Search

This study aimed to evaluate the association between sacubitril/valsartan and dementia-related adverse events (AEs) in geographical subpopulations using subgroup disproportionality analysis. Cases from the FDA adverse event reporting system involving patients aged 60 or older with sacubitril/valsartan or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) were analyzed. The adjusted reporting odds ratios (RORs) for dementia-related AEs were calculated for each continent. A total of 61,518 AEs associated with sacubitril/valsartan or ARBs were identified. Among these, 1441 were dementia-related AEs. In Asia, Europe, and Africa, the reporting risk of dementia-related AEs associated with sacubitril/valsartan was lower compared to ARBs (adjusted ROR, 0.57 [95% CI 0.31–1.01]; adjusted ROR, 0.89 [95% CI 0.69–1.14]; adjusted ROR, 0.40 [95% CI 0.27–0.61], respectively). In Latin America and Oceania, the reporting risk of dementia-related AEs associated with sacubitril/valsartan was similar to that associated with ARBs (adjusted ROR, 1.04 [95% CI 0.75–1.44]; adjusted ROR, 1.02 [95% CI 0.31–3.37], respectively). On the contrary, in North America, the reporting risk associated with sacubitril/valsartan was higher compared to ARBs (adjusted ROR, 1.29 [95% CI 1.10–1.53]). Although the ROR value did not meet the criteria for signal detection, the significantly greater than 1 ROR observed in North America suggests that caution may be warranted regarding potential dementia-related adverse events associated with sacubitril/valsartan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Methods and results Conclusions Renin–angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) have been shown to lower haemoglobin levels, potentially related to reductions in erythropoietin levels and haematopoiesis. We examined whether sacubitril/valsartan might attenuate this effect of RASi alone on incident anaemia in patients with heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF).PARAGON‐HF was a global, multicentre randomized clinical trial of sacubitril/valsartan versus the RASi valsartan in patients with HF and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥45%. We evaluated haemoglobin trajectory and risks of incident anaemia and new iron therapy initiation during follow‐up. Among 4795 participants, 1111 (23.2%) had anaemia at randomization and 5.6% were treated with iron at baseline. Over a median follow‐up of 2.9 years, patients with anaemia were at significantly higher risk for total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death, compared with those without anaemia (21.6 vs. 11.5 per 100 patient‐years; adjusted rate ratio 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12–1.54; p = 0.001). Sacubitril/valsartan slightly slowed the decline in haemoglobin levels by 0.1 g/dl (95% CI 0.0–0.2 g/dl; p = 0.005). Participants treated with sacubitril/valsartan were at significantly lower risk of developing anaemia (30.3% vs. 37.6%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.76; 95% CI 0.68–0.85; p < 0.001) and starting iron therapy (8.1% vs. 10.0%; HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.67–0.97; p = 0.026). Treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan versus valsartan on total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death were consistent among patients across the haemoglobin spectrum (pinteraction = 0.60).Among patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF, treatment with sacubitril/valsartan resulted in modestly smaller declines in haemoglobin, lower rates of incident anaemia, and fewer new initiations of iron therapy compared with RASi.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01920711. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Cardiovascular‐kidney‐metabolic (CKM) multimorbidity is prevalent among individuals with heart failure (HF), but whether cardiac structure and function, clinical outcomes, and treatment response to sacubitril/valsartan vary in relation to CKM status is unknown. Methods and results: In this PARAGON‐HF post‐hoc analysis, we evaluated the impact of CKM multimorbidity (atherosclerotic cardiovascular [CV] disease, chronic kidney disease, and type 2 diabetes) on cardiac structure and function, clinical outcomes, and treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan versus valsartan. The primary outcome was a composite of total HF hospitalizations and CV death. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary outcome and a composite kidney outcome (sustained estimated glomerular filtration rate reduction of ≥50%, end‐stage kidney disease, or kidney‐related death). At baseline, 35.2% had one CKM condition, 33.3% had two, 15.9% had three, and only 15.6% had HF alone. CKM multimorbidity was associated with higher septal and posterior wall thickness, lower global longitudinal strain, higher E/e', and worse right ventricular function. Total HF hospitalizations or CV death increased with greater CKM multimorbidity, with the highest relative risk observed with three CKM conditions (rate ratio 3.06, 95% confidence interval 2.33–4.03), compared with HF alone. Treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan were consistent irrespective of the number of CKM conditions for the primary endpoint (pinteraction = 0.75), CV death (pinteraction = 0.82), total HF hospitalizations (pinteraction = 0.67), and the composite kidney endpoint (pinteraction = 0.99). Conclusions: Cardiovascular‐kidney‐metabolic multimorbidity was common in PARAGON‐HF and associated with adverse changes in cardiac structure and function and with a stepwise increase in risk of clinical outcomes. Treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan were consistent irrespective of CKM burden. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01920711. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are very few objectively studied and proven medical interventions for the management of pediatric heart failure. Due to improvement in morbidity and mortality in the adult heart failure population, sacubitril/valsartan has started to be used in pediatric patients. The aim of this study was to characterize the acute cardiovascular effects of sacubitril/valsartan in the first 48 h after initiation. Single center retrospective study of pediatric patients in the cardiac intensive care unit who were initiated on sacubitril/valsartan for the first time over a three-year period. Clinical data was collected immediately prior to and within 48 h following initiation. A total of 16 patients with a mean age of 9.6 years were started on sacubitril/valsartan with a mean daily dose of 1.6 mg/kg/day in the first 48 h. Significant decreases were noted in N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide and vasoactive-inotrope score. No significant changes were noted in other clinical variables. The initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in a small cohort of pediatric patients with heart failure in the cardiac intensive care unit is associated with a significant decrease in N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide with a concurrent decrease in vasoactive-inotrope score and without significant change venous oxygen extraction ratio or other hemodynamic variables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: A hypothetical concern has been raised that sacubitril/valsartan might cause cognitive impairment because neprilysin is one of several enzymes degrading amyloid-ß peptides in the brain, some of which are neurotoxic and linked to Alzheimer-type dementia. To address this, we examined the effect of sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan on cognitive function in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in a prespecified substudy of PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction). METHODS: In PARAGON-HF, serial assessment of cognitive function was conducted in a subset of patients with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE; score range, 0-30, with lower scores reflecting worse cognitive function). The prespecified primary analysis of this substudy was the change from baseline in MMSE score at 96 weeks. Other post hoc analyses included cognitive decline (fall in MMSE score of =3 points), cognitive impairment (MMSE score <24), or the occurrence of dementia-related adverse events. RESULTS: Among 2895 patients included in the MMSE substudy with baseline MMSE score measured, 1453 patients were assigned to sacubitril/valsartan and 1442 to valsartan. Their mean age was 73 years, and the median follow-up was 32 months. The mean±SD MMSE score at randomization was 27.4±3.0 in the sacubitril/valsartan group, with 10% having an MMSE score <24; the corresponding numbers were nearly identical in the valsartan group. The mean change from baseline to 96 weeks in the sacubitril/valsartan group was -0.05 (SE, 0.07); the corresponding change in the valsartan group was -0.04 (0.07). The mean between-treatment difference at week 96 was -0.01 (95% CI, -0.20 to 0.19; P=0.95). Analyses of a =3-point decline in MMSE, decrease to a score <24, dementia-related adverse events, and combinations of these showed no difference between sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan. No difference was found in the subgroup of patients tested for apolipoprotein E e4 allele genotype. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in PARAGON-HF had relatively low baseline MMSE scores. Cognitive change, measured by MMSE, did not differ between treatment with sacubitril/valsartan and treatment with valsartan in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The effects of initiating sacubitril/valsartan in patients with stable heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) on response to fluid and sodium expansion are unknown. Methods and results: We have explored changes in natriuresis, diuresis, and congestion in response to the administration of intravenous fluid/sodium load in patients with HFrEF before as compared to after the initiation of sacubitril/valsartan. At baseline (before sacubitril/valsartan initiation) and 2 and 3 months after the initiation, patients underwent an evaluation that consisted of three phases of 3 h: the rest phase (0–3 h), the load phase (3–6 h) in which 1 L of intravenous Ringer solution was administered, and the diuretic phase (6–9 h) at the beginning of which furosemide was administered. Overall, 216 patients completed the study. In comparison to baseline values, at 2 and 3 months after sacubitril/valsartan initiation, patients' diuresis and natriuresis in response to Ringer administration significantly increased (mean difference: 38.8 [17.38] ml, p = 0.0040, and 9.6 [2.02] mmol, p < 0.0001, respectively). Symptoms and signs of congestion after the fluid/sodium challenge were significantly decreased at months 2 and 3 compared to baseline. Compared to baseline, there was also an increment of natriuresis after furosemide administration on sacubitril/valsartan (9.8 [5.13] mmol, p = 0.0167). There was a significant decrease in body weight in subsequent visits when compared to baseline values (−0.50 [−12.7, 7.4] kg at 2 months, and −0.75 [−15.9, 7.5] kg at 3 months; both p < 0.0001). Conclusions: The initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in HFrEF patients was associated with improvements in natriuresis, diuresis, and weight loss and better clinical adaptation to potentially decongestive stressors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In addition to their usual use in the treatment of cardiovascular disease, weak evidence is available for the potential of combined use of neprilysin inhibitor (sacubitril) and AT1 receptor antagonist (valsartan) to promote browning of white adipose tissue (WAT) in rats with metabolic syndrome (MetS). This study involved 32 male Wistar albino rats divided into four groups: CTRL—healthy control rats; ENT—healthy rats treated with sacubitril/valsartan; MS—rats with MetS; MS + ENT—rats with MetS treated with sacubitril/valsartan. After finishing the experimental protocol, different WAT depots were isolated for further analysis of molecular pathways. Molecular docking and molecular dynamics studies were used for in silico assessment of the binding affinity of sacubitril and valsartan towards subunits of mechanistic target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1). Sacubitril/valsartan treatment markedly diminished morphological changes in adipose tissue, resulting in smaller lipid size and multilocular lipid droplet structure in WAT. We showed significantly higher protein expression of uncoupling protein‐1 (UCP‐1) and mTORC1 in WAT of MS + ENT rats, correlating with increased relative gene expression of browning‐related markers in tissue of rats treated with sacubitril/valsartan compared with MS group of rats. In silico analysis showed that sacubitrilat and valsartan exhibited the highest binding affinity against mTOR and mLST8, forming stable complexes with these mTORC1 subunits. The observed results confirmed strong potential of combined sacubitril/valsartan treatment to increase browning markers expression in different WAT depots in MetS condition and to form permanent complexes with mTOR and mLST8 subunits over the time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Sacubitril/valsartan is increasingly used in hemodialysis patients due to its cardioprotective benefits. However, its impact on serum potassium levels in anuric patients undergoing hemodialysis remains controversial. Methods: We conducted a retrospective data from patients undergoing hemodialysis at two dialysis centers. A total of 71 out of 332 patients receiving hemodialysis treatment were enrolled. Mean serum potassium (mean value of 6–8 determinations), peak serum potassium (maximum K value observed during follow‐up observations), and other biochemical parameters were recorded at baseline and during the follow‐up period. Findings: After 6 months of follow‐up, mean serum potassium increased from 4.84 ± 0.45 mmol/L at baseline to 5.07 ± 0.46 mmol/L at 3 months and 5.04 ± 0.46 mmol/L at 6 months (p < 0.001). Notably, no significant group differences were found in peak serum potassium concentrations between baseline and 6 months after sacubitril/valsartan therapy (5.69 ± 0.56 vs. 5.75 ± 0.41, p = 0.419). Prior to starting sacubitril/valsartan treatment, none of the patients had severe hyperkalemia; however, after 3 and 6 months of sacubitril/valsartan therapy, two (2.80%) and three (4.20%) patients experienced severe hyperkalemia, respectively; however, this difference was not statistically significant. Additionally, there was a significant reduction in blood pressure; however, serum sodium, bicarbonate, and Kt/V values did not change significantly during either period. Discussion: Sacubitril/valsartan therapy is associated with an increase in serum potassium levels in anuric hemodialysis patients. Nevertheless, the proportion of patients with severe hyperkalemia did not increase significantly. This suggests that the use of sacubitril/valsartan in anuric patients on hemodialysis is relatively safe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Intestinal ischemia reperfusion (IIR) is a critical emergency situation that needs immediate intervention. Small intestine is one of the most sensitive tissues to IR injury and it remains a highly morbid condition, with reported mortality rates ranging from 30% to 90%. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the suspected protective role of sacubitril/valsartan (SAC/VAL) on IIR injury. Methods: Thirty-two adult male Wistar rats were used in our model and divided into four groups: sham group, SAC/VAL treated group without IIR, IIR group, and SAC/VAL treated group with IIR. SAC/VAL in a dose of 30 mg/kg was administered orally just before induction of IIR. Key findings: SAC/VAL significantly ameliorated IIR-induced changes as it decreased malondialdehyde (MDA), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), angiotensin II (ANG II), interleukin 6 (IL 6), active caspase 3, and signal transducer- and activator-of transcription (STAT1). However, SAC/VAL administration significantly increased antioxidant parameters such as total antioxidant capacity (TAC), superoxide dismutase (SOD), and reduced glutathione (GSH). Moreover, alteration of the histological structure was observed in IIR group that was improved by SAC/VAL. Conclusions: SAC/VAL prevents IIR-induced damage via modulation of renin angiotensin aldosterone system, antioxidant, anti-apoptotic, anti-inflammatory properties, and regulation of IL6/STAT1 pathway. Graphical Abstract [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in abnormal renal function (eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73m2) patients combined with heart failure based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. The Embase, PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies from inception to December 2023. Dichotomous variables were described as event counts with the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) values. Continuous variables were expressed as mean standard deviation (SD) with 95% CIs. A total of 6 RCTs and 8 observational studies were included, involving 17335 eGFR below 60 ml/min/1.73m2 patients combined with heart failure. In terms of efficacy, we analyzed the incidence of cardiovascular events and found that sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization in chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages 3–5 patients with heart failure (OR: 0.65, 95%CI: 0.54–0.78). Moreover, sacubitril/valsartan prevented the serum creatinine elevation (OR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.68–0.95), the eGFR decline (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73–0.95) and the development of end-stage renal disease in this population (OR:0.73, 95%CI:0.60–0.89). As for safety outcomes, we did not find that the rate of hyperkalemia (OR:1.31, 95%CI:0.79–2.17) and hypotension (OR:1.57, 95%CI:0.94–2.62) were increased in sacubitril/valsartan group among CKD stages 3–5 patients with heart failure. Our meta-analysis proves that sacubitril/valsartan has a favorable effect on cardiac function without obvious risk of adverse events in abnormal renal function patients combined with heart failure, indicating that sacubitril/valsartan has the potential to become perspective treatment for these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) classification integrates both estimated glomerular filtration rate and urine-albumin-creatinine ratio to stratify risk more comprehensively in patients with chronic kidney disease. There are limited data assessing whether this classification system is associated with prognosis and treatment response in heart failure populations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relative treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan across the KDIGO risk categories in patients with HFrEF. PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) was a global randomized controlled trial evaluating sacubitril/valsartan vs enalapril in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Patients were classified according to low, moderate, and high/very high KDIGO risk. Treatment responses were assessed according to baseline KDIGO risk. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular (CV) death or heart failure hospitalization. A renal composite outcome was defined as sustained decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate by ≥40% or end-stage kidney disease. Among 1,910 (23% of total) participants with available data, 42%, 32%, and 26% were classified as low, moderate, and high/very high KDIGO risk, respectively. Patients in the highest KDIGO risk categories experienced the highest rates of the primary composite outcome (7.6 per 100 person-years [95% CI: 6.5-9.0 per 100 person-years], 9.4 per 100 person-years [95% CI: 7.9-11.2 per 100 person-years], and 14.9 per 100 person-years [95% CI: 12.7-17.6 per 100 person-years]; P < 0.001). Sacubitril/valsartan had a similar safety profile and demonstrated consistent effects on the risk of both the primary outcome (P Interaction = 0.31) and the renal composite outcome (P Interaction = 0.50) across the spectrum of KDIGO risk. One in 4 patients with HFrEF were classified as at least high KDIGO kidney risk; these individuals faced concordantly the highest risks of CV events. Sacubitril/valsartan exhibited consistent CV and kidney protective benefits as well as safety across the spectrum of baseline kidney risk. These data further support initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in HFrEF across a broad range of kidney risk. (This Study Will Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 Compared to Enalapril on Morbidity and Mortality of Patients With Chronic Heart Failure [PARADIGM-HF]; NCT01035255) [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Sacubitril/valsartan treatment reduces mortality and hospitalizations in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction but has limited application in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of sacubitril/valsartan on peak oxygen consumption (VO2) in patients with non‐obstructive HCM. Methods and results: This is a phase II, randomized, open‐label multicentre study that enrolled adult patients with symptomatic non‐obstructive HCM (New York Heart Association class I–III) who were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive sacubitril/valsartan (target dose 97/103 mg) or control for 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was a change in peak VO2. Secondary endpoints included echocardiographic measures of cardiac structure and function, natriuretic peptides and other cardiac biomarkers, and Minnesota Living with Heart Failure quality of life. Between May 2018 and October 2021, 354 patients were screened for eligibility, 115 patients (mean age 58 years, 37% female) met the study inclusion criteria and were randomly assigned to sacubitril/valsartan (n = 79) or control (n = 36). At 16 weeks, there was no significant change in peak VO2 from baseline in the sacubitril/valsartan (15.3 [4.3] vs. 15.9 [4.3] ml/kg/min, p = 0.13) or control group (p = 0.47). No clinically significant changes were found in blood pressure, cardiac structure and function, plasma biomarkers, or quality of life. Conclusion: In patients with HCM, a 16‐week treatment with sacubitril/valsartan was well tolerated but had no effect on exercise capacity, cardiac structure, or function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The PARACOR‐19 randomized controlled trial (RCT) was designed to examine the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on markers of cardiac injury, inflammation, structure, and function among patients who have recovered from acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) infection. Methods and results: PARACOR‐19 was a single‐centre, double‐blind RCT of patients with cardiovascular risk factors and a history of COVID‐19 infection 4–16 weeks prior to enrolment. Patients were randomized to sacubitril/valsartan (titrated to the maximum dose of 97/103 mg twice daily) versus matching placebo. Co‐primary endpoints were change from baseline to 12 weeks in high‐sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs‐cTnT) and soluble ST2 (sST2). Exploratory endpoints included change from baseline to 12 weeks in additional circulating biomarkers. Overall, 42 patients were randomized between August 2021 and March 2023 (n = 20 sacubitril/valsartan, n = 22 placebo). Median (25th–75th) time from COVID‐19 diagnosis to enrolment was 67 (48–80) days. Median age was 67 (62–71) years, 48% were female, and 91% were White. Compared with placebo, sacubitril/valsartan did not have a significant effect on the co‐primary endpoints of change from baseline in hs‐TnT and sST2 (all p ≥ 0.29). In exploratory analyses, sacubitril/valsartan led to a 46% greater reduction in N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide (NT‐proBNP) and 51% greater reduction in C‐terminal telopeptide of collagen type I (CITP). Permanent drug discontinuation occurred in four patients in the sacubitril/valsartan group and three patients in the placebo group. There were no deaths and one patient was hospitalized in each group. Conclusion: In this pilot RCT of patients who recovered from acute COVID‐19, sacubitril/valsartan did not lower hs‐cTnT or sST2 compared with placebo. Exploratory analyses suggested potential benefits of sacubitril/valsartan on cardiac wall stress and collagen turnover as measured by NT‐proBNP and CITP. Sacubitril/valsartan was well tolerated. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04883528. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic inflammation is a constant phenomenon which accompanies the heart failure pathophysiology. In all phenotypes of heart failure, irrespective of the ejection fraction, there is a permanent low-grade activation and synthesis of proinflammatory cytokines. Many classes of anti-remodelling medication used in the treatment of chronic heart failure have been postulated to have an anti-inflammatory effect. Methods: This retrospective study enrolled 220 patients and focused on evaluating the effect of the most used active substances from these classes in reducing the level of inflammatory biomarkers (C reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate and fibrinogen) after initiation or up-titration. Our research is evaluating if this anti-inflammatory effect intensifies while raising the dose. The evaluation was performed at two visits with an interval between them of 6 months. Results: From the beta-blockers class, carvedilol showed a reduction in erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), in low (6.25 mg, bi daily) and medium (12.5 mg, bi daily) doses. At the same time, sacubitril/valsartan showed a reduction in CRP levels. This effect was obtained only in the medium (49/51 mg, bi daily) and high (97/103 mg, bi daily) doses, with the maximum reduction being observed in the high dose. Conclusions: From the classes of medication evaluated, the study showed a significant reduction in ESR levels in the low and medium doses of carvedilol and a reduction in CRP values in the cases of medium and high doses of ARNI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Patients with heart failure (HF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have a particularly high prevalence of comorbidities, often necessitating treatment with many medications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between polypharmacy status and outcomes in PARAGON‐HF. Methods and results: In this post hoc analysis, baseline medication status was available in 4793 of 4796 patients included in the primary analysis of PARAGON‐HF. The effects of sacubitril/valsartan, compared with valsartan, were assessed according to the number of medications at baseline: 683 non‐polypharmacy (<5 medications); 2750 polypharmacy (5–9 medications), and 1360 hyper‐polypharmacy (≥10 medications). The primary outcome was total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular deaths. Patients with hyper‐polypharmacy were older, had more severe limitations due to HF (worse New York Heart Association class and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores), and had greater comorbidity. The non‐adjusted risk of the primary outcome was significantly higher in patients taking more medications, and similar trends were seen for HF hospitalization and cardiovascular and all‐cause death. The effect of sacubitril/valsartan versus valsartan on the primary outcome from the lowest to highest polypharmacy category was (as a rate ratio): 1.19 (0.76–1.85), 0.94 (0.77–1.15), and 0.77 (0.61–0.96) (pinteraction = 0.16). Treatment‐related adverse events were more common in patients in the higher polypharmacy categories but not more common with sacubitril/valsartan, versus valsartan, in any polypharmacy category. Conclusions: Polypharmacy is very common in patients with HFpEF, and those with polypharmacy have worse clinical status and a higher rate of non‐fatal and fatal outcomes. The benefit of sacubitril/valsartan was not diminished in patients taking a larger number of medications at baseline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The first angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor on the market, sacubitril-valsartan, has shown marked improvements in death and hospitalization for heart failure among adults, and is now approved for use in pediatric heart failure. While the ongoing PANORAMA-HF trial is evaluating the effectiveness of sacubitril-valsartan for pediatric patients with a failing systemic left ventricle, the enrollment criteria do not include the majority of pediatric heart failure patients. Additional studies are needed. Using the TriNetX database, we performed a propensity score matched, retrospective cohort study to assess the incidence of a composite of all-cause mortality or heart transplant within 1 year. The 519 patients who received sacubitril-valsartan were compared to 519 matched controls who received an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE) or angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB). There was no significant difference in the incidence of the composite outcome with sacubitril-valsartan over an ACE/ARB (13.3% vs 13.2%, p = 0.95), or among the components of mortality (5.0% vs 5.8%, p = 0.58) or heart transplantation (8.7% vs 7.5%, p = 0.50). Patients who were receiving full goal-directed medical therapy (14.4% vs 16.0%, p = 0.55) also showed no difference in the composite outcome. We observed a significantly increased incidence of hypotension (10% vs 5.2%, p = 0.006) and a trend toward reduced number of hospitalizations per year (mean (SD) 1.3 (4.4) vs 2.0 (9.1), p = 0.09). Sacubitril-valsartan is not associated with a decrease in the composite of all-cause mortality or heart transplantation within 1 year. Future studies should evaluate the possible reduction in hospitalizations and optimal dosing to minimize hypotension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective • Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a prevalent and clinically significant condition characterized by limited treatment options. In this context, the objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan compared to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in managing HFpEF. Methods • A systematic search of relevant studies was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials comparing sacubitril/valsartan to ACEIs or ARBs in HFpEF patients were included. Inclusion criteria: LVEF>45%, NYHA II-IV, Sac/Val vs ACEI/ARB, RCTs, treatment duration >3 months, sample size ≥25 per group. Exclusion criteria: Animal studies, unclear/missing data, poor quality, case studies/expert opinions. Hospitalization for heart failure and cardiovascular mortality were the primary outcomes, while the additional results included mortality from all causes, improvement of NYHA class, modifications in NT-proBNP, and with LVEF. Results • Sacubitril/valsartan substantially reduced heart failure hospitalization rates compared to ACEIs and ARBs, according to a total of six studies involving 5,201 participants (Relative Risk, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.85; P = .001). Nonetheless, there were no significant improvements in mortality due to cardiovascular disease (Relative Risk, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.79-1.12; P = .563). Sacubitril/valsartan did not affect total mortality from all causes significantly (Relative Risk, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.84-1.09; P = .453), but it did enhance NYHA classification (Relative Risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.10-1.43; P = .001). NT-proBNP levels decreased substantially (Weighted Mean Difference, -266.67; 95% CI, -525.86 to -7.47), whereas there had been little major shift in LVEF (Weighted Mean Difference, 1.49; 95% CI, -1.33 to 4.21; P = .342). Conclusions • Sacubitril/valsartan may provide superior benefits in reducing heart failure hospitalization rates, NT-proBNP levels, and improving NYHA classification in patients with HFpEF compared to ACEIs and ARBs. Sacubitril/valsartan might be considered as a preferred treatment option for HFpEF patients due to its benefits in reducing heart failure hospitalization rates and improving symptom severity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The intracellular sensor protein complex known as the NACHT, LRR, and PYD domain-containing protein 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome plays a crucial role in regulating inflammatory diseases by overseeing the production of interleukin (IL)-1β and IL-18. Targeting its abnormal activation with drugs holds significant promise for inflammation treatment. This study highlights LCZ696, an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, as an effective suppressor of NLRP3 inflammasome activation in macrophages stimulated by ATP, nigericin, and monosodium urate. LCZ696 also reduces caspase-11 and GSDMD activation, lactate dehydrogenase release, propidium iodide uptake, and the extracellular release of NLRP3 and apoptosis-associated speck-like protein containing a caspase recruitment domain (ASC) in ATP-activated macrophages, suggesting a potential mitigation of pyroptosis. Mechanistically, LCZ696 lowers mitochondrial reactive oxygen species and preserves mitochondrial integrity. Importantly, it does not significantly impact NLRP3, proIL-1β, inducible nitric oxide synthase, cyclooxygenase-2 expression, or NF-κB activation in lipopolysaccharide-activated macrophages. LCZ696 partially inhibits the NLRP3 inflammasome through the induction of autophagy. In an in vivo context, LCZ696 alleviates NLRP3-associated colitis in a mouse model by reducing colonic expression of IL-1β and tumor necrosis factor-α. Collectively, these findings suggest that LCZ696 holds significant promise as a therapeutic agent for ameliorating NLRP3 inflammasome activation in various inflammatory diseases, extending beyond its established use in hypertension and heart failure treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of aging on the effectiveness and tolerance of sacubitril/valsartan (sac/val) among hypertensive patients complicated with heart failure in a real-world setting. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective study included patients (=18 years old) admitted with a diagnosis of hypertension and heart failure, starting sac/val therapy between January 2020 and December 2021 from 3 medical centers. Patients were grouped by the cutoff age of 65 years. Outcomes were collected 31-365 days after the initiation of sac/val and were compared in a matched cohort after 1: 1 propensity score matching (PSM). Results: A total of 794 patients were finally analyzed. Blood pressure and cardiac functions improved significantly compared with values at baseline. There were 269 patients in each cohort (<65 years and ≥65 years) after PSM. After PSM, the incidence of hyperuricemia and hypotension in the elderly patients (≥65 years) was significantly higher than in those <65 years of age. Kaplan-Meier estimate suggested that the cumulative incidence of new or recurrent cardiovascular events increased significantly at the age of ≥65 years after the point of 3 months (log-rank P = .00087). Conclusion: Sac/val benefited patients in both cohorts by improving blood pressure and cardiac function. Elderly patients (=65 years) were susceptible to hypotension, low diastolic blood pressure, hyperuricemia, and underwent cardiac-related readmissions more frequently. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF) across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) has not been described. Data from randomized trials of sacubitril/valsartan in HF patients with EF ≤40% (PIONEER-HF [Comparison of Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Enalapril on Effect of NT-proBNP in Patients Stabilized From an Acute Heart Failure Episode] trial) and >40% (PARAGLIDE-HF [Prospective comparison of ARNI with ARB Given following stabiLization In DEcompensated HFpEF] trial) following recent worsening heart failure (WHF) were pooled to examine treatment effect across the EF spectrum. The PIONEER-HF and PARAGLIDE-HF trials were double-blind, randomized trials of sacubitril/valsartan vs control therapy (enalapril or valsartan, respectively). All participants in the PIONEER-HF trial and 69.5% in the PARAGLIDE-HF trial were enrolled during hospitalization for HF after stabilization. The remainder in the PARAGLIDE-HF trial were enrolled ≤30 days after a WHF event. The primary endpoint of both trials was time-averaged proportional change in N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) from baseline through weeks 4 and 8. Adjudicated clinical endpoints were analyzed through the end of follow-up, adjusting for trial. The pooled analysis included 1,347 patients (881 from PIONEER-HF, 466 from PARAGLIDE-HF). Baseline characteristics included median age 66 years, 36% women, 31% Black, 34% de novo HF, and median EF 30%. The reduction in NT-proBNP was 24% greater with sacubitril/valsartan vs control therapy (n = 1,130; ratio of change = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.69-0.83; P < 0.0001). Cardiovascular death or hospitalization for HF was reduced by 30% with sacubitril/valsartan vs control therapy (HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.54-0.91; P = 0.0077). This effect was consistent across the spectrum of EF ≤60%. Sacubitril/valsartan increased symptomatic hypotension (risk ratio: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.05-1.72). In patients stabilized after WHF, sacubitril/valsartan led to a greater reduction in plasma NT-proBNP and improved clinical outcome compared with control therapy, in particular across the spectrum of EF ≤60%. (Comparison of Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Enalapril on Effect of NT-proBNP in Patients Stabilized From an Acute Heart Failure Episode [PIONEER-HF]; NCT02554890 ; Changes in NT-proBNP, Safety, and Tolerability in HFpEF Patients With a WHF Event [HFpEF Decompensation] Who Have Been Stabilized and Initiated at the Time of or Within 30 Days Post-decompensation [PARAGLIDE-HF]; NCT03988634) [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sacubitril/valsartan improves heart failure (HF) outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with heart failure and mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have shown inconsistent results. We conducted this meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan compared to valsartan within this specific patient population. Methods: We searched the MEDLINE database and ClinicalTrials.gov and identified four RCTs that could be included in our analysis, with 3375 patients in the sacubitril/valsartan group and 3362 in the valsartan group. Results: Our study shows that, in patients with HFmrEF and HFpEF, sacubitril/valsartan was superior to valsartan in some of the key HF outcomes, such as the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ CSS), with a small but significant mean difference of 1.13 (95% confidence interval or CI of 0.15 to 2.11, p-value 0.024), an improvement in the New York Heart Association (NYHA) class (odds ratio or OR of 1.32, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.58, p-value 0.002), and the composite outcome of hospitalizations for HF and cardiovascular death, with a relative risk (RR) of 0.86 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.99, p-value 0.04). However, there was no additional benefit with sacubitril/valsartan compared to valsartan for the outcomes of cardiovascular death and all-cause mortality. In terms of side effects, sacubitril/valsartan was associated with a higher risk of hypotension when compared to valsartan (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.19, p-value < 0.0001), but did not show an increased risk of hyperkalemia or worsening renal function. Conclusions: In individuals with HFmrEF or HFpEF, sacubitril/valsartan can result in improvements in the HF outcomes of the KCCQ CSS, the NYHA class, and the composite outcome of hospitalization for HF and cardiovascular death when compared to valsartan. While there was a higher risk of hypotension with sacubitril/valsartan compared to valsartan, there was no corresponding increase in the risk of hyperkalemia or worsening renal function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Non-responders to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-NR) have poor prognosis. Sacubitril/valsartan (SV) treatment improved the outcome of patients with heart failure with reduced left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (HFrEF) in randomized trials with no data on the specific cohort of CRT-NRs. The aim of this study was to compare the echocardiographic and biomarker changes in CRT-NR patients treated with versus without SV, and in patients with HFrEF on SV therapy. Methods: CRT-NR patients initiated on SV (group I), CRT-NR patients on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEi/ARB) (group II), and patients with HFrEF (without CRT) initiated on SV (group III) were identified in our heart failure (HF) registry. CRT-NR was defined as < 10% improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LV EF) 6 months after the implantation. Echocardiographic parameters and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels at baseline and at the end of follow-up were compared. Results: A total of 275 patients (group I, 70; group II, 70; and group III, 135) were included. After a follow-up of 7.54 ± 1.8 months (mean ± standard deviation [SD]), LV EF (%) increased in group I (25.2 ± 5.7 versus 29.4% ± 6.7; p < 0.001) and in group III (26.6 ± 6.4 versus 29.9 ± 6.7; p < 0.001). LV end-systolic diameters (mm) decreased in group I (56.6 ± 9.0 versus 54.3 ± 8.7; p = 0.004) and in group III (55.9 ± 9.9 versus 54.3 ± 11.2; p = 0.021). The levels of NT-proBNP (pg/mL) decreased in group I (2058.86 [1041.07–4502.51] versus 1121.55 [545–2541]; p < 0.001) and in group III (2223.35 [1233.03–4795.96] versus 1123.09 [500.38–2651.27]; p < 0.001). The extent of improvement was similar in groups I and III (p > 0.05). No significant changes were detected in group II. Conclusion: SV therapy induced similar improvements in echocardiographic parameters and in NT-proBNP levels in CRT-NR patients and in patients with HFrEF without resynchronization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) poses significant challenges for clinicians and researchers, owing to its multifaceted aetiology and complex treatment regimens. In light of this, artificial intelligence methods offer an innovative approach to identifying relationships within complex clinical datasets. Our study aims to explore the potential for machine learning algorithms to provide deeper insights into datasets of HFrEF patients. Methods: To this end, we analysed a cohort of 386 HFrEF patients who had been initiated on sodium‐glucose co‐transporter‐2 inhibitor treatment and had completed a minimum of a 6‐month follow‐up. Results: In traditional frequentist statistical analyses, patients receiving the highest doses of beta‐blockers (BBs) (chi‐square test, P =.036) and those newly initiated on sacubitril‐valsartan (chi‐square test, P =.023) showed better outcomes. However, none of these pharmacological features stood out as independent predictors of improved outcomes in the Cox proportional hazards model. In contrast, when employing eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) algorithms in conjunction with the data using Shapley additive explanations (SHAP), we identified several models with significant predictive power. The XGBoost algorithm inherently accommodates non‐linear distribution, multicollinearity and confounding. Within this framework, pharmacological categories like 'newly initiated treatment with sacubitril/valsartan' and 'BB dose escalation' emerged as strong predictors of long‐term outcomes. Conclusions: In this manuscript, we not only emphasize the strengths of this machine learning approach but also discuss its potential limitations and the risk of identifying statistically significant yet clinically irrelevant predictors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this study was to assess the correlation between alterations in the distribution width of red blood cells (RDW) and the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFRF) receiving sacubitril/valsartan therapy. Implementing Methods: After obtaining permission from the Institutional Ethics Committee, the present study was initiated. This study retrospectively examined the medical records of hospitalized patients diagnosed with HFRF. The patients were allocated into two distinct groups, namely, the traditional group and the sacubitril/valsartan group, based on whether sacubitril/valsartan was incorporated into their individual pharmacological treatment regimen. The RDW values before and after treatment with sacubitril/valsartan are documented as RDW1 and RDW2, respectively. ΔRDW is defined as the value obtained by subtracting RDW1 from RDW2. Based on ΔRDW >0 or ≤0, patients in the sacubitril/valsartan group were categorized into two subgroups. MACEs, including mortality and readmission for myocardial infarction, acute myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke, were documented in each cohort throughout the one-year follow-up period. Findings: Patients who received sacubitril/valsartan exhibited a reduced incidence of MACE compared to those who received conventional therapy (log-rank, P<0.001). During the follow-up period, the incidence of cardiac events was significantly higher in the ΔRDW >0 group than in the ΔRDW ≤ 0 group (Breslow, P<0.001). There was a significant positive correlation between increased RDW and a decreased likelihood of developing MACE (odds ratio [OR] = 3.044, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.592-4.357). Furthermore, for every unit increase in RDW, the risk of developing MACE increased by 23.2% (OR=2.332, 95% CI:1.185-2.499). Treatment with sacubitril/valsartan effectively reduced the incidence of MACEs in HFRF patients. In addition, variations in RDW serve as predictors of MACEs after sacubitril/valsartan treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objective: Dyslipidemia is significantly more common in those with concurrent chronic kidney disease (CKD) and chronic heart failure (CHF). Sacubitril/valsartan has showcased its influence on both cardiac and renal functions, extending its influence to the modulation of lipid metabolism pathways. This study aimed to examine how sacubitril/valsartan affects lipid metabolism within the context of CKD and CHF. Methods: This study adopted a retrospective design, focusing on a single center and involving participants who were subjected to treatment with sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan. The investigation assessed the treatment duration, with a particular emphasis on recording blood lipid indicators, including triglyceride (TG), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), apolipoprotein A (ApoA), and apolipoprotein B (ApoB). Furthermore, cardiac and renal functions, blood pressure, potassium levels, and other factors influencing the blood lipids were analyzed in both groups at identical time points. Results: After 16 weeks of observation, the sacubitril/valsartan group exhibited lower TG levels compared to the valsartan group. Noteworthy was the fact that individuals undergoing sacubitril/valsartan treatment experienced an average reduction of 0.84 mmol/L in TG levels, in stark contrast to the valsartan group, which registered a decline of 0.27 mmol/L (P < 0.001). The sacubitril/valsartan group exhibited elevated levels of HDL-C and ApoA in comparison to the valsartan group (PHDL-C = 0.023, PApoA = 0.030). While TC, LDL-C, and ApoB decreased compared to baseline, the differences between groups were not statistical significance. Regarding cardiac indicators, there was an observed enhancement in the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) within the sacubitril/valsartan group when compared to the baseline, and it was noticeably higher than that of the valsartan group. Spearman correlation analysis and multiple linear regression analysis revealed that medication, body mass index(BMI), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) had a direct influencing effect on TG levels. Conclusion: Sacubitril/valsartan demonstrated improvements in lipid metabolism and cardiac indicators in patients with CKD and CHF. Specifically, it presented promising benefits in reducing TG levels. In addition, both BMI and HbA1c emerged as influential factors contributing to alterations in TG levels, independent of the administration of sacubitril/valsartan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient Support Programmes (PSPs) are used by the pharmaceutical industry to provide education and support to consumers to overcome the challenges they face managing their condition and treatment. Whilst there is an increasing number of PSPs, limited information is available on whether these programmes contribute to safety signals. PSPs do not have a scientific hypothesis, nor are they governed by a protocol. However, by their nature, PSPs inevitably generate adverse event (AE) reports. The main goal of the research was to gather all Novartis-initiated PSPs for sacubitril/valsartan, followed by research in the company safety database to identify all AE reports emanating from these PSPs. Core data sheets (CDS) were reviewed to assess if these PSPs contributed to any new, regulatory-authority approved, validated signals. Overall, AEs entered into the safety database from PSPs confirmed no contribution to CDS updates. Detailed review of real-world data revealed tablet splitting or taking one higher dose tablet a day instead of twice daily. This research, and subsequent analyses, revealed that PSPs did not impact safety label changes for sacubitril/valsartan. It revealed an important finding concerning drug utilisation i.e. splitting of sacubitril/valsartan tablets to reduce cost. This finding suggests that PSPs may contribute important real-world data on patterns of medication usage. There remains a paucity of literature available on this topic, hence further research is required to assess if it would be worth designing PSPs for collecting data on drug utilisation and (lack of) efficacy. Such information from PSPs could be important for all stakeholders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Tubulointerstitial fibrosis plays an important role in the progression of diabetic kidney disease (DKD). Sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val) exerts a robust beneficial effect in DKD. However, the potential functional effect of Sac/Val on tubulointerstitial fibrosis in DKD is still largely unclear. Methods: Streptozotocin-induced diabetic mice were given Sac/Val or Val by intragastric administration once a day for 12 weeks. The renal function, the pathological changes of tubule injury and tubulointerstitial fibrosis, as well as mitochondrial morphology of renal tubules in mice, were evaluated. Genome-wide gene expression analysis was performed to identify the potential mechanisms. Meanwhile, human tubular epithelial cells (HK-2) were cultured in high glucose condition containing LBQ657/valsartan (LBQ/Val). Further, mitochondrial functions and Sirt1/PGC1α pathway of tubular epithelial cells were assessed by Western blot, Real-time-PCR, JC-1, MitoSOX or MitoTracker. Finally, the Sirt1 specific inhibitor, EX527, was used to explore the potential effects of Sirt1 signaling in vivo and in vitro. Results: We found that Sac/Val significantly ameliorated the decline of renal function and tubulointerstitial fibrosis in DKD mice. The enrichment analysis of gene expression indicated metabolism as an important modulator in DKD mice with Sac/Val administration, in which mitochondrial homeostasis plays a pivotal role. Then, the decreased expression of Tfam and Cox IV;, as well as changes of mitochondrial function and morphology, demonstrated the disruption of mitochondrial homeostasis under DKD conditions. Interestingly, Sac/Val administration was found to restore mitochondrial homeostasis in DKD mice and in vitro model of HK-2 cells. Further, we demonstrated that Sirt1/PGC1α, a crucial pathway in mitochondrial homeostasis, was activated by Sac/Val both in vivo and in vitro. Finally, the beneficial effects of Sac/Val on mitochondrial homeostasis and tubulointerstitial fibrosis was partially abolished in the presence of Sirt1 specific inhibitor. Conclusions: Taken together, we demonstrate that Sac/Val ameliorates tubulointerstitial fibrosis by restoring Sirt1/PGC1α pathway-mediated mitochondrial homeostasis in DKD, providing a theoretical basis for delaying the progression of DKD in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Objectives] To observe the effect of Guanxin-V Mixture combined with Sacubitril Valsartan on cardiac function in patients after PCI for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STE-MI). [Methods] 41 cases of STEMI patients (qi and yin deficiency and blood stasis and obstruction) hospitalized in Nanjing Hospital of Chinese Medicine affiliated to Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine from January 2020 to June 2021 were randomly divided into 21 cases in the treatment group and 20 cases in the control group, and the two groups were given standardized Western medicine treatment as soon as possible after PCI. The control group was treated with Sacubitril Valsartan, and the treatment group was treated with Guanxin-V Mixture on the basis of treatment in the control group. The patients in the two groups were treated for 3 months, and the TCM syndrome score, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and N-Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels, and the incidence of heart failure and adverse reactions in the two groups after treatment were recorded. [Results] After the treatment, the TCM syndrome score and serum NT-proBNP, IL-6 and hs-CRP levels of the two groups significantly decreased (P<0.05), and the levels of the treatment group were significantly lower than those of the control group (P<0.05); the LVEF of the two groups significantly increased (P<0.05), and the level of the treatment group was significantly higher than that of the control group (P<0.05). Comparison of the incidence of heart failure and adverse reactions in the two groups showed no statistically significant differences (P>0.05). [Conclusions] Guanxin-V Mixture combined with Sacubitril Valsartan could significantly improve cardiac function in STEMI patients undergoing PCI, and its effect may be related to the suppression of inflammatory response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sacubitril/valsartan has become an important first-line drug for symptomatic heart failure (HF) patients, especially with left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50%. However, the impact of sacubitril/valsartan on cardiovascular outcomes, especially LV reverse remodeling for such patients with low blood pressure, remains uncertain. We retrospectively studied 164 HF patients with LVEF < 50% who were treated with sacubitril/valsartan from two institutions. Echocardiography was performed before and 9.5 ± 5.1 months after initiation of maximum tolerated dose of sacubitril/valsartan. The maximum tolerated dose of sacubitril/valsartan was lower for the low blood pressure group (≤ 100 mmHg in systole) than for the non-low blood pressure group (> 100 mmHg in systole) (165 ± 106 mg vs. 238 ± 124 mg, P = 0.017). As expected, significant LV reverse remodeling was observed in the non-low blood pressure group after initiation of sacubitril/valsartan. It was noteworthy that significant LV reverse remodeling was also observed in the low blood pressure group after initiation of sacubitril/valsartan (LV end‐diastolic volume: 177.3 ± 66.0 mL vs. 137.7 ± 56.1 mL, P < 0.001, LV end-systolic volume: 131.6 ± 60.3 mL vs. 94.6 ± 55.7 mL, P < 0.001, LVEF: 26.8 ± 10.3% vs. 33.8 ± 13.6%, P = 0.015). Relative changes in LV volumes and LVEF after initiation of sacubitril/valsartan were similar for the two groups. In conclusion, significant LV reverse remodeling occurred after initiation of sacubitril/valsartan, even in HF patients with LVEF < 50% and systolic blood pressure ≤ 100 mmHg. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate the renoprotective effect of sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val) against angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB). Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a thorough search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library was performed up to May 18, 2023. Eligibility criteria included prospective, randomized, controlled trials comparing sac/Val and ACEI/ARB with regard to renal outcomes. Data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken independently by two reviewers. Fixed or random effects models were used depending on the heterogeneity among studies. Subgroup analyses were performed based on the presence or absence of heart failure. Results: Eleven trials with varied patient populations and clinical settings were included. The metaanalysis revealed that Sac/Val exhibited a significantly reduced risk of renal function decline compared to ACEI/ARB (Risk Ratio (RR) = 0.86, 95 % Confidence Interval (CI) (0.78, 0.96), p = 0.016). Subgroup analysis showed that the renoprotective effect was significant in patients with heart failure (RR = 0.84, 95 % CI (0.75, 0.94), p = 0.011), but not in non-heart failure patients (RR = 1.04, 95 % CI (0.80, 1.37), p = 0.66). Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that Sac/Val confers substantial renoprotective effect compared with ACEI/ARB, particularly among heart failure patients. However, further research is required to elaborate on the full potential of Sac/Val as a nephroprotective agent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To explore the efficacy of a new anti-heart failure drug, Entresto, in the prevention of cardiotoxicity caused by doxorubicin (DOX). Methods Male adult ICR mice were randomly divided into three groups (n = 8) : control group, DOX group and DOX plus Entresto group. Cardiac function of mice was measured by echocardiography. H9c2 cells were pretreated with Entresto (0 - 48 μmol/L) for 24 hours in the presence or absence of DOX (1 mmol/L), and then cell viability, oxidative stress, apoptosis and mitochondrial function were evaluated. Results As compared with the control group, leakage of CK, CK-MB and LDH increased significantly in the DOX group (P < 0.01), and left ventricular systolic dysfunction occurred. Entresto administration reversed these changes in the DOX group. The level of ROS and the number of apoptotic cells in cardiomyocytes in the DOX plus Entresto group were lower than those in the DOX group (P < 0.05). As compared with the DOX group, the level of ROS and the number of apoptotic cells in H9c2 cells decreased significantly in the Entresto plus DOX group (P < 0.05), and mitochondrial membrane potential increased significantly (P < 0.05). Entresto reversed the inhibitory effect of DOX on SIRT1/PGC-1α/MFN2 signaling pathway. Conclusions Entresto improves DOX-induced cardiotoxicity by inhibiting ROS-mediated oxidative stress and apoptosis, and its mechanism may be related to SIRT1/PGC- 1α/MFN2 signal transduction pathway. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the efficacy of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) combined with either sacubitril/valsartan or enalapril in the treatment of chronic heart failure (CHF). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 138 patients with CHF admitted to Dazhou Central Hospital between June 2020 and June 2022 to extract clinical data. We divided the data into two treatment groups for the analysis: 71 patients received LBBP combined with sacubitril/valsartan treatment (sacubitril/valsartan group), and 67 received LBBP combined with enalapril treatment (enalapril group). The levels of cardiac and cardiopulmonary function indicators, levels of myocardial injury markers, and the scores of the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) before and after the treatment were compared between the two groups. Results: After six months of treatment, patients in the sacubitril/valsartan group had lower myocardial injury markers, higher cardiopulmonary function indicators, and lower MLHFQ scores (P<0.05). Conclusions: In CHF patients, the combination of LBBP with sacubitril/valsartan had a better therapeutic effect compared to LBBP with enalapril, with more effective improvement of the cardiopulmonary function, reduction of myocardial injury, and improvement in quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: It is unknown whether safety and clinical endpoints by use of sacubitril/valsartan (an angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor [ARNI]) are affected by mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) in high‐risk myocardial infarction (MI) patients. The aim of this study was to examine whether MRA modifies safety and clinical endpoints by use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with a MI and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and/or pulmonary congestion. Methods and results: Patients (n = 5661) included in the PARADISE MI trial (Prospective ARNI vs. ACE Inhibitor Trial to Determine Superiority in Reducing Heart Failure Events After MI) were stratified according to MRA. Primary outcomes in this substudy were worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death. Safety was defined as symptomatic hypotension, hyperkalaemia >5.5 mmol/L, or permanent drug discontinuation. A total of 2338 patients (41%) were treated with MRA. Safety of ARNI compared to ramipril was not altered significantly by ± MRA, and both groups had similar increase in symptomatic hypotension with ARNI. In patients taking MRA, the risk of hyperkalaemia or permanent drug discontinuation was not significantly altered by ARNI (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). The effect of ARNI compared with ramipril was similar in those who were and were not taking MRA (hazard ratio [HR]MRA 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77–1.19 and HRMRA– 0.87, 95% CI 0.71–1.05, for the primary endpoint; p = 0.51 for interaction [Clinical Endpoint Committee adjudicated]); similar findings were observed if investigator‐reported endpoints were evaluated (p = 0.61 for interaction). Conclusions: Use of a MRA did not modify safety or clinical endpoints related to initiation of ARNI compared to ramipril in the post‐MI setting in patients with LVSD and/or congestion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: We sought to evaluate the mechanism of angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan therapy and compare it with a valsartan‐only control group in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods and results: The study was a phase IV, prospective, randomized, double‐blind, parallel‐group study in patients with New York Heart Association class II–III heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%. During a 6‐week run‐in period, all patients received valsartan therapy, which was up‐titrated to the highest tolerated dose level (80 mg bid or 160 mg bid) and then randomized to either valsartan or sacubitril/valsartan. Myocardial oxygen consumption, energetic efficiency of cardiac work, cardiac and systemic haemodynamics were quantified using echocardiography and 11C‐acetate positron emission tomography before and after 6 weeks of therapy (on stable dose) in 55 patients (ARNI group: n = 27, mean age 63 ± 10 years, LVEF 29.2 ± 10.4%; and valsartan‐only control group: n = 28, mean age 64 ± 8 years, LVEF 29.0 ± 7.3%; all p = NS). The energetic efficiency of cardiac work remained unchanged in both treatment arms. However, both diastolic (−4.5 mmHg; p = 0.026) and systolic blood pressure (−9.8 mmHg; p = 0.0007), myocardial perfusion (−0.054 ml/g/min; p = 0.045), and left ventricular mechanical work (−296; p = 0.038) decreased significantly in the ARNI group compared to the control group. Although myocardial oxygen consumption decreased in the ARNI group (−5.4%) compared with the run‐in period and remained unchanged in the control group (+0.5%), the between‐treatment group difference was not significant (p = 0.088). Conclusions: We found no differences in the energetic efficiency of cardiac work between ARNI and valsartan‐only groups in HFrEF patients. However, ARNI appears to have haemodynamic and cardiac mechanical effects over valsartan in heart failure patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in abnormal renal function (eGFR < 60ml/min/1.73m2 ) patients combined with heart failure based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Methods: The Embase, PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies from inception to December 2023. Dichotomous variables were described as event counts with the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) values. Continuous variables were expressed as mean standard deviation (SD) with 95% CIs. Results: A total of 6 RCTs and 8 observational studies were included, involving 17335 eGFR below 60ml/min/1.73m² patients combined with heart failure. In terms of efficacy, we analyzed the incidence of cardiovascular events and found that sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization in chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages 3–5 patients with heart failure (OR: 0.65, 95%CI: 0.54–0.78). Moreover, sacubitril/valsartan prevented the serum creatinine elevation (OR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.68–0.95), the eGFR decline (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73–0.95) and the development of end-stage renal disease in this population (OR:0.73, 95%CI:0.60– 0.89). As for safety outcomes, we did not find that the rate of hyperkalemia (OR:1.31, 95%CI:0.79– 2.17) and hypotension (OR:1.57, 95%CI:0.94–2.62) were increased in sacubitril/valsartan group among CKD stages 3–5 patients with heart failure. Conclusions: Our meta-analysis proves that sacubitril/valsartan has a favorable effect on cardiac function without obvious risk of adverse events in abnormal renal function patients combined with heart failure, indicating that sacubitril/valsartan has the potential to become perspective treatment for these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), an inactive prodrug of mycophenolic acid (MPA), is an immunosuppressive drug used widely in the treatment of lupus nephritis. In this case report, the area under the blood concentration time curve (AUC) of MPA was significantly decreased by the concomitant use of sacubitril/valsartan. Case Presentation: The patient was a man in his 40s with a diagnosis of lupus nephritis class IVa/c+V. MMF dose was 1.5 g/day at admission, and AUC of MPA on day 14 was 25.1 μg⋅h/mL. Owing to poor blood pressure control, sacubitril/valsartan was initiated at 97/103 mg/day on day 29. On day 37, AUC of MPA was significantly decreased to 8.7 μg⋅h/mL, suggesting drug interaction with the newly initiated sacubitril/valsartan. Sacubitril/valsartan was decreased to 49/51 mg/day, and AUC of MPA on day 67 was 37.6 μg⋅h/mL, achieving the target range. The final MMF dose was set at 1.75 g/day. A possible mechanism of drug interaction between sacubitril/valsartan and MPA involves an organic anion transporting polypeptide (OATP). The inhibition of OATPs by sacubitril may have interrupted the enterohepatic circulation of MPA, resulting in a lower plasma concentration. Conclusion: Since lupus nephritis is often associated with hypertension, the drug interaction observed in this report may also occur in other cases. However, it is impossible to conclude that the decrease in plasma MPA levels was due to the concomitant use of sacubitril/valsartan, and more cases and basic findings are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To investigate the clinical effectiveness of beta-blockers (BBs) and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors in chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods: 100 patients with HFpEF admitted to The Third Affiliated Hospital of Qiqihar Medical University, China, between April and June 2023 were stratified into five groups. Beta-blocker (BB) group received bisoprolol, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) group received benazepril hydrochloride, angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) group received candesartan, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) group received sacubitril valsartan, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) group received spironolactone. Differences in clinical effectiveness, six-minute walking distance (6MWD), cardiac functionality, quality of life, and survival rate were compared among the groups. Results: Beta-blocker group showed the highest efficacy. After treatment, all groups except MRA showed significant improvement in 6MWD. Also, ACEI, ARB, and ARNI groups exhibited significantly longer 6 MWD than MRA group (p < 0.05). Left ventricular ejection fraction levels showed significant improvement in the ACEI, ARNI, and MRA groups (p < 0.05), while pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) decreased in the BB, ACEI, ARNI, and MRA groups (p < 0.05). After treatment, the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) scores of BB, ACEI, ARB, and ARNI groups were significantly lower than before treatment (p < 0.05). All five groups significantly exhibited decline in NTproBNP levels after treatment (p < 0.05). However, at 18-month follow-up, there was no significant difference in survival rates among the groups (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Beta-blockers (BBs) and RAAS inhibitors show promising activity in HFpEF, bisoprolol enhances cardiac function, benazepril improves symptoms, candesartan aids exercise and sacubitril valsartan elevates cardiac class. However, none of these drugs significantly improves clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A study published in the European Journal of Heart Failure compared the effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan, an angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEi/ARB) in patients with newly diagnosed heart failure (HF) and preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction. The study used a large real-world dataset from the United States and found that patients initiated on sacubitril/valsartan had significantly lower rates of all-cause and cardiovascular hospitalizations compared to those initiated on ACEi/ARB. These findings support the potential benefit of early initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in a diverse and high-risk HF population. However, the study acknowledges limitations, including its retrospective nature and the possibility of unmeasured confounding. The study was funded by Novartis AG, and some of the authors reported conflicts of interest. [Extracted from the article]

Data on angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril-valsartan (SV) in patients undergoing maintenance dialysis is scarce. Our study aimed to investigate the effect of SV on patients undergoing dialysis. We retrospectively reviewed the data of end-stage kidney disease (ESRD) patients undergoing either peritoneal dialysis (PD) or hemodialysis (HD) in our center. A total of 51 patients receiving SV treatment were enrolled in the SV group. Another 51 age and sex-matched patients on dialysis without SV treatment were selected as the control group. All the patients were regularly followed up in the dialysis clinic. Their clinical, biochemical, and echocardiographic parameters were all recorded at baseline and during follow-up. The effect and safety of SV were further analyzed. A total of 102 ESRD patients on dialysis (51 patients in the SV group and 51 patients in the control group) were finally enrolled. The median follow-up time was 349 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 217–535 days). The level of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) (median [IQR] before and after SV treatment: 596.35 pg/ml [190.6–1714.85] vs. 188.7 pg/ml [83.34–600.35], p < 0.001) or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) (median [IQR]: 6316.00 pg/ml [4552.00–28598.00] vs. 5074.00 pg/ml [2229.00–9851.00], p = 0.022) were significantly decreased after treatment with SV. The variant rate of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was significantly higher in the SV group compared to the control group, especially in the PD subgroup. No significant difference was found in other echocardiographic parameters between SV and control group. Subgroup analysis of the PD group showed an increase in daily PD ultrafiltration (median [IQR]: 400 ml/d [200-500] vs. 500 ml/d [200–850], p = 0.114) after SV treatment. Variant rate of overhydration (OH) measured by the body composition monitor (BCM) of the SV group were significantly different from the control group (median [IQR]: −13.13% [−42.85%–27.84%] vs. 0% [−17.95%–53.85%], p = 0.049). The rate of hyperkalemia was slightly higher but without significant difference before and after the introduction of SV (19.6% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.350). No event of hypotension and angioedema were observed. SV might have a cardio-protective role in ESRD patients undergoing dialysis, especially in PD patients. Serum potassium should be monitored during the treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objective: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and soluble interleukin 1 receptor-like 1 ST2 (sST2) are biomarkers used to grade heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) severity. Both are potential targets of HFrEF treatment, but the first is associated with the patient's hemodynamic status, while the second is more indicative of the inflammatory status and of myocardial fibrosis. The aim of this study was to assess the kinetics of these biomarkers after treatment with sacubitril/valsartan in HFrEF. Methods: We analyzed blood samples of patients with HFrEF at baseline (before sacubitril/valsartan treatment), after 1, 2, and 3 months (respectively, after a month taking the 24/26 – 49/51 – 97/103 mg twice daily, or b.i.d., doses), and 6 months after the maximum-tolerated dose was reached (end study). Results: We obtained samples from 72 patients with HFrEF (age 64.0 ± 10.5 years, 83% males). NT-proBNP and sST2 values progressively and significantly reduced to 37% and 16%, respectively, with a greater reduction for NT-proBNP (p < 0.001). Specifically, NT-proBNP reduced from 1144 [593–2586] pg/mL to 743 [358–1524] pg/mL and sST2 from 27.3 [20.5–35.0] ng/mL to 23.1 [15.9–30.7] ng/mL, p for trend < 0.001 in both cases. The reduction of the two biomarkers over time occurred with statistically significant different kinetics: deferred for sST2 and faster for NT-proBNP. No significant changes in renal function and potassium levels were recorded. Conclusion: These findings suggest that, in patients with HF, sacubitril/valsartan effects on the cardiovascular system share a double pathway: a first, hemodynamic, faster pathway and a second, non-hemodynamic anti-fibrotic, delayed one. Both likely contribute to the sacubitril/valsartan benefits in HFrEF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite previous studies showing that patients with low systolic blood pressure (sBP) in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has a poor prognosis, it has few treatment options. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) in HFrEF patients with hypotension. We included 43 consecutive HFrEF patients with sBP < 100 mmHg despite guideline-directed medical therapy for at least 3 months and who received S/V between September 2020 and July 2021. Patients admitted for acute heart failure were excluded and 29 patients were evaluated for safety endpoints. Furthermore, patients who performed non-pharmacological therapy or died within 1 month were excluded, finally, 25 patients were evaluated for efficacy endpoints. The mean initial S/V dose was 53.0 ± 20.5 mg/day and the mean dosage was increased to 84.0 ± 34.5 mg/day in 1 month. Serum N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) values significantly decreased from 2200 [interquartile range (IQR): 1462–3666] pg/ml to 1409 (IQR: 964–2451) pg/ml. (p < 0.0001). No significant change in sBP occurred (pre-sBP: 93.2 ± 4.9 mmHg, post-sBP: 93.4 ± 9.6 mmHg, p = 0.91), and no patients discontinued the S/V due to symptomatic hypotension in 1 month after S/V initiation. S/V can be safely introduced in HFrEF patients with hypotension to reduce serum NT-proBNP values. Thus, S/V may be useful for the treatment of HFrEF patients with hypotension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medication adherence in chronic conditions is a long-term process. Modeling longitudinal trajectories using routinely collected prescription data is a promising method for describing adherence patterns and identifying at-risk groups. The study aimed to characterize distinct long-term sacubitril/valsartan adherence trajectories and factors associated with them in patients with heart failure (HF). Subjects with incident HF starting sac/val in 2017–2018 were identified from the Campania Regional Database for Medication Consumption. We estimated patients' continuous medication availability (CMA9; R package AdhereR) during a 12-month period. We selected groups with similar CMA9 trajectories (Calinski-Harabasz criterion; R package kml). We performed multinomial regression analysis, assessing the relationship between demographic and clinical factors and adherence trajectory groups. The cohort included 4455 subjects, 70% male. Group-based trajectory modeling identified four distinct adherence trajectories: high adherence (42.6% of subjects; CMA mean 0.91 ± 0.08), partial drop-off (19.6%; CMA 0.63 ± 0.13), moderate adherence (19.3%; CMA 0.54 ± 0.11), and low adherence (18.4%; CMA 0.17 ± 0.12). Polypharmacy was associated with partial drop-off adherence (OR 1.194, 95%CI 1.175–1.214), while the occurrence of ≥1 HF hospitalization (OR 1.165, 95%CI 1.151–1.179) or other hospitalizations (OR 1.481, 95%CI 1.459–1.503) were associated with low adherence. This study found that tailoring patient education, providing support, and ongoing monitoring can boost adherence within different groups, potentially improving health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The sodium–glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have emerged as a crucial therapeutic option for patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The aim of this study was to evaluate, in a real-world population from a single centre, the feasibility of introducing SGLT2i and their interaction with other recommended drug classes. Methods: Consecutive patients affected by chronic heart failure (CHF) were evaluated beginning in January 2022. At the baseline clinical visit, both the patient's current medication and the prescribed treatments were recorded. Over a 6- to 12-month follow-up, changes in concomitant therapy were analysed. Results: At baseline, among 350 patients evaluated, only 17 (5%) were already taking SGLT2i: 13 with HFrEF, five with mildly reduced (HFmrEF), preserved (HFpEF) or improved (HFimpEF) ejection fraction. After the baseline assessment, SGLT2i were prescribed to 224 (64%) of the patients, including 179 (84%) with HFrEF, 27 (42%) with HFmrEF/HFimpEF, and 18 (22%) with HFpEF/HFimpEF. After follow-up, SGLT2i therapy was well tolerated and was associated with a significant increase in sacubitril/valsartan prescriptions and a decrease in diuretic use. Finally, a significant improvement in functional status and left ventricular systolic function after SGLT2i therapy was observed. Conclusions: In this single-centre, real-world study, SGLT2i were primarily prescribed to HFrEF patients who were already on other recommended drug classes for their treatment. Additionally, there was a noticeable enhancement in the prescribed therapy during a short-term follow-up. These findings further bolster the inclusion of this therapeutic approach in regular clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Decision-analytic models (DAMs) with varying structures and assumptions have been applied in economic evaluations (EEs) to assist decision making for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) therapeutics. This systematic review aimed to summarize and critically appraise the EEs of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMTs) for HFrEF. A systematic search of English articles and gray literature, published from January 2010, was performed on databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, NHSEED, health technology assessment, Cochrane Library, etc. The included studies were EEs with DAMs that compared the costs and outcomes of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid-receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. The study quality was evaluated using the Bias in Economic Evaluation (ECOBIAS) 2015 checklist and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklists. A total of 59 EEs were included. Markov model, with a lifetime horizon and a monthly cycle length, was most commonly used in evaluating GDMTs for HFrEF. Most EEs conducted in the high-income countries demonstrated that novel GDMTs for HFrEF were cost-effective compared with the standard of care, with the standardized median incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $21 361/quality-adjusted life-year. The key factors influencing ICERs and study conclusions included model structures, input parameters, clinical heterogeneity, and country-specific willingness-to-pay threshold. Novel GDMTs were cost-effective compared with the standard of care. Given the heterogeneity of the DAMs and ICERs, alongside variations in willingness-to-pay thresholds across countries, there is a need to conduct country-specific EEs, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, using model structures that are coherent with the local decision context. • Consistent with previous review, Markov model was most commonly used in evaluating the cost-effectiveness of guideline-directed medical therapies for heart failure with reduced ejection population. • This study revealed that novel guideline-directed medical therapies for heart failure with reduced ejection (including sacubitril-valsartan, dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, and eplerenone) were cost-effective, particularly in high-income countries. • Given the heterogeneity of decision-analytic models and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, alongside variations in willingness-to-pay thresholds across countries, there is a need to conduct country-specific economic evaluations, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, using model structures that are coherent with the local decision context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To compare clinical outcomes among patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) according to body mass index (BMI) after initiating treatment with an angiotensin‐receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI). Methods: We gathered data from 2016 to 2020 at the University Medical Center Mannheim; 208 consecutive patients were divided into two groups according to BMI (< 30 kg/m2; n = 116, ≥ 30 kg/m2; n = 92). Clinical outcomes, including mortality rate, all‐cause hospitalizations and congestion, were systematically analysed. Results: At the 12‐month follow‐up, the mortality rate was similar in both groups (7.9% in BMI < 30 kg/m2 vs. 5.6% in BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2; P =.76). All‐cause hospitalization before ARNI treatment was comparable in both groups (63.8% in BMI < 30 kg/m2 vs. 57.6% in BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2; P =.69). After ARNI treatment, the hospitalization rate was also comparable in both groups at the 12‐month follow‐up (52.2% in BMI < 30 kg/m2 vs. 53.7% in BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2; P =.73). Obese patients experienced more congestion compared with non‐obese patients at follow‐up, without statistical significance (6.8% in BMI < 30 kg/m2 vs. 15.5% in BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2; P =.11). Median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improved in both groups, but significantly more in non‐obese compared with obese patients at the 12‐month follow‐up (from 26% [3%‐45%] [min.‐max.] vs. 29% [10%‐45%] [min.‐max.] [P =.56] to 35.5% [15%‐59%] [min.‐max.] vs. 30% [13%‐50%] [min.‐max.] [P =.03], respectively). The incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF), non‐sustained (ns) and sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) was less in non‐obese than in obese patients after initiation of sacubitril/valsartan at the 12‐month follow‐up (AF: 43.5% vs. 53.7%; P =.20; nsVT: 9.8% vs. 28.4%; P =.01; VT: 14.1% vs. 17.9%; P =.52; VF: 7.6% vs. 13.4%; P =.23). Conclusions: The incidence of congestion in obese patients was higher compared with non‐obese patients. LVEF improved significantly more in non‐obese compared with obese HFrEF patients. Furthermore, AF and the ventricular tachyarrhythmia rate were revealed more in obesity compared with those without obesity at the 12‐month follow‐up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Cardiovascular disease is the most common cause of death and morbidity in patients with end-stage renal disease. Sacubitril/valsartan (SAC/VAL) can reduce the risk of cardiovascular mortality among patients with heart failure (HF). The present study set out to evaluate the efficacy of SAC/VAL in the treatment of patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD) (HFpEF&PD). Methods: A total of 160 patients with HFpEF&PD were enrolled and randomly divided into the control group (N = 80) and SAC/VAL group (N = 80). The cardiac function efficacy, HF scoring efficacy, echocardiographic parameters, serological indicators, and 6-minute walking test were compared before and after treatment. Results: After 6 months of treatment, the total number of patients who responded to treatment in the SAC/VAL group was higher than that of the control group in terms of cardiac function and HF scoring efficacy. After treatment, levels of early diastolic/late diastolic filling velocity and left ventricular ejection fraction were increased in both groups, while the levels of left atrial diameter, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, left ventricular end-systolic diameter, inter-ventricular septal diameter, and left ventricular posterior wall diameter were decreased; the NT-proBNP levels were diminished in both groups, while hemoglobin levels and the 6-minute walk distance were increased; the systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and 24-h ultrafiltration volume were lowered in all patients. The changes in these indexes in the SAC/VAL group were more obvious than those in the controls. Conclusion: SAC/VAL can significantly improve cardiac function in patients with HFpEF&PD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heart failure (HF) is a progressive condition with an increasing prevalence, and the scientific evidence of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) reports a 6% rate of 1-year mortality in stable patients, whereas, in recently hospitalized patients, the 1-year mortality rates exceed 20%. The Sacubitril/Valsartan (S/V), the first angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), significantly reduced both HF hospitalization and cardiovascular mortality. Aim of the study: to evaluate the effect of S/V in a follow-up period of 5 years from the beginning of the therapy. We compared the one-year outcomes of S/V use with those obtained after 5 years of therapy, monitoring the long-term effects in a real-world population with HFrEF. Methods: Seventy consecutive patients with HFrEF and eligible for ARNI, according to PARADIGM-HF criteria, were enrolled. All patients had an overall follow-up of 60 months, during which time they underwent standard transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) with Global Longitudinal Strain (GLS) evaluation, the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), the Six Minutes Walking Test (6MWT), and blood tests (NT-pro-BNP and BNP, renal function tests). Results: NTproBNP values were reduced significantly among the three time-points (p < 0.001). Among echocardiographic parameters, left ventricle end-diastolic volume (LV EDV) and E/e' significantly were reduced at the first evaluation (12 months), while left ventricle end-systolic volume (LV ESV) decreased during all follow-ups (p < 0.001). LV EF (p < 0.001) and GLS (p < 0.001) significantly increased at both evaluations. The 6MWT (p < 0.001) and KCCQ scores (p < 0.001) increased significantly in the first 12 months and remained stable along the other time-points. NYHA class showed an increase in class 1 subjects and a decrease in class 3 subjects during follow-up. NTproBNP, BNP, 6MWT, and KCCQ scores showed a significant change in the first 12 months, while LVEF, GLS, and ESV changed during all evaluations. Conclusions: We verified that the improvements obtained after one year of therapy had not reached a plateau phase but continued to improve and were statistically significant at 5 years. Although our data should be confirmed in larger and multicentre studies, we can state that the utilization of Sacubitril/Valsartan has catalysed substantial transformations in the prognostic landscape of chronic HFrEF, yielding profound clinical implications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heart failure (HF) is a significant event for public health. It has a prevalence between 1-2%, mortality rate between 7-17%, and hospitalization between 32-44%. This implies a risk to health and quality of life, but also great financial efforts for health systems. Sacubitril/valsartan is a medication recognized for its efficacy, and this consensus seeks to synthesize the available information regarding its use for the benefit of patients. This document consists of a description of the epidemiology of HF, pharmacology of the drug, clinical trials, use of the drug in cases with reduced ejection fraction, mildly reduced ejection frac- tion and preserved ejection fraction, available literature on HF guidelines, recommendations and conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]