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., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Poststroke epilepsy (PSE) is a common complication after ischemic stroke. This study investigates the association between the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and the risk of PSE in patients with ischemic stroke., Methods and Results: A population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database between 2000 and 2015. Patients with hypertension with a history of ischemic stroke were classified into prevalent, new, and nonusers according to their use of ACEIs/ARBs. Prevalent ACEI/ARB users were further classified into continuing or discontinued users, based on their poststroke medication adherence. We used multivariate Cox regression models, adjusted for demographics and comorbidities, to assess the risk of PSE among different ACEI/ARB user groups. There were 182 983 ACEI/ARB users and 38 365 nonusers included. There were 7387 patients diagnosed with PSE, whereas 213 961 were not. Nonusers exhibited a higher risk of PSE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.72 [95% CI, 1.63-1.82]). Both prevalent and nonusers had higher risks compared with new ACEI/ARB users, with respective aHRs of 1.33 (95% CI, 1.25-1.41) and 2.00 (95% CI, 1.87-2.14). Discontinued ACEI/ARB users showed the highest risk of PSE (aHR, 2.34 [95% CI, 2.15-2.54]), suggesting the importance of continuing ACEI/ARB use after stroke. Treatment-by-age interaction was significant among patients with or without ACEI/ARB use before stroke ( P value for interaction 0.004 and <0.001, respectively), suggesting a stronger beneficial association in younger patients., Conclusions: The use of ACEIs/ARBs after ischemic stroke in patients with hypertension is associated with a reduced risk of PSE, especially among younger patients.

Background: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a common cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality. Evidence suggests that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) decrease liver fibrosis, an intermediate step between liver injury and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Our aim was to investigate the association between the use of ACEIs and ARBs on incident HCC and liver-related mortality among patients with HBV infection., Methods: We conducted a population-based study on a new-user cohort of patients seen at 24 hospitals across China. We included adult patients with HBV infection who started ACEIs or ARBs (ACEIs/ARBs), or calcium channel blockers or thiazide diuretics (CCBs/THZs) from January 2012 to December 2022. The primary outcome was incident HCC; secondary outcomes were liver-related mortality and new-onset cirrhosis. We used propensity score matching and Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of study outcomes., Results: Among 32 692 eligible patients (median age 58 [interquartile range (IQR) 48-68] yr, and 18 804 male [57.5%]), we matched 9946 pairs of patients starting ACEIs/ARBs or CCBs/THZs. During a mean follow-up of 2.3 years, the incidence rate of HCC per 1000 person-years was 4.11 and 5.94 among patients who started ACEIs/ARBs and CCBs/THZs, respectively, in the matched cohort. Use of ACEIs/ARBs was associated with lower risks of incident HCC (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.86), liver-related mortality (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.93), and new-onset cirrhosis (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.70-0.94)., Interpretation: In this cohort of patients with HBV infection, new users of ACEIs/ARBs had a lower risk of incident HCC, liver-related mortality, and new-onset cirrhosis than new users of CCBs/THZs., Competing Interests: Competing interests:: Xin Xu reports receiving support for the present manuscript from the Ministry of Science and Technology of China and the Natural Science Foundation of China. Lu Li reports receiving funding from the National Natural Science Foundation of China. No other competing interests were declared., (© 2024 CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors.)

Background: Depression ranks as a leading contributor to the global disease burden. The potential causal relationship between the use of antihypertensive medications and depression has garnered significant interest. Despite extensive investigation, the nature of this relationship remains a subject of ongoing debate. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the influence of antihypertensive medications on depression by conducting a Mendelian randomization study focused on drug targets., Method: We focused on the targets of five antihypertensive drug categories: ACE Inhibitors (ACEIs), Angiotensin II Receptor Antagonists (ARBs), Calcium Channel Blockers (CCBs), Beta-Blockers (BBs), and Thiazide Diuretics (TDs). We collected single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with these drug targets from genome-wide association study (GWAS) statistics, using them as proxies for the drugs. Subsequently, we conducted a Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis targeting these drugs to explore their potential impact on depression., Results: Our findings revealed that genetic proxies for Beta-Blockers (BBs) were associated with an elevated risk of depression (OR [95%CI] = 1.027 [1.013, 1.040], p < 0.001). Similarly, genetic proxies for Calcium Channel Blockers (CCBs) were linked to an increased risk of depression (OR [95%CI] = 1.030 [1.009, 1.051], p = 0.006). No significant associations were identified between the genetic markers of other antihypertensive medications and depression risk., Conclusion: The study suggests that genetic proxies associated with Beta-Blockers (BBs) and Calcium Channel Blockers (CCBs) could potentially elevate the risk of depression among patients. These findings underscore the importance of considering genetic predispositions when prescribing these medications, offering a strategic approach to preventing depression in susceptible individuals., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Yang, Li, Huang, Li, He, Cai and Lai.)

Since 2014, sacubitril/valsartan (Entresto ® ) is widely prescribed for heart failure. Despite neprilysin inhibition's benefits in heart failure, concerns about potential amyloid-beta (Aβ) accumulation and Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk have persisted. This narrative review, a decade post-approval, evaluates the risk of amyloid pathology and neurocognitive disorders in long-term sacubitril/valsartan use. Clinical trials, real-world studies, and pharmacovigilance data do not indicate an increased risk of cognitive decline. In patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan blood-based amyloid biomarkers show perturbations, while neuroimaging biomarkers reveal no significant increase in amyloid load. Despite a theoretical risk of amyloid accumulation and AD under treatment with sacubitril/valsartan, current clinical data appears reassuring, and there is no signal indicating an increased risk of cognitive decline, but a perturbation of amyloid blood-based biomarkers, which implies great caution when interpreting biomarkers in this context., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

BACKGROUND Heart failure and end-stage renal disease often coexist, and management of heart failure can be challenging in patients during hemodialysis. Sacubitril-valsartan (SV) is the first drug to receive regulatory approval for use in patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification II, III, or IV. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SV for use in chronic heart failure patients on maintenance hemodialysis (MHD). MATERIAL AND METHODS From September 2021 to October 2022, 28 patients on MHD with chronic heart failure at the hemodialysis center of Shaanxi Second Provincial People's Hospital were regularly followed. During the 12-week follow-up period, all patients were administered SV at doses of 100-400 mg per day. Biochemical indicators, echocardiographic parameters, life quality scores, and adverse events were evaluated. RESULTS We enrolled 28 patients. Compared with the baseline levels, NYHA class III in these patients treated with SV was significantly decreased from 60.71% to 32.14% (P<0.05), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was significantly improved from 44.29±8.92% to 53.32±7.88% (P<0.001), the Physical Component Summary (PCS) score was significantly improved from 40.0±6.41 to 56.20±9.86 (P<0.001), and the Mental Component Summary (MCS) score was significantly improved from 39.99±6.14 to 52.59±11.0 (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS We demonstrated that SV improved NYHA classification and LVEF values of patients on MHD with chronic heart failure and also improved their quality of life.

In recent years, regulatory agencies have raised concerns about the presence of potentially carcinogenic substances in certain formulations of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (ARBs). Specifically, nitrosamines and azido compounds have been identified in some ARB products. Nitrosamines are known to have carcinogenic properties and are associated with an increased risk of neoplasms. Spontaneous safety reports from the EudraVigilance Data Analysis System (EVDAS) database were analyzed to investigate cases of neoplasms associated with ARBs. A disproportionality analysis was conducted, calculating the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a case/non-case approach for each ARB drug. The EVDAS database contained 68,522 safety reports related to ARBs (including Azilsartan, Candesartan, Irbesartan, Olmesartan, Losartan, Valsartan, and Telmisartan), among which 3,396 (5%) cases were associated with neoplasms. The majority of these cases were reported in Germany (11.9%), followed by France (9.7%). Approximately 70% of the reports were submitted by healthcare professionals such as physicians and nurses. Among the ARBs, valsartan had the highest ROR for neoplasm (ROR 1.949, 95% CI 1.857-2.046). This association remained significant when comparing ARBs with other classes of antihypertensive drugs, including ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, and diuretics. Our study identifies a possible signal of an association between ARBs, particularly valsartan, and the risk of neoplasms. However, further observational and analytical studies are necessary to confirm these findings and elucidate the underlying mechanisms., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aims: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in abnormal renal function (eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73m 2 ) 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 60 ml/min/1.73m 2 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.

Background: The effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEI/ARBs) on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients who undergo coronary artery bypass graft surgery is equivocal. This retrospective, population-based cohort study evaluated effect of exposure to an ACEI/ARB on MACE using linked administrative databases that included all cardiac revascularization procedures, hospitalizations, and prescriptions for the population of British Columbia, Canada., Methods and Results: All adults who underwent coronary artery bypass graft surgery between 2002 and 2020 were eligible. The primary outcome was time to MACE, defined as a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke using Cox proportional hazards models with inverse probability treatment weighting. Included were 15 439 patients and 6191 (40%) were prescribed an ACEI/ARB. Mean age was 66 years, 83% were men, and 16% had heart failure (HF). Median exposure time was 40 months. Over the 5-year follow-up, 1623 MACE occurred. Impact of exposure was different for patients with and without HF ( P <0.0001 for interaction). After probability-weighting and adjustment for relevant covariates, exposure to ACEI/ARBs was associated with a lower hazard of MACE in patients with HF at 1 year (hazard ratio, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.09-0.19]) and 5 years (hazard ratio, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.30-0.44]). In patients without HF, ACEI/ARBs had a lower hazard of MACE at 1 year (hazard ratio, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.27-0.46]) and 5 years (hazard ratio, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.58-0.76])., Conclusions: In this population-based study, ACEI/ARBs were associated with a lower hazard of MACE in a cohort of patients post-coronary artery bypass graft surgery irrespective of HF status.

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a clinical syndrome characterized by volume overload, impaired exercise capacity, and recurrent hospital admissions. A major contributor to the pathophysiology and clinical presentation of heart failure is the activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). Normally, RAAS is responsible for the homeostatic regulation of blood pressure, extracellular fluid volume, and serum sodium concentration. In HFrEF, RAAS gets chronically activated in response to decreased cardiac output, further aggravating the congestion and cardiotoxic effects. Hence, inhibition of RAAS is a major approach in the pharmacologic treatment of those patients. The most recently introduced RAAS antagonizing medication class is angiotensin receptor blocker/ neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI). In this paper, we discuss ARNIs' superiority over traditional RAAS antagonizing agents in reducing heart failure hospitalization and mortality. We also tease out the evidence that shows ARNIs' renoprotective functions in heart failure patients including those with chronic or end stage kidney disease. We also discuss the evidence showing the added benefit resulting from combining ARNIs with a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor. Moreover, how ARNIs decrease the risk of arrhythmias and reverse cardiac remodeling, ultimately lowering the risk of cardiovascular death, is also discussed. We then present the positive outcome of ARNIs' use in patients with diabetes mellitus and those recovering from acute decompensated heart failure. ARNIs' side effects are also appreciated and discussed. Taken together, the provided insight and critical appraisal of the evidence justifies and supports the implementation of ARNIs in the guidelines for the treatment of HFrEF., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Readmission rates following ileostomy formation are high. Dehydration and consecutive renal failure are common causes of readmission, potentially pronounced by drugs affecting the homeostasis. The aim of the study was to assess the risk of dehydration after ileostomy formation in patients treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) or diuretics., Method: This nationwide population-based cohort study used data derived from the Colorectal Cancer Data Base of several Swedish healthcare registers. The study included all patients operated on with elective anterior resection and temporary ileostomy for rectal cancer clinically staged I-III in Sweden in 2007-2016. Exposure was at least two dispensations of ACEI, ARB or diuretics within 1 year prior to surgery. Outcome was 90-day readmission due to dehydration including acute renal failure., Results: In total, 3252 patients were included with 1173 (36.1%) exposed to ACEI, ARB or diuretics. The cumulative incidence for 90-day readmission due to dehydration was 29.0% (151 of 520) for exposed versus 13.8% (98 of 712) for unexposed. The proportion of readmissions due to any reason was 44.3% (520 of 1173) for exposed compared to 34.2% (712 of 2079) for unexposed. The incidence rate ratio for readmission due to dehydration was 2.83 (95% c.i. 2.21 to 3.63, P < 0.001). The hazard rate ratio was 2.45 (95% c.i. 1.83 to 3.27, P < 0.001) after adjusting for age, gender and comorbidity., Conclusion: Medication with ACEI, ARB or diuretics defines a vulnerable patient group with increased risk of readmission due to dehydration after ileostomy formation., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Foundation Ltd.)

Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) medications are widely prescribed. We sought to assess how pre-admission use of these medications might impact the response to angiotensin-II treatment during vasodilatory shock., Methods: In a post-hoc subgroup analysis of the randomized, placebo-controlled, Angiotensin Therapy for High Output Shock (ATHOS-3) trial, we compared patients with chronic angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) use, and patients with angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) use, to patients without exposure to either ACEi or ARB. The primary outcome was mean arterial pressure after 1-h of treatment. Additional clinical outcomes included mean arterial pressure and norepinephrine equivalent dose requirements over time, and study-drug dose over time. Biological outcomes included baseline RAS biomarkers (renin, angiotensin-I, angiotensin-II, and angiotensin-I/angiotensin-II ratio), and the change in renin from 0 to 3 h., Results: We included n = 321 patients, of whom, 270 were ACEi and ARB-unexposed, 29 were ACEi-exposed and 22 ARB-exposed. In ACEi/ARB-unexposed patients, angiotensin-treated patients, compared to placebo, had higher hour-1 mean arterial pressure (9.1 mmHg [95% CI 7.6-10.1], p < 0.0001), lower norepinephrine equivalent dose over 48-h (p = 0.0037), and lower study-drug dose over 48-h (p < 0.0001). ACEi-exposed patients treated with angiotensin-II showed similarly higher hour-1 mean arterial pressure compared to ACEi/ARB-unexposed (difference in treatment-effect: - 2.2 mmHg [95% CI - 7.0-2.6], p interaction  = 0.38), but a greater reduction in norepinephrine equivalent dose (p interaction  = 0.0031) and study-drug dose (p interaction  < 0.0001) over 48-h. In contrast, ARB-exposed patients showed an attenuated effect of angiotensin-II on hour-1 mean arterial pressure versus ACEi/ARB-unexposed (difference in treatment-effect: - 6.0 mmHg [95% CI - 11.5 to - 0.6], p interaction  = 0.0299), norepinephrine equivalent dose (p interaction  < 0.0001), and study-drug dose (p interaction  = 0.0008). Baseline renin levels and angiotensin-I/angiotensin-II ratios were highest in ACEi-exposed patients. Finally, angiotensin-II treatment reduced hour-3 renin in ACEi/ARB-unexposed and ACEi-exposed patients but not in ARB-exposed patients., Conclusions: In vasodilatory shock patients, the cardiovascular and biological RAS response to angiotensin-II differed based upon prior exposure to ACEi and ARB medications. ACEi-exposure was associated with increased angiotensin II responsiveness, whereas ARB-exposure was associated with decreased responsiveness. These findings have clinical implications for patient selection and dosage of angiotensin II in vasodilatory shock. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.Gov Identifier: NCT02338843 (Registered January 14th 2015)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objectives: To investigate differences in the incidence of enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption in patients taking angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), calcium channel blocker (CCB), and beta blockers (BBs) at a single center in Korea., Methods: In this retrospective study, we utilized data from the Yangsan electronic medical records to identify 129,169 patients. These individuals were prescribed olmesartan, other ARBs, ACEI, CCB, and BBs between November 2008 and February 2021., Results: Of the 44,775 patients, 51 (0.11%) were observed to have enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption. Compared with the ACEI group, the adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for enteropathy and intestinal malabsorption were OR=1.313 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.188-6.798], p =0.893) for olmesartan, OR=0.915 (95% CI: [0.525-1.595], p =0.754) for the other ARBs, OR=0.928 (95% CI: [0.200-4.307]; p =0.924) for the CCB, and OR=0.663 (95% CI: [0.151-2.906]; p =0.586) for the BBs group. These findings were adjusted for factors such as age, gender, duration of antihypertensive medication, and comorbidities., Conclusion: In a retrospective cohort study of patients on antihypertensive medications, no significant difference was found in the incidence of enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption when ACEI was compared to olmesartan, other ARBs, CCB, and BBs., (Copyright: © Saudi Medical Journal.)

Although diuretics play an important role in triple-whammy acute kidney injury (AKI), it is unclear whether the type of diuretic influences the risk of triple-whammy AKI. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether vasopressin receptor antagonists affect triple-whammy AKI. This cross-sectional study used disproportionality analysis of VigiBase data to assess the risk of AKI with various diuretics. Although multiple logistic regression analysis showed that aldosterone antagonists (odds ratio [OR] 2.19, 95% CI 2.01-2.37), loop diuretics (OR 4.40, 95% CI 4.07-4.76) and thiazide diuretics (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.83-2.15) increased the risk of AKI in patients who received non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi), vasopressin receptor antagonists did not increase the risk of AKI in those patients. Vasopressin receptor antagonists might not influence the development of triple-whammy AKI., (© 2023 British Pharmacological Society.)

BACKGROUND Angioedema is non-pitting edema that occurs in the deep layers of the skin and subcutaneous tissue due to vascular leakage of plasma resulting from 1 of 2 major pathophysiological processes: mast cell-mediated angioedema and bradykinin-mediated angioedema. While it is a well-recognized adverse reaction of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, the association of angioedema with angiotensin receptor blockers is relatively less studied. Direct local trauma, although rarely, has been suggested to induce angioedema under certain conditions. We present a unique case of direct, local, trauma-related angioedema in a patient on an angiotensin receptor blocker. CASE REPORT The patient, an 83-year-old woman on telmisartan for hypertension, hit her neck against the edge of a chair during a fall. Shortly thereafter, she developed progressive airway compromise due to airway angioedema, as noted on direct laryngoscopy. A contrast CT scan of the neck also noted edema of the periglottic and supraglottic regions. She required intravenous corticosteroid administration and intubation in the emergency room and was successfully extubated 3 days after admission. She had no prior history of angioedema or allergy. We hypothesize that increased levels of circulatory bradykinin in the setting of telmisartan, combined with a local release of bradykinin from trauma, was the main pathophysiologic cause of the angioedema. CONCLUSIONS This case report highlights the rare and often forgotten adverse reaction of angioedema with use of angiotensin receptor blockers and confirms the finding of local trauma as a possible trigger.

Background: The association between antihypertensive medication and schizophrenia has received increasing attention; however, evidence of the impact of antihypertensive medication on subsequent schizophrenia based on large-scale observational studies is limited. We aimed to compare the schizophrenia risk in large claims-based US and Korea cohort of patients with hypertension using angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors versus those using angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or thiazide diuretics., Methods: Adults aged 18 years who were newly diagnosed with hypertension and received ACE inhibitors, ARBs, or thiazide diuretics as first-line antihypertensive medications were included. The study population was sub-grouped based on age (> 45 years). The comparison groups were matched using a large-scale propensity score (PS)-matching algorithm. The primary endpoint was incidence of schizophrenia., Results: 5,907,522; 2,923,423; and 1,971,549 patients used ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and thiazide diuretics, respectively. After PS matching, the risk of schizophrenia was not significantly different among the groups (ACE inhibitor vs. ARB: summary hazard ratio [HR] 1.15 [95% confidence interval, CI, 0.99-1.33]; ACE inhibitor vs. thiazide diuretics: summary HR 0.91 [95% CI, 0.78-1.07]). In the older subgroup, there was no significant difference between ACE inhibitors and thiazide diuretics (summary HR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.71-1.16]). The risk for schizophrenia was significantly higher in the ACE inhibitor group than in the ARB group (summary HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.05-1.43])., Conclusions: The risk of schizophrenia was not significantly different between the ACE inhibitor vs. ARB and ACE inhibitor vs. thiazide diuretic groups. Further investigations are needed to determine the risk of schizophrenia associated with antihypertensive drugs, especially in people aged > 45 years., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Although enteropathy due to angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) has been known for over 10 years, clinicians' awareness of this condition is still low., Aims: To systematically review the literature about clinical phenotypes, distribution of mucosal changes throughout the gastrointestinal tract and prognosis of enteropathy due to ARBs., Methods: According to PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed and Embase for relevant articles up to November 6, 2023. We included full-text papers, letters, case reports and case series describing enteropathy due to ARBs. Patients were classified into subgroups based on endoscopic and histological findings of different regions of the gastrointestinal tract. The protocol was registered with Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/TK67C)., Results: We included 94 articles reporting 183 cases (101 female, mean age at diagnosis 69 ± 10 years). The clinical picture at diagnosis was characterised by severe diarrhoea (97%) and weight loss (84%, median -13 kg), leading to hospital admission in 167 (95%) patients. Olmesartan (90%) was most frequently implicated. Villous atrophy (VA) was reported in 164/183 (89%) patients. One hundred and nine had only VA, 12 had pan-gastrointestinal involvement, 23 had VA and gastric involvement and 19 had VA and colon involvement (predominantly microscopic colitis). Outcomes were reported for 178/183 (97%) patients, who all recovered clinically on ARBs withdrawal. Histological recovery occurred in all 96 patients with VA at baseline who underwent follow-up duodenal biopsy., Conclusions: Enteropathy due to ARBs is characterised by severe malabsorption often requiring hospital admission and can involve the entire gastrointestinal tract. Clinician awareness can lead to prompt diagnosis and excellent prognosis., (© 2024 The Authors. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Sacubitril-valsartan, an inhibitor of the angiotensin receptor neprilysin (ARNi), has been purported to exhibit superiority over angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in individuals diagnosed with heart failure., Hypothesis: This paper gives an updated meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of sacubitril-valsartan to that of standard treatment for different types of heart failure., Results: The meta-analysis comprised a total of nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs), incorporating data from a substantial sample size of 15 939 patients. The study observed a decrease in overall mortality and mortality related to cardiovascular causes among patients in the heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) category who were treated with sacubitril-valsartan. However, no statistically significant variation in this outcome was seen among patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and HFmrEF. Patients who were administered sacubitril-valsartan had a notably elevated likelihood of experiencing hypotension. Nevertheless, no significant disparities were observed in terms of other adverse events among the various treatment groups., Conclusion: Current meta-analysis provide support for use of sacubitril-valsartan in decreasing mortality in patients with HFrEF. However, more numbers of studies are required to draw a definite conclusion on other benefits associated with sacubitril-valsartan use over standard treatment of ACE inhibitors and ARBs., (© 2023 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: The therapeutic efficacy of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) in elderly patients with hypertension and at risk of fractures has been in the limelight because of accumulating evidence that localized RAS activation in bone tissue leads to osteoclastic bone resorption, resulting in osteoporosis. This study set out to investigate the association between RASi use and fracture incidence in a large cohort., Methods: We employed a nested case-control design to investigate the association between RASi use and newly developed fractures. A case was defined as a patient newly diagnosed with a fracture between January 2004 and December 2015. We selected 1,049 cases and controls using 1:1 propensity score matching. Conditional logistic regression analysis was conducted to estimate the association between RASi exposure and fracture incidence., Results: Overall, RASi usage was significantly associated with lower odds for fracture incidence (ever-users vs never-users: OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.91). We found that ARB-only users experienced fewer fractures than RASi-never users (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.49-0.86), whereas ACEi-only users or ARB/ACEi-ever users did not. In subgroup analysis, RASi-ever users without cerebrovascular disease, those with a BMI exceeding 23, and statin exposure had significantly lower ORs., Conclusions: The present study established a significant association between RASi use and reduced fracture incidence, thus highlighting the potential clinical utility of RASi use as a preventive strategy in elderly patients at risk for osteoporotic fractures., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Valsartan was recalled by the US Food and Drug Administration in July 2018 for carcinogenic impurities, resulting in a drug shortage and management challenges for valsartan users. The influence of the valsartan recall on clinical outcomes is unknown. We compared the risk of adverse events between hypertensive patients using valsartan and a propensity score-matched group using nonrecalled angiotensin receptor blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors., Methods and Results: We used Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Datamart (July 2017-January 2019). Hypertensive patients who received valsartan or nonrecalled angiotensin receptor blockers/angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors for 1 year before and on the recall date were compared. Primary outcomes were measured in the 6 months following the recall and included: (1) a composite measure of all-cause hospitalization, all-cause emergency department visit, and all-cause urgent care visit, and (2) a composite cardiac event measure of hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction and hospitalizations/emergency department visits/urgent care visits for stroke/transient ischemic attack, heart failure, or hypertension. We compared the risk of outcomes between treatment groups using Cox proportional hazard models. Of the hypertensive patients, 76 934 received valsartan, and 509 472 received a nonrecalled angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor. Valsartan use at the time of recall was associated with a higher risk of all-cause hospitalization, emergency department use, or urgent care use (hazard ratio [HR], 1.02 [95% CI, 1.00-1.04]) and the composite of cardiac events (HR, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.15-1.29]) within 6 months after the recall., Conclusions: The valsartan recall and shortage affected hypertensive patients. Local- and national-level systems need to be enhanced to protect patients from drug shortages by providing safe and reliable medication alternatives.

Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) are effective against heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction, but hypotension is a significant complication. Predictors of ARNI-associated hypotension remain unclear. This study aimed to determine predictors of hypotension after administering an ARNI to patients with HF accompanied by ARNI.This retrospective multicenter observational study analyzed data from 138 consecutive patients with HF treated with an ARNI between August 2020 and July 2021. Hypotension attributed to an ARNI after treatment was defined as (A) systolic blood pressure (SBP) below the 1st quartile ≤ 25 mmHg, and as (B) absolute SBP ≤ 103 mmHg. SBP was measured at baseline, after ARNI treatment, at first follow-up as outpatients and on day 7 for inpatients. Presence of atrial fibrillation, and greater BUN/Cr ratio, and SBP at baseline were significant independent predictors for hypotension after ARNI administration on multivariate analyses. Among 43 patients with AF, fine f-waves on electrocardiograms were significantly more prevalent in the hypotensive group.A robust reduction in blood pressure after ARNI administration is associated with AF and elevated BUN/Cr. This highlights the need for caution when administering ARNI to patients with HF.

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 11 C-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., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), diabetes affects approximately 37.3 million individuals in the USA, with another estimated 96 million people having a prediabetic state. Furthermore, one or two out of three adult Americans exhibit metabolic syndrome or an insulin-resistant state, depending on their age group., Summary: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) represents a complication often associated with type II diabetes or the insulin-resistant condition, typically identifiable through proteinuria. Proteinuria serves as both a marker and a contributing factor to kidney damage, and it significantly heightens the risk of cardiovascular (CV) events, including atherosclerosis, heart attacks, and strokes. Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASis) have demonstrated clinical efficacy in lowering blood pressure, reducing proteinuria, and slowing CKD progression. However, hyperkalemia is a common and serious adverse effect associated with using RAASi., Key Messages: It is imperative to establish personalized management strategies to enable patients to continue RAASi therapy while effectively addressing hyperkalemia risk. Healthcare professionals must be careful not to inadvertently create a low renal perfusion state, which can reduce distal nephron luminal flow or luminal sodium concentration while using RAASi. Nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (nsMRAs), such as finerenone, are demonstrated to delay CKD progression and reduce CV complications, all while mitigating the risk of hyperkalemia. Additionally, maintaining a routine monitoring regimen for serum potassium levels among at-risk patients, making dietary adjustments, and considering the adoption of newer potassium-binding agents hold promise for optimizing RAASi therapy and achieving more effective hyperkalemia management., (© 2024 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

In the STOP-ACEi trial, the outcome was similar whether or not renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) were discontinued. We now investigate whether the effect of withdrawing angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) differed. In this open label trial patients with estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR) under 30ml/min per 1.73 m 2 and progressive chronic kidney disease (CKD) were randomized to stop or continue RASi. The primary outcome was eGFR at three years. The composite of kidney failure, over 50% fall in eGFR, or kidney replacement therapy (KRT) was also assessed. Of patients randomized, 99 stopped and 123 patients continued ACEi while 104 stopped and 77 continued ARB at baseline. At three years, the eGFR was similar whether or not patients were withdrawn from ACEi or from ARB. Kidney failure or initiation of KRT occurred in 65% of those stopping and 54% continuing ACEi (hazard ratio if stopped, 1.52; 95% Confidence Interval, 1.07 to 2.16) and in 60% on an ARB regardless of randomized group (hazard ratio if stopped, 1.23; 0.83 to 1.81). Kidney failure/Initiation of KRT with over 50% decline in eGFR occurred in 71% of those stopping and 59% continuing ACEi (relative risk if stopped, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.41) and in 65% stopping and 69% continuing ARB (relative risk if stopped, 0.96; 0.79 to 1.16). Thus, neither discontinuing ACEi nor ARB slowed the rate of decline in eGFR. Although discontinuation of ACEi appeared to have more unfavorable effects on kidney outcomes than stopping ARB, the trial was neither designed nor powered to show differences between agents., (Copyright © 2023 International Society of Nephrology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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 HR MRA- 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., (© 2023 European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Lower systolic blood pressure (SBP) is known to be associated with poor prognosis in heart failure (HF). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan according to baseline SBP tertiles in Japanese patients from the PARALLEL-HF study., Methods and results: In all, 223 patients were stratified into tertiles according to baseline SBP (≤114 mmHg: n=75; >114 and ≤130 mmHg: n=76; and >130 mmHg: n=72). Patients with lower SBP (≤114 mmHg) had the highest median N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentrations at baseline (P=0.0184). No significant difference was observed between sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril for the composite outcome of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization across SBP tertiles (P-interaction=0.2682). Although the P-interaction value was not significant (0.2106), a greater reduction in NT-proBNP with sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril was observed in patients with SBP >130 mmHg (P=0.0076). The incidence of hypotension-related events and reduction or discontinuation of treatment due to hypotension-related events was higher in the lower SBP subgroup, and these events were more frequent in the sacubitril/valsartan than enalapril group., Conclusions: The efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril was consistent across baseline SBP tertiles in Japanese patients from the PARALLEL-HF study. Hypotension-related events were more common in patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan with lower SBP.

Background: The PARALLEL-HF study assessed the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril in Japanese patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This open-label extension (OLE) assessed long-term safety with sacubitril/valsartan., Methods and results: This study enrolled 150 patients who received sacubitril/valsartan 50 or 100 mg, b.i.d., in addition to optimal background heart failure (HF) therapy. A dose level of sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg, b.i.d., was targeted by Week 8. At OLE baseline, higher concentrations of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and urine cGMP, and lower concentrations of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), were observed in the sacubitril/valsartan core group (patients who received sacubitril/valsartan in both the core and extension study) than in the enalapril core group (patients who received enalapril in the core study and were then transitioned to sacubitril/valsartan). The mean exposure to study drug was 98.9%. There was no trend of worsening of HF at Month 12. No obvious changes in cardiac biomarkers were observed, whereas BNP and urine cGMP increased and NT-proBNP decreased in the enalapril core group, which was evident at Weeks 2-4 and sustained to Month 12., Conclusions: Long-term sacubitril/valsartan at doses up to 200 mg, b.i.d., has a positive risk-benefit profile; it was safe and well tolerated in Japanese patients with chronic HFrEF.

Background: The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) activation is a proposed mechanism of muscle wasting (MW i.e., reduction in muscle mass). Although we reported that RAS inhibitors (RASIs) were associated with lower prevalence of MW in heart failure (HF) patients, the relationship between mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) signaling and MW has not been analyzed., Methods and results: We analyzed data from 320 consecutive Japanese HF patients who underwent dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scanning for assessment of appendicular skeletal muscle mass index (ASMI). In multiple linear regression analyses, plasma renin activity (PRA) was negatively correlated with ASMI in patients not receiving RASIs, indicating an untoward role of the RAS in MW. Results of analysis of covariance in which risk factors of MW served as covariates showed that use of MR antagonists (MRAs) was associated with lower ASMI and higher PRA in the non-RASIs group. The close relationship between use of MRAs and lower ASMI or higher PRA in the non-RASIs group was confirmed in analyses in which the differences in baseline characteristics between users and non-users of MRAs were minimized by using an inverse probability of treatment weighting., Conclusions: Increased PRA by MR inhibition without concurrent RAS inhibition, possibly contributing to upregulation of angiotensin II signaling, may be associated with reduction in muscle mass.

Objective: To explore the effects of long-term oral ACEIs/ARBs on the incidence of exacerbation and in-hospital mortality in elderly COVID-19 Omicron BA.2 patients with hypertension, especially patients aged 80 years or older., Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, patients suffering mild and rcommon COVID-19 with hypertension who were hospitalized in the Shanghai Fourth People's Hospital between April 2022 and June 2022 were enrolled. Primary outcomes included the incidence of exacerbation and in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of respiratory failure of patients, use of mechanical ventilation, nucleic acid conversion time (NCT), hospitalization costs, and the temporal trend of the incidence of exacerbations and in-hospital mortality in different age groups. The data were analysed using propensity score weighting (PSW)., Results: In the entire cohort, there were 298 ACEI/ARB users and 465 non-ACEI/ARB users. The ACEI/ARB group showed a lower incidence of exacerbation (OR = 0.64, 95% CI for OR: 0.46-0.89, P = 0.0082) and lower in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.49, 95% CI for OR: 0.27-0.89, P = 0.0201) after PSW. Sensitivity analysis obtained the same results. The results of the subgroup of patients aged 80 years and older obtained a similar conclusion as the whole cohort. Most of the study indicators did not differ statistically significantly in the subgroup of patients aged 60 to 79 years except for rates of mechanical ventilation and respiratory failure., Conclusion: Antihypertensive therapy with ACEIs/ARBs might reduce the incidence of exacerbation and in-hospital mortality. The findings of this study support the use of ACEIs/ARBs in COVID-19 patients infected by Omicron BA.2, especially in patients aged 80 years or older with hypertension., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Aims: The long-term effect of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) remains uncertain in patients who have experienced improvements in left ventricular (LV) systolic function or significant LV reverse remodelling following a certain period of treatment. It is also unclear how ARNI performs in patients who have not shown these improvements. This study aimed to assess the impact of prolonged ARNI use compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with and without significant treatment response after 1 year of heart failure (HF) treatment., Methods and Results: The present study enrolled patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who were treated with either ARNI or ACEIs/ARBs within 1 year of undergoing index echocardiography. After 1 year of treatment, patients were reclassified into the following groups: (i) patients with HF with improved ejection fraction and persistent HFrEF and (ii) patients with and without LV reverse remodelling based on the follow-up echocardiography. The effect of ARNI versus that of ACEIs/ARBs in each group was assessed from the time of categorizing into new groups using the composite event of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization. A total of 671 patients with HFrEF (age, 66.4 ± 14.1 years; males, 66.8%) were included, and 133 (19.8%) composite events of death and rehospitalization for HF were observed during the follow-up (median follow-up, 44 [interquartile range, 34-51] months). ARNI had a significantly lower event rate than ACEIs/ARBs in patients with HF with improved ejection fraction (7.0% vs. 30.4%, P = 0.020) and those with persistent HFrEF (17.6% vs. 49.7%, P < 0.001). Irrespective of whether patients exhibited LV reverse remodelling (15.8% vs. 31.1%, P = 0.001) or not (15.0% vs. 54.9%, P < 0.001), ARNIs were associated with a significantly lower event rate than ACEIs/ARBs., Conclusions: Regardless of significant treatment response measured by either LVEF or LV reverse remodelling after 1 year of treatment, the extended utilization of ARNI demonstrated a more favourable prognosis than that of ACEIs/ARBs in patients with HFrEF., (© 2023 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Although doxorubicin (DOX) is a commonly used potent chemotherapeutic agent in patients with breast cancer, its cardiotoxic effect is a concern, particularly in patients with hypertension. Antihypertensive renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors may potentially play a role in preventing overt heart failure (HF) due to DOX toxicity. This study aimed to evaluate whether the use of RAS inhibitors improves clinical outcomes in patients with hypertension and breast cancer undergoing DOX-containing chemotherapy., Methods: A total of 54,344 female patients who were first diagnosed with breast cancer and initiated into DOX therapy between 2008 and 2015 were recruited from a nationwide Korean cohort. Patients were divided into two groups: with and without hypertension (HT, n = 10,789; non-HT, n = 43,555), and the RAS inhibitor group (n = 1,728) was sub-classified from the HT group. Two propensity score-matched cohorts were constructed to compare the clinical outcomes between non-HT and HT groups and between non-HT and RAS inhibitor groups. The primary outcome was the composite of HF and death., Results: After propensity score matching, the HT group had a higher risk for HF (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.30, 95% confidence intervals [95% CI] = 1.09-1.55) compared to the non-HT group, but there was no significant difference in primary outcome between the two groups. The RAS inhibitor group had a lower risk for primary outcome (adjusted HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.65-0.94) and death (adjusted HR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.66-0.99) compared to the non-HT group., Conclusions: Hypertension is a risk factor for HF in patients with breast cancer undergoing DOX chemotherapy. However, the RAS inhibitors used to treat hypertension may contribute to decreased mortality and improved clinical outcomes., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Hwang, Lee. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Sacubitril-valsartan (SV) monotherapy has been shown to help patients with Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but whether adding a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) improves treatment results even more is unknown., Hypothesis: The goal of this study was to look at the efficacy of SV with additional SGLT2i in HFrEF patients., Methods: For this study, several databases, such as PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, were searched. A coherent search approach was used for data extraction. Review Manager 5.2 and MedCalc were used for conducting the meta-analysis and bias analysis. A meta-regression study correlates patient mean age with primary and secondary outcomes., Results: Seven trials totaling 16 100 patients were included in this meta-analysis. All-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and improvement in mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were the study's major objectives, while hospitalization for heart failure (HF) was calculated to be its secondary outcome. Our analysis showed that HFrEF patients receiving the combination of SV and SGLT2i had better treatment outcomes than the standard SV monotherapy, with risk ratios of 0.76 (0.65-0.88) for all-cause mortality, 0.65 (0.49-0.86) for cardiovascular mortality, 1.41 (-0.59 to 3.42) for change in mean LVEF, and 0.80 (0.64-1.01) for hospitalization for HF. According to the regression analysis, older HFrEF patients have higher rates of hospitalization, cardiovascular disease, and overall death., Conclusions: The combination of SV and SGLT2i may have a greater cardiovascular protective effect and minimize the risk of death or hospitalization due to heart failure in HFrEF., (© 2023 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

The purpose of this study was to identify the effect of antihypertensive medication on risks of open-angle glaucoma (OAG) among patients diagnosed with hypertension (HTN). A total of 5,195 patients, who were diagnosed with HTN between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2015, and subsequently diagnosed with OAG, were selected for analysis. For each OAG patient, 5 non-glaucomatous, hypertensive controls were matched (n = 25,975) in hypertension diagnosis date, residential area, insurance type and economic status. Antihypertensive medications were stratified into 5 types: angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), calcium channel blockers (CCB), β-blockers and diuretics. Relative risks were calculated. After adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, lifestyle, comorbidities, blood pressure (BP), follow-up duration, and use of other types of antihypertensive drugs, ARB and CCB were found to slightly increase OAG risks (RR 1.1087 (95% CI 1.0293-1.1942); 1.0694 (1.0077-1.1349), respectively). Combinations of ARB with diuretics (1.0893 (1.0349-1.1466)) and CCB (1.0548 (1.0122-1.0991)) also increased OAG risks. The risks for OAG were found to increase by antihypertensive medication use, but the effects appeared to be small. Further studies are necessary to identify the associations of increased BP, medication and therapeutic effect with OAG., (© 2023. Springer Nature Limited.)

Aim: Sacubitril/valsartan is a new cardiovascular agent characterized by its dual inhibition on the reninangiotensin system (RAS) and the neprilysin. As neprilysin also involved itself in the degradation of amyloid-β, there is an ongoing concern about the effect of sacubitril/valsartan on cognition, especially in case of long-term administration., Methods: The FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) was mined between 2015Q3 and 2022Q4 to analyze the association between sacubitril/valsartan and adverse events (AEs) involving dementia. Standardized Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) Queries (SMQs) with "broad" and "narrow" preferred terms (PTs) relevant to dementia was applied to systematically search demented AE reports. The Empirical Bayes Geometric Mean (EBGM) from Multi-Item Gamma Poisson Shrinker (MGPS) and proportional reporting ratio with Chi-square (PRR, χ 2 ) were used to calculate the disproportionality., Results: We filtered the query for indication and identified 80,316 reports with heart failure indication in FAERS during the analytical period. Among all the reports, sacubitril/valsartan was listed as primary suspected or secondary suspected drug in 29,269 cases. No significantly elevated reporting rates of narrow dementia were evident with sacubitril/valsartan. The EBGM05 for narrow dementia-related AEs associated with sacubitril/valsartan was 0.88 and the PRR (χ 2 ) was 1.22 (2.40). Similarly, broad demented complications were not over-reported in the heart failure patients administrated with sacubitril/valsartan (EBGM05 1.11; PRR 1.31, χ 2 109.36)., Conclusion: The number of dementia-related cases reported to FAERS generate no safety signal attributable to sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure for now. Further follow-ups are still warranted to address this question., (© 2023 The Authors. CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Rationale: Sacubitril/valsartan (Entresto) is the first drug approved for the treatment of symptomatic chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in adult patients. There have been no reports of hepatotoxicity secondary to sacubitril/valsartan administration. Here, we report the first case of severe liver injury caused by sacubitril/valsartan., Patient Concerns: A 90-year-old female patient taking sacubitril/valsartan was admitted due to chronic heart failure. Subsequently, the patient developed serious liver injury with increased hepatic transaminases., Diagnosis: Drug-induced liver injury, sacubitril/valsartan-related. No liver injury caused by other reasons was observed after thorough examination. After the withdrawal of sacubitril/valsartan, the liver function of the patient gradually returned to normal., Interventions: We chose general liver protection methods to improve her hepatic function, including magnesium isoglycyrrhizinate at 100 mg daily and polyene phosphatidylcholine capsules at 456 mg 3 times daily. We consulted with a hepatologist to discuss the best plan for her treatment. The last, we stopped sacubitril/valsartan., Outcomes: After the withdrawal of sacubitril/valsartan, the liver function of the patient gradually returned to normal., Lessons: Sacubitril/valsartan-induced liver injury is very rare. Clinicians should pay particular attention to the possibility of hepatotoxicity during sacubitril/valsartan treatment., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: The data on the effects of the angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril-valsartan (LCZ696) in chronic heart failure (CHF) patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) requiring dialysis are lacking. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of LCZ696 in CHF patients with ESRD on dialysis., Hypothesis: LCZ696 treatment can reduce rehospitalization rate for HF, delay the occurrence of rehospitalization for HF, and prolong the survival time., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of CHF patients with ESRD on dialysis who were admitted to the Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University from August 2019 to October 2021., Results: Sixty-five patients had primary outcome during the follow-up. The incidence of rehospitalization for HF in the control group was significantly higher than that in the LCZ696 group (73.47% vs. 43.28%, p = .001). There was no significant difference in mortality between the two groups (8.96% vs. 10.20%, p = 1.000). Our study included a time-to-event analysis through 1 year for the primary outcome-Kaplan-Meier curve showed that the LCZ696 group had significantly longer free-event survival time than the control group over 1-year follow-up (median survival time 139.0 days vs. 116.0 days, p = .037)., Conclusions: Our study found that LCZ696 treatment was associated with a reduction in HF rehospitalization without significant effects on serum creatinine and serum potassium levels. LCZ696 is effective and safe in CHF patients with ESRD on dialysis., (© 2023 The Authors. Clinical Cardiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a long-term condition that occurs as a result of damage to the kidneys. Early recognition of CKD is becoming increasingly common due to widespread laboratory estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) reporting, raised clinical awareness, and international adoption of the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) classifications. Early recognition and management of CKD affords the opportunity to prepare for progressive kidney impairment and impending kidney replacement therapy and for intervention to reduce the risk of progression and cardiovascular disease. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) are two classes of antihypertensive drugs that act on the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. Beneficial effects of ACEi and ARB on kidney outcomes and survival in people with a wide range of severity of kidney impairment have been reported; however, their effectiveness in the subgroup of people with early CKD (stage 1 to 3) is less certain. This is an update of a review that was last published in 2011., Objectives: To evaluate the benefits and harms of ACEi and ARB or both in the management of people with early (stage 1 to 3) CKD who do not have diabetes mellitus (DM)., Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 6 July 2023 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov., Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the effect of ACEi or ARB in people with early (stage 1 to 3) CKD who did not have DM were selected for inclusion. Only studies of at least four weeks duration were selected. Authors independently assessed the retrieved titles and abstracts and, where necessary, the full text to determine which satisfied the inclusion criteria., Data Collection and Analysis: Data extraction was carried out by two authors independently, using a standard data extraction form. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data entry was carried out by one author and cross-checked by another. When more than one study reported similar outcomes, data were pooled using the random-effects model. Heterogeneity was analysed using a Chi² test and the I² test. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach MAIN RESULTS: Six studies randomising 9379 participants with CKD stages 1 to 3 (without DM) met our inclusion criteria. Participants were adults with hypertension; 79% were male from China, Europe, Japan, and the USA. Treatment periods ranged from 12 weeks to three years. Overall, studies were judged to be at unclear or high risk of bias across all domains, and the quality of the evidence was poor, with GRADE rated as low or very low certainty. In low certainty evidence, ACEi (benazepril 10 mg or trandolapril 2 mg) compared to placebo may make little or no difference to death (any cause) (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.26 to 15.37; I² = 76%), total cardiovascular events (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05; I² = 0%), cardiovascular-related death (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 1.73, 95% CI 0.26 to 11.66; I² = 54%), stroke (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.03; I² = 0%), myocardial infarction (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.20; I² = 0%), and adverse events (2 studies, 8873 participants): RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.41; I² = 0%). It is uncertain whether ACEi (benazepril 10 mg or trandolapril 2 mg) compared to placebo reduces congestive heart failure (1 study, 8290 participants): RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.95) or transient ischaemic attack (1 study, 583 participants): RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.01; I² = 0%) because the certainty of the evidence is very low. It is uncertain whether ARB (losartan 50 mg) compared to placebo (1 study, 226 participants) reduces: death (any-cause) (no events), adverse events (RR 19.34, 95% CI 1.14 to 328.30), eGFR rate of decline (MD 5.00 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , 95% CI 3.03 to 6.97), presence of proteinuria (MD -0.65 g/24 hours, 95% CI -0.78 to -0.52), systolic blood pressure (MD -0.80 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.89 to 2.29), or diastolic blood pressure (MD -1.10 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.29 to 1.09) because the certainty of the evidence is very low. It is uncertain whether ACEi (enalapril 20 mg, perindopril 2 mg or trandolapril 1 mg) compared to ARB (olmesartan 20 mg, losartan 25 mg or candesartan 4 mg) (1 study, 26 participants) reduces: proteinuria (MD -0.40, 95% CI -0.60 to -0.20), systolic blood pressure (MD -3.00 mm Hg, 95% CI -6.08 to 0.08) or diastolic blood pressure (MD -1.00 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.31 to 1.31) because the certainty of the evidence is very low., Authors' Conclusions: There is currently insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of ACEi or ARB in patients with stage 1 to 3 CKD who do not have DM. The available evidence is overall of very low certainty and high risk of bias. We have identified an area of large uncertainty for a group of patients who account for most of those diagnosed as having CKD., (Copyright © 2023 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: Different first-line drug classes for patients with hypertension are often assumed to have similar effectiveness with respect to reducing mortality and morbidity outcomes, and lowering blood pressure. First-line low-dose thiazide diuretics have been previously shown to have the best mortality and morbidity evidence when compared with placebo or no treatment. Head-to-head comparisons of thiazides with other blood pressure-lowering drug classes would demonstrate whether there are important differences., Objectives: To compare the effects of first-line diuretic drugs with other individual first-line classes of antihypertensive drugs on mortality, morbidity, and withdrawals due to adverse effects in patients with hypertension. Secondary objectives included assessments of the need for added drugs, drug switching, and blood pressure-lowering., Search Methods: Cochrane Hypertension's Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Hypertension Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trials registers to March 2021. We also checked references and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. A top-up search of the Specialized Register was carried out in June 2022., Selection Criteria: Randomized active comparator trials of at least one year's duration were included. Trials had a clearly defined intervention arm of a first-line diuretic (thiazide, thiazide-like, or loop diuretic) compared to another first-line drug class: beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, alpha adrenergic blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, direct renin inhibitors, or other antihypertensive drug classes. Studies had to include clearly defined mortality and morbidity outcomes (serious adverse events, total cardiovascular events, stroke, coronary heart disease (CHD), congestive heart failure, and withdrawals due to adverse effects)., Data Collection and Analysis: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures., Main Results: We included 20 trials with 26 comparator arms randomizing over 90,000 participants. The findings are relevant to first-line use of drug classes in older male and female hypertensive patients (aged 50 to 75) with multiple co-morbidities, including type 2 diabetes. First-line thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics were compared with beta-blockers (six trials), calcium channel blockers (eight trials), ACE inhibitors (five trials), and alpha-adrenergic blockers (three trials); other comparators included angiotensin II receptor blockers, aliskiren (a direct renin inhibitor), and clonidine (a centrally acting drug). Only three studies reported data for total serious adverse events: two studies compared diuretics with calcium channel blockers and one with a direct renin inhibitor. Compared to first-line beta-blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.10; 5 trials, 18,241 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (5.4% versus 4.8%; RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.00; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; absolute risk reduction (ARR) 0.6%, moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in stroke (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.09; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; low-certainty), CHD (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.07; 4 trials, 18,135 participants; low-certainty), or heart failure (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.19; 1 trial, 6569 participants; low-certainty), and probably reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (10.1% versus 7.9%; RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.85; 5 trials, 18,501 participants; ARR 2.2%; moderate-certainty). Compared to first-line calcium channel blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.08; 7 trials, 35,417 participants; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in serious adverse events (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.24; 2 trials, 7204 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (14.3% versus 13.3%; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; ARR 1.0%; moderate-certainty), probably result in little to no difference in stroke (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.18; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; moderate-certainty) or CHD (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.08; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce heart failure (4.4% versus 3.2%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.82; 6 trials, 35,217 participants; ARR 1.2%; moderate-certainty), and may reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (7.6% versus 6.2%; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.88; 7 trials, 33,908 participants; ARR 1.4%; low-certainty). Compared to first-line ACE inhibitors, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.07; 3 trials, 30,961 participants; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in total cardiovascular events (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.02; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce stroke slightly (4.7% versus 4.1%; RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.99; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; ARR 0.6%; moderate-certainty), probably result in little to no difference in CHD (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.12; 3 trials, 30,900 participants; moderate-certainty) or heart failure (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; 2 trials, 30,392 participants; moderate-certainty), and probably reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (3.9% versus 2.9%; RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.84; 3 trials, 25,254 participants; ARR 1.0%; moderate-certainty). Compared to first-line alpha-blockers, first-line thiazides probably result in little to no difference in total mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.09; 1 trial, 24,316 participants; moderate-certainty), probably reduce total cardiovascular events (12.1% versus 9.0%; RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.80; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; ARR 3.1%; moderate-certainty) and stroke (2.7% versus 2.3%; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.01; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; ARR 0.4%; moderate-certainty), may result in little to no difference in CHD (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.11; 2 trials, 24,396 participants; low-certainty), probably reduce heart failure (5.4% versus 2.8%; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.58; 1 trial, 24,316 participants; ARR 2.6%; moderate-certainty), and may reduce withdrawals due to adverse effects (1.3% versus 0.9%; RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.89; 3 trials, 24,772 participants; ARR 0.4%; low-certainty). For the other drug classes, data were insufficient. No antihypertensive drug class demonstrated any clinically important advantages over first-line thiazides., Authors' Conclusions: When used as first-line agents for the treatment of hypertension, thiazides and thiazide-like drugs likely do not change total mortality and likely decrease some morbidity outcomes such as cardiovascular events and withdrawals due to adverse effects, when compared to beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, ACE inhibitors, and alpha-blockers., (Copyright © 2023 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objective: To examine the effect of angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) treatment on serum potassium level and hyperkalaemia risk in a clinical setting with inpatients and outpatients using calcium channel blockers (CCBs) as a reference standard., Methods: The increased risk of hyperkalaemia associated with ARB treatment is known, however only a few studies have used an active comparator to examine this risk. In this retrospective study at a 320-bed general hospital in Japan, the hospital information system was used to identify patients with at least one prescription for an ARB (819 patients) or a CCB (1015 patients) who were naive to these drugs before study initiation. Serum potassium levels before and after ARB treatment were compared. Additionally, the unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios for the risk of hyperkalaemia in the ARB and CCB users were estimated., Results: The serum potassium level was higher in patients receiving ARB treatment (0.05 mEq/L, p=0.02) compared with those on CCB treatment. However, there was no significant association between ARB use and hyperkalaemia (adjusted HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.99, p=0.82)., Conclusion: The increase in serum potassium level after ARB initiation makes it necessary to monitor serum potassium levels continuously during ARB treatment; however, the risk of hyperkalaemia appeared to be similar for ARB and CCB treatments., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© European Association of Hospital Pharmacists 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Cognitive dysfunction (CD) is detectable in approximately 40% of patients with SLE. Despite this high prevalence, there are no approved pharmacological treatment options for this detrimental condition. Preliminary murine studies show potential for targeting microglial activation as a treatment of SLE-CD, which may be ameliorated with centrally acting ACE inhibitor (cACEi) and angiotensin receptor blocker (cARB) use. The aim of this study is to determine if there is an association of cACEi/cARB use with cognitive function in a human SLE cohort., Methods: The American College of Rheumatology neuropsychological battery was administered to patients with consecutive SLE at a single academic health centre at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Scores were compared with sex-matched and age-matched control subjects. Clinical and demographic data were gathered at each visit. The primary outcome was CD defined as dysfunction in two or more cognitive domains. The primary predictor was a total cumulative dose of cACEi/cARB in milligrams per kilogram, recorded as an equivalent ramipril dose. Odds of CD with respect to cACEi/cARB use were determined through generalised linear mixed modelling., Results: A total of 300 patients, representing 676 visits, completed this study. One hundred sixteen (39%) met the criteria for CD. Fifty-three participants (18%) were treated with a cACEi or cARB. Mean cumulative dose was 236 mg/kg (calculated as equivalent ramipril dose). Cumulative cACEi/cARB dose was not protective against SLE-CD. Caucasian ethnicity, current employment status and azathioprine cumulative dose were each associated with reduced odds of SLE-CD. Increasing Fatigue Severity Scale score was associated with increased odds of CD., Conclusions: In a single-centre SLE cohort, cACEi/cARB use was not associated with absence of CD. Many important confounders may have influenced the results of this retrospective study. A randomised trial is required to accurately determine if cACEi/cARB is a potential treatment for SLE-CD., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) have been hypothesized to benefit patients with COVID-19 via the inhibition of viral entry and other mechanisms. We conducted an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis assessing the effect of starting the ARB losartan in recently hospitalized COVID-19 patients., Methods: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov in January 2021 for U.S./Canada-based trials where an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/ARB was a treatment arm, targeted outcomes could be extrapolated, and data sharing was allowed. Our primary outcome was a 7-point COVID-19 ordinal score measured 13 to 16 days post-enrollment. We analyzed data by fitting multilevel Bayesian ordinal regression models and standardizing the resulting predictions., Results: 325 participants (156 losartan vs 169 control) from 4 studies contributed IPD. Three were randomized trials; one used non-randomized concurrent and historical controls. Baseline covariates were reasonably balanced for the randomized trials. All studies evaluated losartan. We found equivocal evidence of a difference in ordinal scores 13-16 days post-enrollment (model-standardized odds ratio [OR] 1.10, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.76-1.71; adjusted OR 1.15, 95% CrI 0.15-3.59) and no compelling evidence of treatment effect heterogeneity among prespecified subgroups. Losartan had worse effects for those taking corticosteroids at baseline after adjusting for covariates (ratio of adjusted ORs 0.29, 95% CrI 0.08-0.99). Hypotension serious adverse event rates were numerically higher with losartan., Conclusions: In this IPD meta-analysis of hospitalized COVID-19 patients, we found no convincing evidence for the benefit of losartan versus control treatment, but a higher rate of hypotension adverse events with losartan., Competing Interests: S.N.B., N.M., and D.F.H. report receiving research funding from the Department of Defense for clinical trials of convalescent plasma for COVID-19 outside the submitted work. M.A.P. had money paid to his institution for COVID-19 trials from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (trial of losartan), Minnesota Partnership for Biotechnology and Medical Genomics (trial of losartan), NHLBI NECTAR trial (trial of host response agents, including those targeting RAS), Parsemus Foundation (metformin trial), Rainwater Foundation (metformin, fluvoxamine, ivermectin trial), United Health Group (metformin, fluvoxamine, ivermectin trial), and for service as the independent medical safety monitor in the NHLBI Early Convalescent Plasma for High Risk Outpatients with COVID-19 clinical trial. Money was paid to him by the Protocol Development Committee (ACTIV-4d/ NECTAR), and he served without reimbursement on the REMAP CAP RAAS Domain Protocol Committee. A.E.S has received speaker honoraria and travel support from Servier, Sanofi, and Takeda. C.J.T. has received support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Minnesota Partnership for Biotechnology and Medical Genomics (trial of losartan), and he received funding from Parsemus Foundation (metformin trial). The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

The authors investigated whether there is an association between angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) users with hemorrhoids. A total of 21,670 ACEI users and 21,670 ARB users during 2000 - 2012 from a national health insurance database were included. Hemorrhoid incidences were monitored to the end of 2013. To examine the risk of hemorrhoids, the Cox proportional hazard model and the Kaplan-Meier method were used. The incidence rate of hemorrhoids in ARB users was 6.64 per 1000 person-years, which was higher than that of the ACEI users (5.48 per 1000 person-years). The adjusted hazard ratio of hemorrhoids in patients who received ACEI relative to those who received ARB was 0.83 (95% confidence intervals [CI] = 0.75, 0.92). Compared to ARB users, patients who used ACEI more than 740 days per year (adjusted hazard ratios = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.36, 0.54) and more than 7800 mg (adjusted hazard ratios = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.46, 0.65) had a lower risk of hemorrhoids. ACEI users who took a relatively long period or high cumulative dosage were found to less prone to develop hemorrhoids., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objectives: Angiotensin II is implicated in GCA pathology. We examined whether the use of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) is associated with GCA risk compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) or other antihypertensives., Methods: We performed a matched cohort study including adults who were initiators of antihypertensives in UK primary care data between 1995 and 2019. Treatment-naïve individuals without prior GCA or PMR were categorized into three groups-ARB initiators, ACEi initiators, or other antihypertensive initiators (beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics or alpha-adrenoceptor blockers)-and followed for up to 5 years. Incident GCA was defined using validated Read codes, with age of onset ≥50 years and two or more glucocorticoid prescriptions. Inverse probability-weighted Cox models were used to model outcome risk, adjusting for lifestyle parameters, comorbidities and comedications., Results: Among >1 million new starters of antihypertensives (81 780 ARBs, 422 940 ACEis and 873 066 other antihypertensives), the incidence rate of GCA per 10 000 patient-years was 2.73 (95% CI 2.12, 3.50) in the ARB group, 1.76 (95% CI 1.25, 2.39) in the ACEi group and 1.90 (95% CI 1.37, 2.56) in the other antihypertensives group. The hazard of GCA was higher in ARB initiators [hazard ratio (HR) 1.55; 95% CI 1.16, 2.06] than initiators of ACEis, but similar between initiators of other antihypertensives and ACEis (HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.87, 1.35)., Conclusions: Initiation of ARBs is associated with a higher risk of GCA compared with ACEis or other antihypertensives. Mechanistic studies of angiotensin receptor biology will provide further clarity for our findings., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: Multimorbidity, the coexistence of two or more chronic conditions, is synonymous with heart failure (HF). How risk related to comorbidities compares at individual and population levels is unknown. The aim of this study is to examine the risk related to comorbidities, alone and in combination, both at individual and population levels., Methods and Results: Using two clinical trials in HF - the Prospective comparison of ARNI (Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor) with ACEI (Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor) to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in HF trial (PARADIGM-HF) and the Aliskiren Trial to Minimize Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure trials (ATMOSPHERE) - we identified the 10 most common comorbidities and examined 45 possible pairs. We calculated population attributable fractions (PAF) for all-cause death and relative excess risk due to interaction with Cox proportional hazard models. Of 15 066 patients in the study, 14 133 (93.7%) had at least one and 11 867 (78.8%) had at least two of the 10 most prevalent comorbidities. The greatest individual risk among pairs was associated with peripheral artery disease (PAD) in combination with stroke (hazard ratio [HR] 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-2.33) and anaemia (HR 1.71; 95% CI 1.39-2.11). The combination of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and hypertension had the highest PAF (5.65%; 95% CI 3.66-7.61). Two pairs demonstrated significant synergistic interaction (atrial fibrillation with CKD and coronary artery disease, respectively) and one an antagonistic interaction (anaemia and obesity)., Conclusions: In HF, the impact of multimorbidity differed at the individual patient and population level, depending on the prevalence of and the risk related to each comorbidity, and the interaction between individual comorbidities. Patients with coexistent PAD and stroke were at greatest individual risk whereas, from a population perspective, coexistent CKD and hypertension mattered most., (© 2023 European Society of Cardiology.)

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly prescribed in pediatric hypertension because of the fundamental role of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in the pathogenesis of hypertension. We, therefore, aimed to systematically review articles that investigated efficacy and safety of ARB agents in the pediatric population aged over six years. To do so, the databases of Web of Science, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Scopus were searched to conduct a systematic review by using the following keywords: ("angiotensin receptor blocker" OR "valsartan" OR "losartan") AND ("pediatric" OR "children" OR "child") AND ("high blood pressure" OR "hypertension"). Finally, 12 studies were included in our review, and we found that almost all of them supported the effectiveness and tolerability of different ARB agents. Candesartan cilexetil lowered blood pressure (BP), with a 9 mmHg decline in both systolic and diastolic BP, and proteinuria after four months of treatment. Valsartan and Losartan similarly were shown to be effective in lowering BP in a dose-dependent manner. Headache, dizziness, upper respiratory infection, and cough were the most reported side effects. However, almost all reviewed studies indicated that the safety profile was satisfactory. In conclusion, ARBs are beneficial and well-tolerated antihypertensive medications.  DOI: 10.52547/ijkd.7228.

The incidence of heart failure and chronic kidney disease is increasing, and many patients develop both diseases. Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) is a promising therapeutic candidate for both diseases. ARNI has demonstrated superior cardioprotective effects compared with renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RAS-Is) in large clinical trials such as the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ACEI [Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor] to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) trial. It has also been suggested that ARNI can provide renoprotective effects beyond those of RAS-Is in patients with HF. ARNI might have beneficial effects on the kidneys because of its ability to improve cardiac function in patients with heart failure and affect renal hemodynamics by enhancing the effects of hormones such as natriuretic peptide. In contrast, in the PARADIGM-HF trial, ARNI was associated with more albuminuria compared with RAS-I; thus, it is unclear whether long-term ARNI therapy has renoprotective effects. Additionally, ARNI did not provide renoprotective effects beyond RAS-I in patients with chronic kidney disease in the UK HARP-III (United Kingdom Heart and Renal Protection-III) trial. In other words, the patient population in which ARNI is more renoprotective than RAS-I might be limited. Collectively, ARNI may have renoprotective effects in addition to cardioprotective effects, but the evidence to date is applicable only to heart failure. Theoretically, given the molecular mechanism of ARNI, it could also be renoprotective in conditions such as nephrosclerosis, which has low risks of albuminuria and reduced kidney perfusion, but the evidence for such effects is lacking. Further research is needed to clarify whether ARNI therapy is an acceptable treatment strategy for renal protection.

Cardiovascular disease and diabetes are risk factors for depression, yet the relationship between the drug treatments for these diseases and the risk of antidepressant initiation remains unclear. This study aimed to examine possible associations between the use of angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), beta-blockers (BB), calcium channel blockers (CCB), diuretics, or metformin and risk of antidepressant initiation. The Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT3), Norway, was linked to the Norwegian Prescription Database (NorPD). Participants with no prescriptions of cardiovascular agents, metformin, or antidepressants for at least 6 months before HUNT3 (baseline) were eligible and followed for 10 years. The exposure was the use of cardiovascular agents or metformin, defined as mono- or polytherapy from baseline to end of follow-up. The outcome was the initiation of antidepressant use, indicated by the first drug dispensation during the study period and expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Among 20 227 adults aged 40-70 years at baseline, we observed different associations between cardiovascular agents or metformin and the risk of antidepressant initiation. ARBs or CCB monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of initiating antidepressant use (HR 0.70; 95%CI 0.56-0.88 and HR 0.81; 95%CI 0.61-1.06, respectively) compared to no use of any drugs included in the study (reference). Reduced risk of antidepressant initiation was among ASA or statin polytherapy users, whereas there was a small increased risk among participants on ASA monotherapy. In contrast, there was no statistical evidence of associations between ACEI, BB, diuretics, or metformin and increased or decreased risk of antidepressant initiation. Our mixed findings indicate the possibility that some cardiovascular agents may be associated with a reduced risk of initiating antidepressant use while others may not. However, bias due to the limitations of the study design is possible., (© 2023 The Authors. Pharmacology Research & Perspectives published by British Pharmacological Society and American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Initiation and up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMTs) for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remains suboptimal, in part because of concerns regarding tolerability and adverse events (AEs)., Objectives: The authors sought to compare rates of AE in patients randomized to GDMT medication vs placebo in a meta-analysis of landmark cardiovascular outcomes trials., Methods: The authors assessed rates of reported AE in 17 landmark HFrEF clinical trials across each class of GDMT in the placebo and intervention arms. The overall rates of AE for each drug class, the absolute difference in frequency in AEs between the placebo and intervention arms, and the odds of each AE according based on randomization strata were calculated., Results: AE were reported commonly in trials across each class of GDMT, with 75% to 85% of participants reporting at least 1 AE. There was no significant difference in the frequency of AE between the intervention and placebo arms, except for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (87.0% [95% CI: 85.0%-88.8%] vs 82.0% [95% CI: 79.8%-84.0%], absolute difference: +5% with intervention; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in drug discontinuation because of AE between placebo and intervention arms in angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker trials. Patients randomized to beta-blocker were significantly less likely to stop study drug because of AE than placebo (11.3% [95% CI: 10.3%-12.3%] vs 13.7% [95% CI: 12.5%-14.9%], absolute difference: -1.1%; P = 0.015). When individual types of AE were assessed, the initiation of an intervention vs placebo resulted in small differences in absolute frequency of AE that were largely not statistically significant., Conclusions: In clinical trials of GDMT for HFrEF, AEs are observed frequently. However, rates of AE are similar between active medication and control, suggesting these may reflect the high risk nature of the heart failure disease state rather than be attributive to a specific therapy., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Harrington has received salary support from T32 training grant T32HL069749. Dr Fonarow has done consulting for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, and Novartis. Dr Felker has received research grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, American Heart Association, Amgen, Bayer, BMS, Merck, Cytokinetics, and CSL-Behring; has acted as a consultant to Novartis, Amgen, BMS, Cytokinetics, Medtronic, Cardionomic, Boehringer-Ingelheim, American Regent, Abbott, AstraZeneca, Reprieve, Myovant, Sequana, Windtree Therapuetics, and Whiteswell; and has served on clinical endpoint committees/data safety monitoring boards for Amgen, Merck, Medtronic, EBR Systems, V-Wave, LivaNova, Siemens, and Rocket Pharma. Dr Böhm is supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation; TTR 219, project number 322900939); and has received personal fees from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Medtronic, Novartis, Servier, and Vifor during the conduct of the study. Dr Hernandez has received research grants from American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squib, Merck, Novartis, and Verily; and has done consulting for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squib, Myokardia, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Anker has received fees from Abbott, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiac Dimension, Impulse Dynamics, Novartis, Occlutech, Servier, and Vifor Pharma; and has received grant support from Abbott and Vifor Pharma. Dr Greene has received research support from the Duke University Department of Medicine Chair’s Research Award, American Heart Association, National Heart Lung and Blood Institute, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Merck and Co Inc, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; has served on advisory boards for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Roche Diagnostics, and Sanofi; has served as a consultant for Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck and Co Inc, PhamaIN, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, Tricog Health, Urovant Pharmaceuticals, and Vifor; and has received speaker fees from Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Vaduganathan has received research grant support or served on advisory boards for American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Baxter Healthcare, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pharmacosmos, Relypsa, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, and Tricog Health; has had speaker engagements with Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Roche Diagnostics; and has participated on clinical trial committees for studies sponsored by Galmed, Novartis, Bayer AG, Occlutech, and Impulse Dynamics. Dr Butler has served as a consultant to Abbott, Adrenomed, Amgen, Array, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Berlin Cures, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squib, CVRx, G3 Pharmaceutical, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Luitpold, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Occlutech, Relypsa, Roche, Sanofi, SC Pharma, V-Wave Limited, and Vifor. Dr Khan has reported that he has no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)