proANP Metabolism Provides New Insights Into Sacubitril/Valsartan Mode of Action

Impact of sacubitril/valsartan on cardiac and systemic hypoxia in chronic heart failure

In heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction, Sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) increased proBNP T71 glycosylation, which is regulated negatively by hypoxia via miR-30a in vitro. Using a cohort of 73 HFrEF patients who were transitioned from standard HF medication to S/V, we found that the increase in proBNP T71 glycosylation after S/V was associated with a decrease in cardiac hypoxia. We further found that plasma levels of K709-acteylated HIF1α, HIF-regulated and HIF-independent biomarkers also evolved consistently with a decrease in hypoxia. We further confirmed that biomarker changes were related to hypoxia, in a rat model subjected to isobaric hypoxia. We measured them in rats subjected to isobaric hypoxia. Overall, these data strongly suggest that optimally treated HFrEF patients exhibited subclinical hypoxia that is improved by S/V. The data also posit proBNP T71 glycosylation as a biomarker of cardiac hypoxia.

N-terminal pro atrial natriuretic peptide as a prognostic marker of cardiac resynchronization therapy recipients

Background

Although the dynamic changes of atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) expressions in a failing heart are well-documented, the clinical implications of detailed measurements of each ANP molecular form processed from proANP remain unclear.

Methods

Patients screening was conducted on patients who were eligible for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) between 2014 and 2019 in our institution. Blood samples and echocardiographic parameters were collected on the day before and six months after implantation. Total ANP, proANP, and N-terminal fragment of proANP (NT-proANP) were examined as predictive biomarkers for cardiac death, left ventricular assist device implantation, and heart failure hospitalization following CRT implantation.

Results

A total of 86 subjects (mean age 70 years, 64 males) who underwent successful CRT implantation were enrolled. Plasma levels of total ANP, proANP, and NT-proANP were not normally distributed [25.8 pM (interquartile range: 11.1-53.1), 2.2 pM (1.0-5.4), and 4.1 nM (2.4-7.1), respectively]. Over a median follow-up of 2.7 years, 31 patients (2 deaths and 29 heart failure hospitalizations) reached the endpoints. Among the different ANP forms, only NT-proANP emerged as an independent predictor of the composite outcome (adjusted odds ratio of 2.542 in those with levels above vs. below the median, 95 % confidence interval 1.151-5.615, p = 0.021). NT-proANP levels were associated with left atrial volume and left diastolic functional parameters and decreased in response to echocardiographic improvements at six months post-implantation (16 ± 44 % decrease in responders vs 18 ± 60 % increase in non-responders, p = 0.005).

Conclusion

Pre-implantation NT-proANP levels could serve as a predictive factor for clinical outcomes in recipients of CRT.

Deconvolution of BNP and NT-proBNP Immunoreactivities by Mass Spectrometry in Heart Failure and Sacubitril/Valsartan Treatment

BACKGROUND

Elevated BNP and the N-terminal fragment of the proBNP (NT-proBNP) are hallmarks of heart failure (HF). Generally, both biomarkers parallel each other. In patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan, BNP remained stable while NT-proBNP decreased. As BNP and NT-proBNP assays have limited specificity due to cross-reactivity, we quantified by mass spectrometry (MS) the contributing molecular species.

METHODS

We included 356 healthy volunteers, 100 patients with acute dyspnoea (49 acute decompensated HF; 51 dyspnoea of non-cardiac origin), and 73 patients with chronic HF and reduced ejection fraction treated with sacubitril/valsartan. BNP and NT-proBNP immunoreactivities (BNPir and NT-proBNPir) were measured by immunoassays (Abbott ARCHITECT and Roche Diagnostics proBNPII) and proBNP-derived peptides and glycosylation at serine 44 by MS on plasma samples.

RESULTS

BNPir corresponded to the sum of proBNP1-108, BNP1-32, BNP3-32, and BNP5-32 (R2 = 0.9995), while NT-proBNPir corresponded to proBNP1-108 and NT-proBNP1-76 not glycosylated at serine 44 (R2 = 0.992). NT-proBNPir was better correlated (R2 = 0.9597) than BNPir (R2 = 0.7643) with proBNP signal peptide (a surrogate of proBNP production). In patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan, non-glycosylated NT-proBNP1-76 remained constant (P = 0.84) despite an increase in NT-proBNP1-76 and its glycosylation (P < 0.0001). ProBNP1-108 remained constant (P = 0.12) while its glycosylation increased (P < 0.0001), resulting in a decrease in non-glycosylated proBNP1-108 (P < 0.0001), and in NT-proBNPir.

CONCLUSIONS

Glycosylation interfered with NT-proBNPir measurement, explaining the discrepant evolution of these 2 biomarkers in patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan. Both BNPir and NT-proBNPir are surrogates of proBNP1-108 production, NT-proBNPir being more robust in the clinical contexts studied.

Mechanisms of current therapeutic strategies for heart failure: more questions than answers?

Heart failure (HF) is a complex, multifactorial and heterogeneous syndrome with substantial mortality and morbidity. Over the last few decades, numerous attempts have been made to develop targeted therapies that may attenuate the known pathophysiological pathways responsible for causing the progression of HF. However, therapies developed with this objective have sometimes failed to show benefit. The pathophysiological construct of HF with numerous aetiologies suggests that interventions with broad mechanisms of action which simultaneously target more than one pathway maybe more effective in improving the outcomes of patients with HF. Indeed, current therapeutics with clinical benefits in HF have targeted a wider range of intermediate phenotypes. Despite extensive scientific breakthroughs in HF research recently, questions persist regarding the ideal therapeutic targets which may help achieve maximum benefit. In this review, we evaluate the mechanism of action of current therapeutic strategies, the pathophysiological pathways they target and highlight remaining knowledge gaps regarding the mode of action of these interventions.