Design of the Omapatrilat in Persons with Enhanced Risk of Atherosclerotic events (OPERA) trial

Targeting Metalloenzymes for Therapeutic Intervention

Metalloenzymes are central to a wide range of essential biological activities, including nucleic acid modification, protein degradation, and many others. The role of metalloenzymes in these processes also makes them central for the progression of many diseases and, as such, makes metalloenzymes attractive targets for therapeutic intervention. Increasing awareness of the role metalloenzymes play in disease and their importance as a class of targets has amplified interest in the development of new strategies to develop inhibitors and ultimately useful drugs. In this Review, we provide a broad overview of several drug discovery efforts focused on metalloenzymes and attempt to map out the current landscape of high-value metalloenzyme targets.

Sacubitril/valsartan: A novel angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor

OBJECTIVE

To describe the efficacy, superiority and safety profile of the first-in-class angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor "Sacubitril/Valsartan" as compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) in heart failure (HF) patients, reviewing data available from both clinical and pre-clinical studies. Evidences on health care utilization outcomes such as hospitalizations and emergency department visits were also evaluated.

MATERIAL (DATA SOURCE)

Sources: Medical literature on 'Sacubitril/Valsartan' and 'Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor' was identified by searching databases (including, but not limited to, PubMed, Embase and HighWire) for articles published since 1991, bibliographies from published literature, clinical trial registries/databases and websites (including those of regional regulatory agencies and the manufacturer). Additional information (including contributory unpublished data) was also requested from the companies developing the drug.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We conducted separate searches for each of the interventions of interest. The timeframe for both searches spanned the period from January 1991 to the most recently published data available and focused on PubMed, Embase and HighWire indexed articles. The search strategies included a combination of indexing terms as well as free-text terms included separately in 'Keywords' section. To supplement the above searches and ensure optimal and complete literature retrieval, we performed a manual check of the references of recent relevant reviews and meta-analysis. Searches were last updated on 12th July 2017.

SELECTION

Studies in patients with hypertension who received sacubitril/valsartan combination drug were included. Inclusion of studies was based mainly on the methods section of the trials. When available, large, well-controlled trials with appropriate statistical methodology was preferred. Relevant pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics data was also included.

DATA EVALUATION

Many clinical trials have been conducted comparing the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan with other anti-hypertensives. The trials have shown sacubitril/valsartan to be more effective in improving symptoms and physical limitations, reducing the risk of cardiovascular (CV) death, HF hospitalization, and the overall mortality and morbidity compared to its counterparts.

CONCLUSION

Effective reduction of blood pressure to accepted goals is the key to reduce the risk of CV events and stroke. Dual inhibition of neprilysin and the angiotensin receptor with sacubitril/valsartan may represent an attractive and serendipitous therapeutic approach for a range of CV diseases, including hypertension and HF, in which vasoconstriction, volume overload and neuro-hormonal activation play a part in pathophysiology. Sacubitril/Valsartan appears to be more efficacious in reducing blood pressure than currently available ACEi and ARBs with a similar safety and tolerability profile. Besides, pleiotropic benefits like HbA_1c reduction, better eGFR progression and a greater decrease in blood pressure and serum creatinine levels make this drug a novel addition to the current hypertension armamentarium.

Treatment of hypertension in peripheral arterial disease

BACKGROUND

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) causes considerable morbidity and mortality. Hypertension is a risk factor for PAD. Treatment for hypertension must be compatible with the symptoms of PAD. Controversy regarding the effects of beta-adrenoreceptor blockade for hypertension in patients with PAD has led many physicians to stop prescribing beta-adrenoreceptor blockers. Little is known about the effects of other classes of anti-hypertensive drugs in the presence of PAD. This is the second update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of anti-hypertensive drugs in patients with both raised blood pressure and symptomatic PAD in terms of the rate of cardiovascular events and death, symptoms of claudication and critical leg ischaemia, and progression of atherosclerotic PAD as measured by ankle brachial index (ABI) changes and the need for revascularisation (reconstructive surgery or angioplasty) or amputation.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Specialised Register (last searched March 2013) and CENTRAL (2013, Issue 2).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of at least one anti-hypertensive treatment against placebo or two anti-hypertensive medications against each other, with interventions lasting at least one month. Trials had to include patients with symptomatic PAD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by one author (DAL) and checked by the other (GYHL). Potentially eligible studies were excluded when the results presentation prevented adequate extraction of data and enquiries to authors did not yield raw data.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight RCTs were included with a total of 3610 PAD patients. Four studies compared a recognised class of anti-hypertensive treatment with placebo and four studies compared two anti-hypertensive treatments with each other. Studies were not pooled due to the variation of the comparisons and the outcomes presented. Overall the quality of the available evidence was unclear, primarily as a result of a lack of detail in the study reports on the randomisation and blinding procedures and incomplete outcome data. Two studies compared angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors against placebo. In one study there was a significant reduction in the number of cardiovascular events in patients receiving ramipril (odds ratio (OR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 0.91; n = 1725). In the second trial using perindopril (n = 52) there was a marginal increase in claudication distance but no change in ABI and a reduction in maximum walking distance. A trial comparing the calcium antagonist verapamil versus placebo in patients undergoing angioplasty (n = 96) suggested that verapamil reduced restenosis (per cent diameter stenosis (± SD) 48.0% ± 11.5 versus 69.6% ± 12.2; P < 0.01), although this was not reflected in the maintenance of a high ABI (0.76 ± 0.10 versus 0.72 ± 0.08 for verapamil versus placebo). Another study (n = 80) demonstrated no significant difference in arterial intima-media thickness (IMT) in men receiving the thiazide diuretic hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) compared to those receiving the alpha-adrenoreceptor blocker doxazosin (-0.12 ± 0.14 mm and -0.08 ± 0.13 mm, respectively; P = 0.66). A study (n = 36) comparing telmisartan to placebo found a significant improvement in maximum walking distance at 12 months with telmisartan (median (interquartile range (IQR)) 191 m (157 to 226) versus 103 m (76 to 164); P < 0.001) but no differences in ABI (median (IQR) 0.60 (0.60 to 0.77) versus 0.52 (0.48 to 0.67)) or arterial IMT (median (IQR) 0.08 cm (0.07 to 0.09) versus 0.09 cm (0.08 to 0.10)). Two studies compared the beta-adrenoreceptor blocker nebivolol with either the thiazide diuretic HCTZ or with metoprolol. Both studies found no significant differences in intermittent or absolute claudication distance, ABI, or all-cause mortality between the anti-hypertensives. A subgroup analysis of PAD patients (n = 2699) in a study which compared a calcium antagonist-based strategy (verapamil slow release (SR) ± trandolapril) to a beta-adrenoreceptor blocker-based strategy (atenolol ± hydrochlorothiazide) found no significant differences in the composite endpoints of death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke with or without revascularisation (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.07 and OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.13, respectively).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence on the use of various anti-hypertensive drugs in people with PAD is poor so that it is unknown whether significant benefits or risks accrue. However, lack of data specifically examining outcomes in PAD patients should not detract from the overwhelming evidence on the benefit of treating hypertension and lowering blood pressure.

Treatment of hypertension in peripheral arterial disease

BACKGROUND

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) causes considerable morbidity and mortality. Hypertension is a risk factor for PAD. Treatment for hypertension must be compatible with the symptoms of PAD. Controversy regarding the effects of beta-blockade for hypertension in patients with PAD has led many physicians to stop prescribing beta-blockers. Little is known about the effects of other classes of anti-hypertensive drugs in the presence of PAD. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of anti-hypertensive drugs on cardiovascular events and death, symptoms of claudication, critical leg ischaemia, progression of PAD and revascularisation or amputation in people with hypertension and PAD SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group searched their Specialised Register (last searched May 2009) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 2). The authors studied abstracts of cardiology meetings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of at least one anti-hypertensive treatment against placebo, or two anti-hypertensive medications against each other, with interventions lasting at least one month. Trials had to include patients with symptomatic PAD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by one author (DAL) and checked by the other (GYHL). Eligible studies were excluded when results presentation prevented adequate extraction of data and enquiries to authors did not yield raw data.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies were included. Two compared ACE inhibitors against placebo. In the HOPE study there was a significant reduction in the number of cardiovascular events in 168 patients receiving ramipril (OR 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.58 to 0.91). In the second trial using perindopril in a small numbers of patients, there was a marginal increase in claudication distance but no change in ankle brachial pressure index (ABPI) and a reduction in maximum walking distance.The third trial in patients undergoing angioplasty suggested that the calcium antagonist verapamil reduced restenosis, although this was not reflected in the maintenance of a high ABPI. Another small study demonstrated no significant difference in arterial intima-media thickness with men receiving the thiazide diuretic hydrochlorathiazide compared to those receiving the alpha-adrenoreceptor blocker doxazosin.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence on various anti-hypertensive drugs in people with PAD is poor so that it is unknown whether significant benefits or risks accrue from their use. Lack of data specifically examining outcomes in PAD patients should not detract from the compelling evidence of the benefit of treating hypertension and lowering blood pressure.

The first preclinical pharmacotoxicological safety assessment of CGS 35601, a triple vasopeptidase inhibitor, in chronically instrumented, conscious, and unrestrained spontaneously hypertensive rats

CGS 35601 is a triple vasopeptidase inhibitor (VPI) of angiotensin-converting enzyme, neutral endopeptidase, and endothelin-converting enzyme-1 with respective IC50 values of 22, 2, and 55 nM. We characterized the safety profile and toxicity of escalating doses of CGS 35601 over a 20-day period in chronically instrumented, unrestrained, conscious, male, spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR). Once instrumented with an arterial catheter, the SHR were placed in metabolic cages allowing daily assessment of hemodynamics and blood sampling for biochemical and hematological measurements. After a 7-day stabilization period, the SHR were divided into 2 groups: Gr. 1, (n = 13 to 18) receiving CGS 35601 at 0.01, 0.1, 1 and 5 mg kg(-1) day(-1) (continuous i.a. infusion) for 5 consecutive days/dose, followed by a 5-day washout; and Gr. 2, (n = 10) receiving vehicle (saline). The highest dose of CGS 35601 dose-dependently reduced MABP from 156 +/- 4 up to 94 +/- 5 mm Hg, whereas heart rate, metabolic, electrolytic, and hematological profiles, growth, diuresis, and renal activity were unaffected, and no hepatic or liver toxicities were observed. These results suggest that this novel triple VPI presents no safety concerns at this stage and may become of interest for the treatment of hypertension and other cardiovascular disorders. Long-term chronic experiments are needed to assess possible angioedema and increases in vascular permeability.

CGS 35601, a Triple Inhibitor of Angiotensin Converting Enzyme, Neutral Endopeptidase and Endothelin Converting Enzyme

CGS 35601 (L-tryptophan, N-[[1-[[(2S)-2-mercapto-4-methyl-1-oxopentyl]amino]-cyclopentyl]carbonyl]) is one of a few single molecules capable of inhibiting the activities of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE), neutral endopeptidase (NEP) and endothelin converting enzyme (ECE) simultaneously, with IC(50) values of 22, 2, and 55 nM, respectively. Through the inhibition of ACE and ECE, it blocks the conversion of angiotensin I (AI) and big endothelin-1 (big ET-1) into the two most potent peptidic vasoconstrictors, angiotensin II (AII) and ET-1, respectively. By inhibiting NEP, CGS 35601 also prevents the degradation of peptidic vasodilators such as bradykinin (BK), natriuretic peptides (NPs) and adrenomedullin (ADM) and, hence, modulates the secondary release of other vasoactive mediators such as nitric oxide (NO) and prostaglandins. In chronic (30 days) experiments, CGS 35601 is well tolerated with a very good safety profile in healthy normotensive, hypertensive and type 2 diabetic rats. The antihypertensive efficacy of CGS 35601 was demonstrated in chronically instrumented, unrestrained and conscious rat models of hypertension (SHR and DSS) and type 2 diabetes (ZDF-fatty). It lowered blood pressure effectively as well as modulated plasma concentrations of a number of circulating vasoactive peptidic mediators that are keys to the regulation of the vascular tone. These data suggest that CGS 35601, a triple vasopeptidase inhibitor (VPI), may represent a novel class of antihypertensive drugs and may have the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disorders, diabetes and subsequent renal complications. Similar in vivo ACE, NEP, and ECE inhibitory activities were also observed with the orally active prodrug, CGS 37808 (L-tryptophan, N-[[1-[[(2S)-2-(acetylthio)-4-methyl-1-oxopentyl]amino]cyclopentyl]-carbonyl]-, methyl ester.

New pharmacological strategies in chronic heart failure

Diuretics, ACE inhibitors and betablockers form the cornerstone of pharmacological treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF), while angiotensin receptor blockers are gaining ground. However, despite optimal treatment CHF remains a syndrome with poor prognosis. For this reason, a large number of new agents have been developed as add-on treatment over the last few years. Vasopeptidase inhibitors, moxonidine, endothelin antagonists, vasopressin antagonists, and selective aldosterone antagonists, are some of the new agents that were designed to interfere with different neurohormonal pathways. Immunomodulating agents, growth hormone, caspase inhibitors, adrenomedullin, and erythropoietin have different modes of action, which in general are less understood. Although most of the agents exhibited efficacy in preclinical trials, the clinical results have not always been similarly positive. The results of trials involving vasopeptidase inhibitors, endothelin antagonists, immunomodulating agents, and growth hormone have been disappointing. Other compounds like caspase inhibitors, adrenomedullin, and vasopressin antagonists are still at the early stages of development. Currently, the two most promising agents seem to be erythropoietin and the selective aldosterone receptor blocker eplerenone. In the present article an overview of new pharmacological developments for CHF is given, and the clinical value of these developments is discussed.

Vasopeptidase inhibitors: will they have a role in clinical practice?

The human cardiovascular system is regulated by haemodynamic, neurohumoral and structural mechanisms. The endothelium and the neurohumoral system play a key role in modulating both vascular tone and structure by producing vasoactive substances, and in the modulation of blood cell adhesion. Although the neurohormonal systems are essential in vascular homeostasis, they become maladaptive in conditions such as hypertension, coronary disease and heart failure. The clinical success of blocking the renin-angiotensin system by angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitors and the sympathetic nerve system by beta-blockers demonstrates the importance of neurohumoral blockade. The inadequate effect of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) or neutral endopeptidase (NEP) inhibitor monotherapy seen in some patients treated for hypertension or congestive heart failure, and the promising effect seen after their combination, led to the development of drugs that simultaneously inhibit both enzyme systems. Neutral endopeptidase, like ACE, is an endothelial cell surface zinc metallopeptidase with similar structure and catalytic site to ACE. NEP is the major enzymatic pathway for degradation of natriuretic peptides. The natriuretic peptide system can be viewed as the endogenous inhibitor of the renin angiotensin system. The dual metalloprotease inhibitors of ACE and NEP, called vasopeptidase inhibitors therefore represent a new and attractive therapeutic strategy for the treatment of cardiovascular disease. The ability to add incremental benefit over already proven therapy, with an acceptable side-effect profile however, is questionable in this new class of agents.

Recent clinical trials with omapatrilat: new developments

Omapatrilat belongs to the vasopeptidase inhibitors, ie, drugs that possess the ability to inhibit simultaneously the membrane-bound zinc metalloproteases, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE), and the neutral endopeptidase EC 3.4.24.11 (NEP). Omapatrilat was targeted to treat patients with hypertension and congestive heart failure. The preclinical and early clinical studies conducted with omapatrilat were very promising. Indeed, omapatrilat appeared to be a very potent antihypertensive agent with very favorable effects on cardiac function in heart failure patients. In contrast to these early studies, the large clinical trials were more disappointing. The results of the OCTAVE trial confirmed the antihypertensive efficacy of omapatrilat, but at the price of an angioedema rate more than threefold higher than that of an ACE inhibitor in the overall population (2.17% vs 0.68%), and close to fourfold higher in the black population. In OVERTURE, a large randomized control trial in heart failure, angioedema was also more common with omapatrilat, but the incidence was much lower (0.8% with omapatrilat vs 0.5% with enalapril). However, omapatrilat was not convincingly superior to the ACE inhibitor. Because angioedema is probably a class side effect of vasopeptidase inhibitors, the higher incidence of this potentially life-threatening complication with omapatrilat has likely stopped the development of this new class of agents. The future of vasopeptidase inhibitors will depend on the ability to improve the risk/benefit ratio either by developing agents that produce less angioedema, or by defining more precisely a high-risk population that could take advantage of dual ACE/NEP inhibition.

Vasopeptidase inhibition: a new treatment approach for endothelial dysfunction

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibition is a well-established principle in the treatment of endothelial dysfunction. Numerous preclinical and clinical studies have clearly demonstrated the beneficial effects of inhibiting the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAS) in states of impaired endothelial function. The successful use of ACE inhibitors encouraged attempts to inhibit other key enzymes in the regulation of vascular tone, such as the neutral endopeptidase (NEP). Similar to ACE, NEP is an endothelial cell surface metalloproteinase that is involved in the degradation of several regulatory peptides, including the natriuretic peptides, and, thus, NEP inhibition augments vasodilatation and natriuresis through increased levels of atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP). By inhibiting the RAS and potentiating the natriuretic peptide system at the same time, combined NEP/ACE inhibitors, the so-called vasopeptidase inhibitors, reduce vasoconstriction and enhance vasodilatation, thereby decreasing peripheral vascular resistance and blood pressure. Within the vessel wall this may lead to a reduction of vasoconstrictor and proliferative mediators, such as angiotensin II and endothelin-1, and may increase local levels of bradykinin as well as natriuretic peptides. Even though first results of both preclinical and clinical studies indicate that combined inhibition of ACE and NEP by vasopeptidase inhibitors represents a promising strategy in the treatment of hypertension and heart failure, angioedema occurs more frequently on vasopeptidase inhibition as compared to ACE inhibition. To establish vasopeptidase inhibition as a novel option in the treatment of cardiovascular disease, further validation of efficacy and safety of this promising therapeutic principle is mandatory.

Treatment of hypertension in peripheral arterial disease

BACKGROUND

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) causes considerable morbidity and mortality. Hypertension is a risk factor for PAD. Therefore, treatment for hypertension must be compatible with the symptoms of PAD. Controversy regarding the effects of beta blockade for hypertension in patients with PAD has led many physicians to stop prescribing beta-blockers. Little is known about the effects of other classes of anti-hypertensive drugs in the presence of PAD.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of anti-hypertensive drugs on the: cardiovascular events and death in patients with hypertension and PAD; symptoms of claudication and critical leg ischaemia; progression of PAD, and revascularisation, or amputations.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were sought via the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group (last searched July 2003), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (last searched Issue 2, 2003), and the NHS Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) (last searched August 2002). There were no language restrictions. Abstracts of cardiology meetings were studied. Reference lists of papers were also examined.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of at least one anti-hypertensive treatment against placebo, or two anti-hypertensive medications against each other, with interventions lasting at least one month. Trials had to include patients with symptomatic PAD. Trials of poor quality and execution were excluded, as were cross-over trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by the other. Eligible studies were excluded when presentation prevented adequate extraction of data, and enquiries to authors did not yield the raw data.

MAIN RESULTS

Two studies were included in the review. In one trial using perindopril in small numbers of patients with PAD, there was a marginal increase in claudication distance (weighted mean difference (WMD) 8.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) -30.66 to 46.66), but no change in ankle brachial pressure index (ABPI), (WMD 0, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.14), and a reduction in walking distance (WMD -46, 95 % CI -169.24 to 77.24). In patients undergoing angioplasty, a second trial suggested that the calcium antagonist verapamil reduced restenosis, although this was not reflected in the maintenance of a high ABPI.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for various anti-hypertensive drug classes in PAD is poor, so that it is unknown whether significant benefit or risk accrues from their use. In view of this, no definite recommendations on use or avoidance can be made from the available data.

Omapatrilat--the story of Overture and Octave

At the American College of Cardiology in March two major trials were presented. The publicity surrounding the two could not have been more different. The LIFE demonstrated clear superiority of losartan-based therapy over atenolol-based therapy for the treatment of hypertension. It was published the same week in the Lancet and received major press coverage all over the world. The OVERTURE (Omapatrilat Versus Enalapril Randomized Trial of Utility in Reducing Events) study in contrast received a subdued reception, very little publicity and is yet to be published. 5770 NYHA class II-IV heart failure patients (LVEF<or=30%, recent heart failure hospital admission) were randomised and uptitrated to either 10 mg BD of Enalapril or 40 mg once a day Omapatrilat. The primary end-point of all cause mortality or heart failure related hospitalisation did not differ significantly: 914/2884 for Enalapril and 914/2886 for Omapatrilat (hazard ratio 0.94, CI's 0.86-1.03, P=0.187). Mortality was also similar: 509 for Enalapril and 477 for Omapatrilat (hazard ratio 0.94, CI's 0.83-1.07, P=0.339). Omapatrilat was as good as Enalapril but not better. The worrying trend was however, that angioedema was more common with Omapatrilat; 24 (0.8%) versus 14 cases (0.5%). The OCTAVE (Omapatrilat Cardiovascular Treatment Assessment Versus Enalapril) study was also presented at this time. 25,267 hypertensives were randomised to Omapatrilat or enalapril and a difference of approximately 3 mmHg in favour of Omapatrilat was seen. Significantly more cases of angioedema were seen with Omapatrilat, 274 (2.17%) compared to 86 (0.68%) with enalapril. Overall death rates were similar, 0.18% for enalapril and 0.15% for Omapatrilat. All adverse events were similar, 51.0% for Omapatrilat and 50.4% for enalapril. The rates of angioedema were much higher in blacks, 5.54% for Ompatrilat and 1.62% for enalapril and for smokers, 3.93% for Omapatrilat and 0.81% for enalapril. We were left with a drug that was, for heart failure, not superior to an ACE inhibitor already off patent, and, as an anti-hypertensive, with an angioedema rate more than double that of an ACE inhibitor in a large head to head comparison. The medical community will be watching to make sure these data are published in full in the medical literature in a timely fashion, in the order of end-points specified in the protocol and with appropriate emphasis on the logical points of presentation.

Vasopeptidase inhibitors

Vasopeptidase inhibitors are a new class of drugs that have dual inhibitory effects on two key enzymes involved in the metabolism of vasoactive peptides. Essentially, they inhibit angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE), thereby blocking the generation of angiotensin II (Ang II); at the same time they prevent the breakdown of natriuretic peptides by the enzyme neutral endopeptidase. The combination of reduction of Ang II on a background of increased natriuretic peptide activity has several potential advantages for the treatment of cardiovascular and renal disease and in particular, hypertension and congestive heart failure (CHF). Several vasopeptidase inhibitors, such as sampatrilat, fasidotril, gemopatrilat and omapatrilat (Vanlev, the most clinically developed vasopeptidase inhibitor to date) are under intensive clinical investigation. Recent clinical trials have demonstrated effective antihypertensive activity in hypertension, independent of age, renin and salt status or ethnic origin, and have also highlighted the potential for vasopeptidase inhibition as a new therapeutic modality for the treatment of CHF. Moreover, ongoing research suggests that this new class of drugs may be an important approach, not only for the treatment of hypertension and of conditions associated with overt volume overload but also for ischaemic heart disease.