Search

Background: Treatment of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and renal dysfunction (RD) is challenging owing to the risk of further deterioration in renal function, especially after acute decompensated HF (ADHF)., Methods and Results: We assessed the effect of RD (estimated glomerular filtration rate of ≥30 to <60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ) on initiation, up-titration, and tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan in hemodynamically stabilized patients with HFrEF admitted for ADHF (RD, n = 476; non-RD, n = 483). At week 10, the target dose of sacubitril/valsartan (97/103 mg twice daily) was achieved by 42% patients in RD subgroup vs 54% in non-RD patients (P < .001). Sacubitril/valsartan was associated with greater estimated glomerular filtration rate improvements in RD subgroup than non-RD (change from baseline least squares mean 4.1 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , 95% confidence interval 2.2-6.1, P < .001). Cardiac biomarkers improved significantly in both subgroups; however, compared with the RD subgroup, the improvement was greater in those without RD (N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, -28.6% vs -44.8%, high-sensitivity troponin T -20.3% vs -33.9%) (P < .001). Patients in the RD subgroup compared with those without RD experienced higher rates of hyperkalemia (16.3% vs 6.5%, P < .001), investigator-reported cardiac failure (9.7% vs 5.6%, P = .029), and renal impairment (6.4% vs 2.1%, P = .002)., Conclusions: Most patients with HFrEF and concomitant RD hospitalized for ADHF tolerated early initiation of sacubitril/valsartan and showed significant improvements in estimated glomerular filtration rate and cardiac biomarkers., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02661217., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest E. Straburzynska-Migaj received consultancy fees and/or honoraria from Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, Abbott, Servier, AstraZeneca, and Bausch Health. M. Senni received consultancy fees and/or speaker's honoraria from Novartis, Bayer, Abbott, Merck, AstraZeneca, Vifor Pharma, and Boehringer Ingelheim. R. Wachter is a member of advisory boards and/or received speaker's honoraria from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, CVRx, Medtronic, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Servier, and research grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, European Union, and Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. C. Fonseca received consultancy fees, grants and speaker's honoraria from Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, and Vifor Pharma. K. K. Witte was the UK Principal Investigator on the TRANSITION study. He has received research support in the form of a PhD fellowship program to the University of Leeds from Medtronic UK, the MRC, and Heart Research UK, and holds fellowship grants from the NIHR and the British Heart Foundation. He has received consultancy and/or speaker fees from Medtronic, Abbott, Microport, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Novartis, and Astra Zeneca. C. Mueller has received research grants from the Swiss National Science Foundation, the Swiss Heart Foundation, the KTI, the European Union, the University Basel, the University Hospital Basel, Abbott, Astra Zeneca, Beckman Coulter, BRAHMS, Idorsia, Novartis, Ortho Clinical Diagnostics, Quidel, Roche, Siemens, Singulex, and Sphingotec, as well as speaker/consulting honoraria from Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Idorsia, Osler, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Siemens, and Singulex, all outside the current work and all paid to the institution. E. Lonn received research support from Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Sanofi, and Roche, and consultancy fees and/or speaker's honoraria from Novartis, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Sanofi. D. Butylin, A. Noe, H. Schwende and D. Lawrence are employees of Novartis. B. Suryawanshi is an employee of IQVIA, India. D. Pascual-Figal declares research grants from Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, and Pfizer; and consultancy or educational honoraria from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Servier, Pfizer, Vifor Pharma, Rovi, and Abbott., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Diabetes mellitus is associated with worse outcomes and lower attainment of disease-modifying therapies in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This post hoc analysis of TRANSITION compared the patterns of tolerability and uptitration of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with HFrEF stabilized after hospital admission due to acute decompensated HF depending on the presence or absence of diabetes as a co-morbidity., Methods: TRANSITION, a randomized, open-label study compared sacubitril/valsartan initiation pre-discharge vs. post-discharge (up to14 days) in 991 patients hospitalized for acutely decompensated HFrEF. The impact of diabetes status on tolerability and safety was studied at 10-week and 26-week post-randomization., Results: Among the 991 patients analysed at baseline, 460 (46.4%) had diabetes and exhibited a higher risk profile. At 10 weeks, sacubitril/valsartan target dose (97/103 mg bid) was achieved in a similar proportion of patients in each subgroup, when initiated pre-discharge or post-discharge respectively [diabetes subgroup: 47% (n = 105/226) vs. 50% (n = 115/228); relative risk ratio (RRR), 0.923; P = 0.412; non-diabetes subgroup: 45% (n = 119/267) vs. 51% (n = 133/261); RRR, 0.878; P = 0.155]. The proportions of patients achieving and maintaining either 49/51 mg or 97/103 mg bid [diabetes subgroup: 61.1% (n = 138/226) vs. 67.5% (n = 154/228); RRR, 0.909; P = 0.175; non-diabetes subgroup: 62.9% [n = 168/267] vs 69.3% [n = 181/261]; RRR, 0.906; P = 0.118] or any dose for ≥2 weeks leading to Week 10 [diabetes subgroup: 85% (n = 192/226) vs. 88.2% (n = 201/228); RRR, 0.966; P = 0.356; non-diabetes subgroup: 86.9% (n = 232/267) vs. 90.8% (n = 237/261); RRR, 0.963; P = 0.215] were also similar in each subgroup, when initiated pre-discharge or post-discharge, respectively. At 10 weeks, hypotension and renal dysfunction rates were similar, although hyperkalaemia was higher among patients with diabetes (15.9% vs. 9.5%). The rate of permanent discontinuation due to adverse events was similar in the diabetes and non-diabetes subgroups at 10 weeks, respectively: pre-discharge (7.5% vs. 7.1%) or post-discharge (5.7% vs. 4.2%). Similar patterns of uptitration and tolerability were observed at 26 weeks. Cardiac biomarkers including NT-proBNP (P < 0.005) and hs-TnT (P < 0.005) reduced significantly from baseline levels in both subgroups at Weeks 4 and 10; however, the response was greater among patients without diabetes. Mortality (diabetes vs. non-diabetes subgroups: 3.3% vs 4.0%; P = 0.438) and HF rehospitalization (diabetes vs. non-diabetes subgroups: 36.3% vs. 33.0%; P = 0.295) did not differ between the groups at 26 weeks., Conclusions: Despite a higher risk profile among patients with diabetes, sacubitril/valsartan initiation either before or shortly after discharge in hospitalized patients with HFrEF resulted in comparable rates of dose up-titration and tolerability as in those without diabetes., (© 2022 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Heart failure (HF) is associated with poor health-related quality of life (HRQL). Patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have similar HRQL impairment as those with reduced ejection fraction. This study describes the impact of sacubitril/valsartan on HRQL in patients with HFpEF enrolled in the PARAGON-HF trial., Methods and Results: Patients completed the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and EuroQol (EQ-5D) at randomization, 4, 8 months, and annually thereafter. Changes in HRQL scores were evaluated using repeated measures models adjusted for treatment, baseline values and region. The pre-specified principal efficacy assessment was at 8 months at which time patients randomized to sacubitril/valsartan had borderline higher KCCQ clinical summary score (CSS) with least squares mean (LSM) adjusted difference of 1.0 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.0, 2.1; p = 0.051). Including all visits up to 36 months, the LSM difference in KCCQ-CSS favoured sacubitril/valsartan with average adjusted difference of 1.1 (95% CI 0.1, 2.0; p = 0.034). Patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan had greater odds of clinically meaningful improvement (≥5-point increase) in KCCQ-CSS (odds ratio 1.31; 95% CI 1.06, 1.61) at 8 months. At 8 months, there was no significant difference in the EQ visual analogue scale between the treatment arms, but sacubitril/valsartan was associated with higher EQ-5D utility score (US-based) with LSM adjusted difference of 0.01 (95% CI 0.00, 0.02; p = 0.019)., Conclusion: Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan had a borderline benefit on KCCQ-CSS at 8 months in patients with HFpEF. This benefit became more significant when data from all visits up to 36 months were included. This modest overall benefit was also supported by greater odds of patients reporting a clinically meaningful improvement in HRQL with sacubitril/valsartan., (© 2022 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Objectives: This study examined the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels and determined patient characteristics associated with favorable NT-proBNP reduction response., Background: NT-proBNP levels reflect cardiac wall stress and predict event risk in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF)., Methods: Post-hoc analysis of the TRANSITION (Comparison of Pre- and Post-discharge Initiation of Sacubitril/Valsartan Therapy in HFrEF Patients After an Acute Decompensation Event) study, including stabilized ADHF patients with reduced ejection fraction, randomized to open-label sacubitril/valsartan initiation in-hospital (pre-discharge) versus post-discharge. NT-proBNP was measured at randomization (baseline), discharge, and 4 and 10 weeks post-randomization. A favorable NT-proBNP response was defined as reduction to ≤1,000 pg/ml or >30% from baseline., Results: In patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan in-hospital, NT-proBNP was reduced by 28% at discharge, with 46% of patients obtaining favorable NT-proBNP reduction response compared with a 4% reduction and 18% favorable response rate in patients initiated post-discharge (p < 0.001). NT-proBNP was reduced similarly in patients initiating sacubitril/valsartan pre- and post-discharge (reduction at 4 weeks: 25%/22%; 10 weeks: 38%/34%) with comparable favorable response rates (46%/42% and 51%/48% at 4 and 10 weeks, respectively). NT-proBNP favorable response at 4 weeks was associated with lower risk of first heart failure (HF) rehospitalization or cardiovascular death through 26 weeks (hazard ratio: 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38 to 0.86; p = 0.007). Predictors of a favorable response at 4 weeks were starting dose ≥49/51 mg twice daily, higher baseline NT-proBNP, lower baseline serum creatinine, de novo HF, no atrial fibrillation, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-naive or angiotensin receptor blocker-naive, and no prior myocardial infarction., Conclusions: In-hospital initiation of sacubitril/valsartan produced rapid reductions in NT-proBNP, statistically significant at discharge. A favorable NT-proBNP response over time was associated with a better prognosis and predicted by higher starting dose and predisposing clinical profile. (Comparison of Pre- and Post-discharge Initiation of LCZ696 Therapy in HFrEF Patients After an Acute Decompensation Event [TRANSITION]; NCT02661217)., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Sacubitril/valsartan has shown efficacy and tolerability in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in the ambulatory setting (PARADIGM-HF), and following stabilisation of acutely decompensated HF (ADHF) (PIONEER-HF and TRANSITION). However, data are lacking for the initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in newly diagnosed (de novo) HFrEF. Here, we assess the tolerability of initiating sacubitril/valsartan following ADHF in TRANSITION subgroups of patients with a de novo vs. prior diagnosis of HFrEF., Methods and Results: TRANSITION randomised 1002 patients to pre- and post-discharge initiation of sacubitril/valsartan (analysis set n = 991, following exclusions for mis-randomisation). In this post-hoc analysis, tolerability to sacubitril/valsartan [proportion of patients achieving target dose (97/103 mg b.i.d.) at 10 weeks post-randomisation], adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) were compared in de novo (n = 286) and prior HFrEF (n = 705) subgroups. More de novo than prior HFrEF patients achieved target dose at Week 10 (56% vs. 45%; relative risk ratio 1.30, 95% confidence interval 1.12-1.52, P < 0.001), and fewer had SAEs and permanent treatment discontinuations. Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan did not prevent the concomitant initiation and up-titration of guideline-directed HF therapies. De novo patients showed faster and greater decreases in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and high-sensitivity troponin-T, and lower rates of HF and all-cause rehospitalisation vs. prior HFrEF., Conclusions: After ADHF, first-line initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in de novo HFrEF, alongside the initiation of other guideline-directed therapies, is feasible and is associated with a better risk-benefit profile than in patients with prior HFrEF. Early intervention with sacubitril/valsartan may be considered to delay disease progression in patients with de novo HFrEF., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02661217., (© 2019 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure © 2019 European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: To assess tolerability and optimal time point for initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in patients stabilised after acute heart failure (AHF)., Methods and Results: TRANSITION was a randomised, multicentre, open-label study comparing two treatment initiation modalities of sacubitril/valsartan. Patients aged ≥ 18 years, hospitalised for AHF were stratified according to pre-admission use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors and randomised (n = 1002) after stabilisation to initiate sacubitril/valsartan either ≥ 12-h pre-discharge or between Days 1-14 post-discharge. Starting dose (as per label) was 24/26 mg or 49/51 mg bid with up- or down-titration based on tolerability. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients attaining 97/103 mg bid target dose after 10 weeks. Median time of first dose of sacubitril/valsartan from the day of discharge was Day -1 and Day +1 in the pre-discharge group and the post-discharge group, respectively. Comparable proportions of patients in the pre- and post-discharge initiation groups met the primary endpoint [45.4% vs. 50.7%; risk ratio (RR) 0.90; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79-1.02]. The proportion of patients who achieved and maintained for ≥ 2 weeks leading to Week 10, either 49/51 or 97/103 mg bid was 62.1% vs. 68.5% (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.83-0.99); or any dose was 86.0% vs. 89.6% (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.92-1.01). Discontinuation due to adverse events occurred in 7.3% vs. 4.9% of patients (RR 1.49; 95% CI 0.90-2.46)., Conclusions: Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in a wide range of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients stabilised after an AHF event, either in hospital or shortly after discharge, is feasible with about half of the patients achieving target dose within 10 weeks., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02661217., (© 2019 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)