Antihypertensive effect of sacubitril/valsartan: a meta-analysis

Different Doses of Scubitril/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.

Cyclic GMP modulating drugs in cardiovascular diseases: mechanism-based network pharmacology

Mechanism-based therapy centred on the molecular understanding of disease-causing pathways in a given patient is still the exception rather than the rule in medicine, even in cardiology. However, recent successful drug developments centred around the second messenger cyclic guanosine-3'-5'-monophosphate (cGMP), which is regulating a number of cardiovascular disease modulating pathways, are about to provide novel targets for such a personalized cardiovascular therapy. Whether cGMP breakdown is inhibited or cGMP synthesis is stimulated via guanylyl cyclases or their upstream regulators in different cardiovascular disease phenotypes, the outcomes seem to be so far uniformly protective. Thus, a network of cGMP-modulating drugs has evolved that act in a mechanism-based, possibly causal manner in a number of cardiac conditions. What remains a challenge is the detection of cGMPopathy endotypes amongst cardiovascular disease phenotypes. Here, we review the growing clinical relevance of cGMP and provide a glimpse into the future on how drugs interfering with this pathway may change how we treat and diagnose cardiovascular diseases altogether.

Application of Angiotensin Receptor–Neprilysin Inhibitor in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients: Chinese Expert Consensus

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a global public health problem, and cardiovascular disease is the most common cause of death in patients with CKD. The incidence and prevalence of cardiovascular events during the early stages of CKD increases significantly with a decline in renal function. More than 50% of dialysis patients die from cardiovascular disease, including coronary heart disease, heart failure, arrhythmia, and sudden cardiac death. Therefore, developing effective methods to control risk factors and improve prognosis is the primary focus during the diagnosis and treatment of CKD. For example, the SPRINT study demonstrated that CKD drugs are effective in reducing cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events by controlling blood pressure. Uncontrolled blood pressure not only increases the risk of these events but also accelerates the progression of CKD. A co-crystal complex of sacubitril, which is a neprilysin inhibitor, and valsartan, which is an angiotensin receptor blockade, has the potential to be widely used against CKD. Sacubitril inhibits neprilysin, which further reduces the degradation of natriuretic peptides and enhances the beneficial effects of the natriuretic peptide system. In contrast, valsartan alone can block the angiotensin II-1 (AT1) receptor and therefore inhibit the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system. These two components can act synergistically to relax blood vessels, prevent and reverse cardiovascular remodeling, and promote natriuresis. Recent studies have repeatedly confirmed that the first and so far the only angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan can reduce blood pressure more effectively than renin–angiotensin system inhibitors and improve the prognosis of heart failure in patients with CKD. Here, we propose clinical recommendations based on an expert consensus to guide ARNI-based therapeutics and reduce the occurrence of cardiovascular events in patients with CKD.

Hypertension and Type 2 Diabetes-The Novel Treatment Possibilities

Elevated blood pressure and hyperglycaemia frequently coexist and are both components of metabolic syndrome. Enhanced cardiovascular risk is strongly associated with diabetes and the occurrence of hypertension. Both hypertension and type 2 diabetes, if treated inappropriately, lead to serious complications, increasing the mortality of patients and generating much higher costs of health systems. This is why it is of great importance to find the missing link between hypertension and diabetes development and to simultaneously search for drugs influencing these two disorders or even drugs aimed at their pathological bases. Standard antihypertensive therapy mainly focuses on blood pressure reduction, while novel drugs also possess a wide range of pleiotropic modes of actions, such as cardio- and nephroprotective properties or body weight reduction. These properties are especially desirable in a situation when type 2 diabetes coexists with hypertension. This review describes the connections between diabetes and hypertension development and briefly summarises the current knowledge regarding attempts to define targets for the treatment of high blood pressure in diabetic patients. It also describes the standard hypotensive drugs preferred in patients with type 2 diabetes, as well as novel drugs, such as finerenone, esaxerenone, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 analogues and sacubitril/valsartan.

Effectiveness and safety of sacubitril/valsartan for patients with hypertension and heart failure in the real-world setting: A retrospective study in China

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Hypertension (HP) is associated with heart failure (HF). Sacubitril/valsartan (sac/val) has been approved for primary HP by China Food and Drug Administration (CFDA) in June 2021. The present study aimed to provide evidence on the effectiveness and safety of sac/val in Chinese patients complicated with HP and HF.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted on adult patients diagnosed with HP and HF and treated with sac/val between July 2020 and December 2020. The potential risk factors for the discontinuation events caused by sac/val-related adverse events (AEs) were explored. The data, including blood pressure (BP), cardiac indicators, corresponding values on echocardiographic parameters, unplanned visits, and AEs throughout 3-12 months, were collected.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 446 eligible patients were included in this study. The discontinuation events of sac/val were mainly attributed to its AEs (hypotension, hyperkalemia, and deterioration in kidney function). Univariate analysis revealed that history of chronic kidney disease, atrial fibrillation, higher values of serum creatinine, serum uric acid, serum N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide, and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate were potential risk factors for discontinuation. Patients who maintained sac/val therapy throughout 3-12 months showed significantly improved values of clinical BP, cardiac indicators, and echocardiographic parameters compared to those at baseline (p < 0.0001).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Sac/val was effective on BP and improved cardiac function in patients complicated with HP and HF. The physicians should focus on patients with renal dysfunction to take timely precautions to improve tolerability for sac/val.

The effects of sacubitril/valsartan on heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers, Sacubitril/Valsartan has been reported to have superior results. However, the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are still in dispute.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to evaluate the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on the treatment of HFpEF patients.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov were used to search for randomised controlled trials of sacubitril/valsartan in HFpEF patients from inception to 7 December 2020.

RESULTS

Four studies, with a total of 7739 participants, met the inclusion criteria. The present meta-analysis results showed that compared with the control group, sacubitril/valsartan reduced the hospitalisation rate of HF in HFpEF patients [Risk Ratio(RR): 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.79-0.93; p = 0.0002). Regarding all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and the improvement in NYHA class, sacubitril/valsartan did not show apparent advantages. Although sacubitril/valsartan was linked to increasing the risk of symptomatic hypotension (RR: 1.44; 95% CI: 1.25-1.66; p﹤0.00001), there was no evidence supporting the incidence of renal function worsening and hyperkalemia.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that compared with valsartan or individualised medical therapy (IMT), there were not different between the two groups except for the hospitalisation rate which was favoured by Sacubitril/Valsartan treatment group for HFpEF patients.

Adverse events of sacubitril/valsartan: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

ABSTRACT

This review aimed to summarize the adverse events (AEs) reported during the use of sacubitril/valsartan versus ACEI/ARB. Studies containing safety outcomes or AEs during the use of sacubitril/valsartan versus ACEI/ARB were retrieved from the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library databases and clinical trials. From the selected studies, the pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of dichotomous outcomes were assessed by a random or fixed effects model in our meta-analysis. Fourteen studies involving 20261 patients were included in this review. No significant differences were found in total AEs between the sacubitril/valsartan and ACEI/ARB groups. Compared with ACEI/ARB, sacubitril/valsartan decreased the risk of death, discontinuation due to AEs and renal dysfunction, while it increased the risk of hypotension. Specifically, sacubitril/valsartan decreased the risk of death compared with ACEI/ARB, while it increased the risk of hypotension for patients with heart failure (HF) and decreased the risk of discontinuation due to AEs in Caucasians. It also increased the risk of dizziness in Asians and decreased the risk of hyperkalemia and renal dysfunction, while it increased the risk of hypotension when the study duration ≥48 weeks. The available evidence showed that sacubitril/valsartan was associated with fewer side effects than ACEI/ARB, except for hypotension. Study duration, race, and patients with primary diseases affected the AEs of sacubitril/valsartan.

Efficacy and safety of sacubitril-valsartan in heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Aims

Sacubitril‐valsartan has been shown to have superior effects over angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers in patients with heart failure (HF) and hypertension. The efficacy and safety of sacubitril‐valsartan in patients with HF are controversial. We performed a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess and compare the effect and adverse events of sacubitril‐valsartan, valsartan, and enalapril in patients with HF.

Methods and results

We conducted a systematic search using PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Randomized controlled trials involving the use of sacubitril‐valsartan in patients with HF were included. We assessed the pooled odds ratio (OR) of all‐cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and hospitalization for HF in fixed‐effects models and the pooled risk ratio (RR) of symptomatic hypotension, worsening renal function, and hyperkalaemia in fixed‐effects models. Of the 315 identified records, six studies involving 14 959 patients were eligible for inclusion. Sacubitril‐valsartan reduced the endpoints of all‐cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in three trials with pooled ORs of 0.83 (P = 0.0006) and 0.78 (P < 0.0001), respectively. Regarding the composite outcome of hospitalization for HF in five trials, the pooled OR was 0.79 (P < 0.00001). Compared with enalapril or valsartan, sacubitril‐valsartan was associated with a high risk of symptomatic hypotension (RR 1.47, P < 0.00001), low risk of worsening renal function (RR 0.81, P = 0.005), and low rate of serious hyperkalaemia (≥6.0 mmol/L) (RR 0.76, P = 0.0007) in all six trials.

Conclusions

Compared with angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, sacubitril‐valsartan significantly decreased the risk of death from all causes or cardiovascular causes in HFrEF and hospitalization for HF in both patients with HFrEF and HF with preserved ejection fraction. Sacubitril‐valsartan reduced the risk of renal dysfunction and serious hyperkalaemia but was associated with more symptomatic hypotension.