Update on ranolazine in the management of angina

Pharmacotherapy in patients with vasomotor disorders

Background

Anginal symptoms in patients with non-obstructive coronary artery disease are frequently related to vasomotor disorders of the coronary circulation. Although frequently overlooked, a distinct diagnosis of different vasomotor disorders can be made by intracoronary function testing. Early detection and treatment seems beneficial, but little evidence is available for the medical treatment of these disorders. Nevertheless, there are several pharmacotherapeutic options available to treat these patients and improve quality of life.

Methods & findings

We performed an extensive yet non-systematic literature search to explore available pharmacotherapeutic strategies for addressing vasomotor disorders in individuals experiencing angina and non-obstructive coronary artery disease. This article presents a comprehensive overview of therapeutic possibilities for patients exhibiting abnormal vasoconstriction (such as spasm) and abnormal vasodilation (like coronary microvascular dysfunction).

Conclusion

Treatment of vasomotor disorders can be very challenging, but a general treatment algorithm based on the existing evidence and the best available current practice is feasible.

The Role of Ranolazine for the Treatment of Residual Angina beyond the Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization

INTRODUCTION

Despite a successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), several studies reported that the recurrence of angina after revascularization, even complete, is a particularly frequent occurrence in the first year after PCI.

METHODS

The aim was to evaluate the efficacy of treatment with ranolazine in addition to conventional anti-ischemic therapy in patients who underwent coronary angiography for persistent/recurrent angina after PCI and residual ischemia only due to small branches not suitable for further revascularization. Forty-nine consecutive patients were included in our registry, adding the ranolazine (375 mg b.i.d) to optimal medical therapy (OMT). The Exercise ECG Test (EET) was performed in all patients before to start the therapy (baseline BL) and at 30 days (T1) after enrollment.

RESULTS

The average duration of the exercise was increased after the therapy with ranolazine comparing to baseline (RG 9'1'' ± 2' versus BL 8'10'' ± 2', p = 0.01). Seven (14.3%) patients after receiving ranolazine had not crossed the threshold of six minutes (75 watts) compared to 20 (40.8%) of BL (p = 0.0003). Stress angina appeared more frequently at BL than at 30 days (T1 4.1% versus BL 16.3%, p = 0.04) as well as exercise-induced arrhythmias (BL 30.6% versus T1 14.3%, p = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of ranolazine to standard anti-ischemic therapy showed a significant improvement in EET results after one month of therapy, including reduced exercise angina, increased exercise tolerance, and reduced exercise arrhythmias.

Stable Angina Medical Therapy Management Guidelines: A Critical Review of Guidelines from the European Society of Cardiology and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence

Most patients with stable angina can be managed with lifestyle changes, especially smoking cessation and regular exercise, along with taking antianginal drugs. Randomised controlled trials show that antianginal drugs are equally effective and none of them reduced mortality or the risk of MI, yet guidelines prefer the use of beta-blockers and calcium channel blockers as a first-line treatment. The European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of stable coronary artery disease provide classes of recommendation with levels of evidence that are well defined. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines for the management of stable angina provide guidelines based on cost and effectiveness using the terms first-line and second-line therapy. Both guidelines recommend using low-dose aspirin and statins as disease-modifying agents. The aim of this article is to critically appraise the guidelines’ pharmacological recommendations for managing patients with stable angina.

Ranolazine for stable angina pectoris

BACKGROUND

Stable angina pectoris is a chronic medical condition with significant impact on mortality and quality of life; it can be macrovascular or microvascular in origin. Ranolazine is a second-line anti-anginal drug approved for use in people with stable angina. However, the effects of ranolazine for people with angina are considered to be modest, with uncertain clinical relevance.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of ranolazine on cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, quality of life, acute myocardial infarction incidence, angina episodes frequency and adverse events incidence in stable angina patients, used either as monotherapy or as add-on therapy, and compared to placebo or any other anti-anginal agent.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and the Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science in February 2016, as well as regional databases and trials registers. We also screened reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which directly compared the effects of ranolazine versus placebo or other anti-anginals in people with stable angina pectoris were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Estimates of treatment effects were calculated using risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD) and standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a fixed-effect model. Where we found statistically significant heterogeneity (Chi² P < 0.10), we used a random-effects model for pooling estimates. Meta-analysis was not performed where we found considerable heterogeneity (I² ≥ 75%). We used GRADE criteria to assess evidence quality and the GRADE profiler (GRADEpro GDT) to import data from Review Manager 5.3 to create 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 RCTs (9975 participants, mean age 63.3 years). We found very limited (or no) data to inform most planned comparisons. Summary data were used to inform comparison of ranolazine versus placebo. Overall, risk of bias was assessed as unclear.For add-on ranolazine compared to placebo, no data were available to estimate cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality. We found uncertainty about the effect of ranolazine on: all-cause mortality (1000 mg twice daily, RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.26 to 2.71; 3 studies, 2053 participants; low quality evidence); quality of life (any dose, SMD 0.25, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.52; 4 studies, 1563 participants; I² = 73%; moderate quality evidence); and incidence of non-fatal acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (1000mg twice daily, RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.08 to 2.07; 2 studies, 1509 participants; low quality evidence). Add-on ranolazine 1000 mg twice daily reduced the fervour of angina episodes (MD -0.66, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.35; 3 studies, 2004 participants; I² = 39%; moderate quality evidence) but increased the risk of non-serious adverse events (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.40; 3 studies, 2053 participants; moderate quality evidence).For ranolazine as monotherapy compared to placebo, we found uncertain effect on cardiovascular mortality (1000 mg twice daily, RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.88; 1 study, 2604 participants; low quality evidence). No data were available to estimate non-cardiovascular mortality. We also found an uncertain effect on all-cause mortality for ranolazine (1000 mg twice daily, RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.25; 3 studies, 6249 participants; low quality evidence), quality of life (1000 mg twice daily, MD 0.28, 95% CI -1.57 to 2.13; 3 studies, 2254 participants; moderate quality evidence), non-fatal AMI incidence (any dose, RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.12; 3 studies, 2983 participants; I² = 50%; low quality evidence), and frequency of angina episodes (any dose, MD 0.08, 95% CI -0.85 to 1.01; 2 studies, 402 participants; low quality evidence). We found an increased risk for non-serious adverse events associated with ranolazine (any dose, RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.00; 3 studies, 947 participants; very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found very low quality evidence showing that people with stable angina who received ranolazine as monotherapy had increased risk of presenting non-serious adverse events compared to those given placebo. We found low quality evidence indicating that people with stable angina who received ranolazine showed uncertain effect on the risk of cardiovascular death (for ranolazine given as monotherapy), all-cause death and non-fatal AMI, and the frequency of angina episodes (for ranolazine given as monotherapy) compared to those given placebo. Moderate quality evidence indicated that people with stable angina who received ranolazine showed uncertain effect on quality of life compared with people who received placebo. Moderate quality evidence also indicated that people with stable angina who received ranolazine as add-on therapy had fewer angina episodes but increased risk of presenting non-serious adverse events compared to those given placebo.