and readmissions. We have also compiled studies to examine the drug's effect on adverse cardiac events. Finally, the cost benefits of the drug and optimal dosing strategies are also reviewed. Our review article, combined with the recommendations of the 2022 American Heart Association guidelines for heart failure, strongly suggests that sacubitril/valsartan is a cost-effective strategy that reduces hospitalizations for HFrEF patients when started early with optimal doses. There is still much uncertainty regarding the optimal usage of this drug, its use in HFrEF, and the cost benefits when used alone compared with enalapril.

Effectiveness and safety of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a meta-analysis

The current review aimed to study the effectiveness and safety of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) combined with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors versus ARNI or SGLT2 inhibitors monotherapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Studies containing patients with HFrEF who used ARNI combined with SGLT2 inhibitors versus ARNI or SGLT2 inhibitors alone were retrieved from the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. From the selected studies, the pooled risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals of dichotomous outcomes were assessed by a random or fixed effects model in our meta-analysis. Compared with ARNI monotherapy, the reduction in ARNI combined with SGLT2 inhibitors in a composite of the first hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death was 32%, hospitalization for heart failure was 35% and cardiovascular death was 35%; also all-cause death was 30%, worsening renal function was 35%, respectively, for patients with HFrEF. In addition, compared with SGLT2 inhibitors monotherapy, the reduction in ARNI combined with SGLT2 inhibitors in cardiovascular death was 36% and all-cause death was 28%, respectively, for patients with HFrEF. Although the estimated treatment effect is a 55% increase in volume depletion, overall, ARNI combined with SGLT2 inhibitors might be effective and safe for patients with HFrEF, and volume depletion should be given more attention.

Sacubitril/Valsartan in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: Real-World Experience from Italy (the REAL.IT Study)

Sacubitril/valsartan reduces heart failure (HF)-related hospitalizations and cardiovascular mortality in PARADIGM-HF and has become a foundational treatment for HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, data of its routine real-world use are limited, and evidence from Italian settings is lacking. The REAL.IT study aimed to characterize the demographics, pharmacotherapy, clinical characteristics and outcomes of sacubitril/valsartan-treated Italian patients with HFrEF. Electronic medical records of patients initiating sacubitril/valsartan from October 2016 to June 2019 at nine specialized hospital outpatient HF centers across Italy were reviewed. Overall, 924 adults (mean age 64.5 years, 84.6% male) were included. At baseline, 38.7% had an ischemic HF etiology, 45.9% hypertension, 23.2% atrial fibrillation, 25.4% diabetes mellitus, 26.1% an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and 31.9% coronary artery bypass grafting. There were no clear patterns of patient selection over time. During follow-up, NYHA class improved in 37.5% of patients after a mean of 5.3 ± 3.8 months; 36.1% and 16.7% of patients were in NYHA class III during characterization and after one year of follow-up, respectively. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improved ≥5% in 56.3% of patients at one year; 39.7% had ≥30% reduction of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; 2.2% had hyperkalemia during characterization and 2.6% during follow-up; and 3.8% had hypotension during characterization and 12% during follow-up. A total of 50 (5.8%) of patients had device implantation (ICD/CRT) during follow-up. HF-related hospitalization was recorded in 19.6% of patients during follow-up; 3.8% of patients died, approximately 1.3% from cardiovascular causes. Our real-world data confirm the favorable effectiveness and tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan observed in pivotal randomized controlled trials.

Predicting Hospital Readmissions in Patients Receiving Novel-Dose Sacubitril/Valsartan Therapy: A Competing-Risk, Causal Mediation Analysis

Backgrounds: Our study aimed to identify and predict patients with heart failure (HF) taking novel-dose Sacubitril/Valsartan (S/V) at risk for all-cause readmission, as well as investigate the possible role of left ventricular reverse remodeling (LVRR). Methods and results: There were 464 patients recruited from December 2017 to September 2021 in our hospital with a median follow-up of 660 days (range, 17-1494). Competing risk analysis with Gray's Test showed statistically significant differences in all-cause readmission (p-value< .001) across the three different dose groups. Models 1 and 2 were developed based on the results of univariable competing risk analysis, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator approach, backward stepwise regression, and multivariable competing risk analysis. The internal verification (data-splitting method) indicated that Model 1 had better discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility. The corresponding nomogram showed that patients aged 75 years and above, or taking the lowest-dose S/V (≤50 mg twice a day), or diagnosed with ventricular tachycardia, or valvular heart disease, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or diabetes mellitus were at the highest risk of all-cause readmission. In the causal mediation analysis, LVRR was considered as a critical mediator that negatively affected the difference of novel-dose S/V in readmission. Conclusions: A significant association was detected between novel-dose S/V and all-cause readmission in HF patients, in part negatively mediated by LVRR. The web-based nomogram could provide individual prediction of all-cause readmission in HF patients receiving novel-dose S/V. The effects of different novel-dose S/V are still needed to be explored further in the future.

Efficacy of new medical therapies in patients with heart failure, reduced ejection fraction, and chronic kidney disease already receiving neurohormonal inhibitors: a network meta-analysis

AIMS

We assessed the efficacy of the drugs developed after neurohormonal inhibition (NEUi) in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and concomitant chronic kidney disease (CKD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

The literature was systematically searched for phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving ≥90% patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <45%, of whom <30% were acutely decompensated, and with published information about the subgroup of estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Six RCTs were included in a study-level network meta-analysis evaluating the effect of NEUi, ivabradine, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), vericiguat, and omecamtiv mecarbil (OM) on a composite outcome of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for HF. In a fixed-effects model, SGLT2i [hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.69-0.89], ARNI (HR 0.79, 95% CrI 0.69-0.90), and ivabradine (HR 0.82, 95% CrI 0.69-0.98) decreased the risk of the composite outcome vs. NEUi, whereas OM did not (HR 0.98, 95% CrI 0.89-1.10). A trend for improved outcome was also found for vericiguat (HR 0.90, 95% CrI 0.80-1.00). In indirect comparisons, both SLGT2i (HR 0.80, 95% CrI 0.68-0.94) and ARNI (HR 0.80, 95% CrI 0.68-0.95) reduced the risk vs. OM; furthermore, there was a trend for a greater benefit of SGLT2i vs. vericiguat (HR 0.88, 95% CrI 0.73-1.00) and ivabradine vs. OM (HR 0.84, 95% CrI 0.68-1.00). Results were comparable in a random-effects model and in sensitivity analyses. Surface under the cumulative ranking area scores were 81.8%, 80.8%, 68.9%, 44.2%, 16.6%, and 7.8% for SGLT2i, ARNI, ivabradine, vericiguat, OM, and NEUi, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Expanding pharmacotherapy beyond NEUi improves outcomes in HFrEF with CKD.

Updates in heart failure: sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors and beyond – major changes are coming

Prevalence of heart failure is increasing worldwide mainly due to the ageing of the population and the improvement in diagnosis and treatment. In recent years, huge progress has been made in the management of heart failure patients. A new definition of chronic heart failure based on left ventricular ejection fraction and its possible trajectories has been reported. New drug classes have been introduced for the treatment of chronic heart failure. In particular, the prognostic benefit of sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors was demonstrated across all the heart failure phenotypes. Therapies for patients with advanced heart failure (long-term mechanical circulatory supports and heart transplantation) are now indicated also in the case of mild-to-moderate symptoms but with high risk of progression. In patients with acute heart failure, monitoring of urinary sodium and the use of acetazolamide may lead to better decongestion. Importantly, pre- and postdischarge assessment should lead to optimal treatment. Devices and telemonitoring can also be of help. Cardiovascular and noncardiovascular comorbidities are major determinants of the clinical course and need proper management. This review will summarize these important advances.

Heart failure: an update from the last years and a look at the near future

In the last years, major progress occurred in heart failure (HF) management. Quadruple therapy is now mandatory for all the patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Whilst verciguat is becoming available across several countries, omecamtiv mecarbil is waiting to be released for clinical use. Concurrent use of potassium-lowering agents may counteract hyperkalaemia and facilitate renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor implementations. The results of the EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic heaRt Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Preserved) trial were confirmed by the Dapagliflozin in Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction (DELIVER) trial, and we now have, for the first time, evidence for treatment of also patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction. In a pre-specified meta-analysis of major randomized controlled trials, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors reduced all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, and HF hospitalization in the patients with HF regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction. Other steps forward have occurred in the treatment of decompensated HF. Acetazolamide in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure with Volume Overload (ADVOR) trial showed that the addition of intravenous acetazolamide to loop diuretics leads to greater decongestion vs. placebo. The addition of hydrochlorothiazide to loop diuretics was evaluated in the CLOROTIC trial. Torasemide did not change outcomes, compared with furosemide, in TRANSFORM-HF. Ferric derisomaltose had an effect on the primary outcome of CV mortality or HF rehospitalizations in IRONMAN (rate ratio 0.82; 95% confidence interval 0.66-1.02; P = 0.070). Further options for the treatment of HF, including device therapies, cardiac contractility modulation, and percutaneous treatment of valvulopathies, are summarized in this article.

Effectiveness of sacubitril-varsartan versus angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in patients hospitalized for acute heart failure: a retrospective cohort study of the RICA registry

BACKGROUND

Sacubitril-valsartan has been shown to reduce hospitalizations and mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction. The PIONEER-HF trial demonstrated that initiation of the drug during acute HF hospitalization reduced NT-proBNP levels and a post-hoc analysis of the trial found a reduction in HF hospitalizations and deaths. Real-life studies in the elderly population are scarce. The aim of our study was to assess the effectiveness of sacubitril-valsartan versus angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) in elderly patients who initiate this treatment during hospitalization for acute HF.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Spanish acute heart failure registry (RICA) comparing rehospitalizations and deaths at 3 months and 1 year among patients aged 70 years or older who had initiated treatment with sacubitril-valsartan during hospitalization for acute HF versus those treated with ACEI.

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety-nine patients hospitalized between October 2016 and November 2020 were included, with a median age of 82 years and high rate of comorbidity. Of these, 107 were treated with sacubitril-valsartan and 92 with ACEI. The adjusted OR for readmission for HF at 3 months was 0.906 (95% CI: 0.241-3.404) and for the combined variable readmission for HF or death at 3 months was 0.696 (95% CI: 0.224-2.167). The adjusted OR for HF readmission at one year was 0.696 (95% CI: 0.224 -2.167). and for the combined variable HF readmission or death at one year 0.724 (95% CI: 0.325-1.612).

CONCLUSION

Treatment with sacubitril-valsartan initiated early in hospitalization for HF in elderly patients with high comorbidity was associated with a trend towards a reduction in readmissions and death due to HF compared to treatment with ACEI, which did not reach statistical significance either at 3 months or 1 year of follow-up.

Combined Therapy of Low-Dose Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor and Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitor Prevents Doxorubicin-Induced Cardiac Dysfunction in Rodent Model with Minimal Adverse Effects

Although cancer-therapy-related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD) is a critical issue in clinical practice, there is a glaring lack of evidence regarding cardiotoxicity management. To determine an effective and suitable dosage of treatment using angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), we adopted a clinically relevant rodent model with doxorubicin, which would mimic cardiac dysfunction in CTRCD patients. After the oral administration of drugs (vehicle, SGLT2i, ARNI, Low-ARNI/SGLT2i, ARNI/SGLT2i), several physiologic parameters, including hemodynamic change, cardiac function, and histopathology, were evaluated. Bulk RNA-sequencing was performed to obtain insights into the molecular basis of a mouse heart response to Low-ARNI/SGLT2i treatment. For the first time, we report that the addition of low-dose ARNI with SGLT2i resulted in greater benefits than ARNI, SGLT2i alone or ARNI/SGLT2i combination in survival rate, cardiac function, hemodynamic change, and kidney function against doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity through peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor signaling pathway. Low-dose ARNI with SGLT2i combination treatment would be practically beneficial for improving cardiac functions against doxorubicin-induced heart failure with minimal adverse effects. Our findings suggest the Low-ARNI/SGLT2i combination as a feasible novel strategy in managing CTRCD patients.

Effectiveness of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction Using Real-World Data: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

AIM

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess all-cause mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization with sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) compared to standard HF therapy in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) using real-world data.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched PubMed and Google Scholar for the observational studies published in English exploring the clinical outcomes of S/V use in HFrEF till 14/03/2022. Two independent reviewers assessed the quality and risk of bias of the included studies. A random-effect model was used to combine data. The outcomes assessed were all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization associated with S/V use in comparison to standard HF therapy.

RESULTS

A total of nine observational studies comparing S/V to Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I)/Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) in HFrEF were included in the systematic review, with more than 32000 patients included in the final analysis. Overall, S/V use was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (Risk Ratio [RR]= 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.93, I²= 83%) and HF hospitalization (RR= 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48-0.80, I²= 94%).

CONCLUSION

Similar to the landmark controlled evidence, real-world data of S/V use in HFrEF demonstrated a significant reduction in all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization.

Haemodynamic Effects of Sacubitril/Valsartan Initiation in Outpatients with Chronic Heart Failure

Background

Sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) improves outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Data about the immediate, short-, and intermediate-term hemodynamic effects of S/V are limited.

Methods

In this prospective observational study, 37 outpatients with chronic HFrEF were treated with S/V according to current guideline recommendations. Next to clinical, laboratory and echocardiographic parameters, haemodynamic variables were assessed non-invasively by use of inert gas rebreathing and bioimpedance cardiography at baseline and at 2-week, 3-month and 6-month follow-up. The course of variables throughout the study and the relationship between variables were analysed using fractional polynomials.

Results

S/V treatment resulted in short- and intermediate-term improvements in NYHA functional class (2.3 ± 0.6 at baseline vs. 1.9 ± 0.5 at 6-month follow-up, p = 0.14), 6-min walk test (453 ± 110 vs. 528 ± 98 m, p = 0.02), ejection fraction (31 ± 9 vs. 36 ± 12%, p = 0.13), pulmonary artery pressure (39 ± 10 vs. 31 ± 10 mmHg, p = 0.02), and NT-proBNP values (1702 (782–2897 vs. 1004 (599–1627) ng/L, p = 0.03). In addition, S/V caused immediate decreases in systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI) and systolic blood pressure (SBP), which were associated with a simultaneous drop in stroke volume (SV) and cardiac index (CI). However, while SVRI and SBP remained at low levels during further treatment, SV and CI restored rapidly and increased to slightly higher levels thereafter.

Conclusion

The vasodilative effects of S/V result in immediate reductions in SVRI, SBP, SV and CI. However, S/V induces reverse cardiac remodelling, which is apparent shortly after treatment initiation and leads to improvements of clinical, functional, echocardiographic, laboratory and haemodynamic variables.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40256-022-00549-2.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on prescription of sacubitril/valsartan in Italy

AIMS

The present study sought to examine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown measures on the prescription of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure (HF) in Italy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Data from Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) monitoring registries were analysed. The sacubitril/valsartan monitoring registry is based on 6-month prescriptions. A monthly aggregation on new activations throughout the observational period was computed. From March to December 2020, the initiation of new HF patients on sacubitril/valsartan decreased by nearly 40% with prescriptions dropping to values similar to 2018 when the registry was still operated off-line. A slight increase in prescriptions was observed after the lockdown measures were lifted, but prescriptions remained constantly below the pre-lockdown period.

CONCLUSION

A marked and worrisome decline during the COVID-19 pandemic in the activation of a life-saving treatment such as sacubitril/valsartan was observed. This decline was clearly linked to the lockdown measures instated to counteract the COVID-19 pandemic. Upcoming studies should analyse the occurrence of new cases of HF as well as the severity of patients admitted to hospitals and their mortality compared to pre-pandemic levels.

Evaluating sacubitril/valsartan as a treatment option for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and preserved ejection fraction

INTRODUCTION

Sacubitril/valsartan is the first-in-class angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor approved in 2015 for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). On 16 February 2021, the Food and Drug Administration acknowledged that "Benefits are most clearly evident in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction below normal," thus potentially extending the use in subjects with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

AREAS COVERED

The authors outline the regulatory history, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and risk-benefit profile of sacubitril/valsartan in HFrEF and HFpEF. A critical cross-trial comparison is presented, including sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), together with an insight into the latest European Society of Cardiology guidelines, where the new category of heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction is introduced.

EXPERT OPINION

Sacubitril/valsartan is a foundation of the pharmacological armamentarium in HFrEF to counteract the neuro-hormonal changes and reverse cardiac remodeling, together with beta-blockers, SGLT2i and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. The optimal sequence algorithm is an evolving issue, and the authors provide the reader with their personal perspective. A multidisciplinary management is encouraged to minimize the therapeutic inertia and manage tolerability issues, thus supporting adherence. Pragmatic trials, pharmacovigilance, and high-quality real-world evidence are crucial toward personalized safe prescribing of sacubitril/valsartan.

The year in cardiovascular medicine 2021: heart failure and cardiomyopathies

In the year 2021, the universal definition and classification of heart failure (HF) was published that defines HF as a clinical syndrome with symptoms and/or signs caused by a cardiac abnormality and corroborated by elevated natriuretic peptide levels or objective evidence of cardiogenic congestion. This definition and the classification of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), mildly reduced, and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is consistent with the 2021 ESC Guidelines on HF. Among several other new recommendations, these guidelines give a Class I indication for the use of the sodium–glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in HFrEF patients. As the first evidence-based treatment for HFpEF, in the EMPEROR-Preserved trial, empagliflozin reduced the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalizations. Several reports in 2021 have provided novel and detailed analyses of device and medical therapy in HF, especially regarding sacubitril/valsartan, SGLT2 inhibitors, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, ferric carboxymaltose, soluble guanylate cyclase activators, and cardiac myosin activators. In patients hospitalized with COVID-19, acute HF and myocardial injury is quite frequent, whereas myocarditis and long-term damage to the heart are rather uncommon.

A year in heart failure: an update of recent findings

Major changes have occurred in these last years in heart failure (HF) management. Landmark trials and the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of HF have established four classes of drugs for treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction: angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors or an angiotensin receptor‐neprilysin inhibitor, beta‐blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium‐glucose co‐transporter 2 inhibitors, namely, dapagliflozin or empagliflozin. These drugs consistently showed benefits on mortality, HF hospitalizations, and quality of life. Correction of iron deficiency is indicated to improve symptoms and reduce HF hospitalizations. AFFIRM‐AHF showed 26% reduction in total HF hospitalizations with ferric carboxymaltose vs. placebo in patients hospitalized for acute HF (P = 0.013). The guanylate cyclase activator vericiguat and the myosin activator omecamtiv mecarbil improved outcomes in randomized placebo‐controlled trials, and vericiguat is now approved for clinical practice. Treatment of HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) was a major unmet clinical need until this year when the results of EMPEROR‐Preserved (EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic HFpEF) were issued. Compared with placebo, empagliflozin reduced by 21% (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 0.90; P < 0.001), the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization. Advances in the treatment of specific phenotypes of HF, including atrial fibrillation, valvular heart disease, cardiomyopathies, cardiac amyloidosis, and cancer‐related HF, also occurred. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic still plays a major role in HF epidemiology and management. All these aspects are highlighted in this review.

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.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00228-021-03210-0.