Efficacy and safety of supramaximal titrated inhibition of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy.
ABSTRACT: AIMS:The optimal dosing strategies for blocking the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDCM) are poorly known. We sought to determine the long-term efficacy and safety of supramaximal titration of benazepril and valsartan in patients with IDCM. METHODS AND RESULTS:480 patients with IDCM in New York Heart Association functional class II-IV and with left ventricular ejection fraction ?35% were randomly assigned to extended-release metoprolol (mean 152?mg/day, range 23.75-190), low-dose benazepril (20?mg/day), low-dose valsartan (160?mg/day), high-dose benazepril (mean 69?mg/day, range 40-80), and high-dose valsartan (mean 526?mg/day, range 320-640). After a median follow-up of 4.2?years, high-dose benazepril and valsartan, compared with their respective low dosages, resulted in 41% and 52% risk reduction in the primary endpoint of all-cause death or admission for heart failure (P?=?0.042 and 0.002), promoted functional improvement, and reversed remodelling as assessed by New York Heart Association classes, quality-of-life scores, and echocardiographic recording of left ventricular ejection fraction, left ventricular end-diastolic volume, mitral regurgitation, and wall motion score index. Compared with metoprolol, high-dose valsartan reduced risk for the primary endpoint by 46% (P?=?0.006), whereas high-dose benazepril and both low-dose groups showed no significant difference. Major adverse events involved hypotension and renal impairment but were largely tolerated. CONCLUSIONS:Supramaximal doses of benazepril and valsartan were well tolerated and produced extra benefit than their low dosages in clinical outcome and cardiac reverse remodelling in patients with IDCM and modest-severe heart failure. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01917149.
Project description:Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and the angiotensin-receptor blocker valsartan ameliorate ventricular remodeling after myocardial infarction (MI). Based on previous clinical trials, a maximum clinical dose is recommended in practical guidelines. Yet, has not been clearly demonstrated whether the recommended dose is more efficacious compared to the lower dose that is commonly used in clinical practice.Valsartan in post-MI remodeling (VALID) is a randomized, open-label, single-blinded multicenter study designed to compare the efficacy of different clinical dose of valsartan on the post-MI ventricular remodeling. This study also aims to assess neurohormone change and clinical parameters of patients during the post-infarct period. A total of 1116 patients with left ventricular dysfunction following the first episode of acute ST-elevation MI are to be enrolled and randomized to a maximal tolerable dose (up to 320 mg/day) or usual dose (80 mg/day) of valsartan for 12 months in 2:1 ratio. Echocardiographic analysis for quantifying post-MI ventricular remodeling is to be conducted in central core laboratory. Clinical assessment and laboratory test are performed at fixed times.VALID is a multicenter collaborative study to evaluate the impact of dose of valsartan on the post-MI ventricular remodeling. The results of the study provide information about optimal dosing of the drug in the management of patients after MI. The results will be available by 2012.NCT01340326.
Project description:We examined the antihypertensive effects of valsartan, aliskiren, or both drugs combined on circulating, cardiac, and renal components of the renin-angiotensin system in congenic mRen2.Lewis hypertensive rats assigned to: vehicle (n=9), valsartan (via drinking water, 30 mg/kg per day; n=10), aliskiren (SC by osmotic mini-pumps, 50 mg/kg per day; n=10), or valsartan (30 mg/kg per day) combined with aliskiren (50 mg/kg per day; n=10). Arterial pressure and heart rate were measured by telemetry before and during 2 weeks of treatment; trunk blood, heart, urine, and kidneys were collected for measures of renin-angiotensin system components. Arterial pressure and left-ventricular weight/tibia length ratio were reduced by monotherapy of valsartan, aliskiren, and further reduced by the combination therapy. Urinary protein excretion was reduced by valsartan and further reduced by the combination. The increases in plasma angiotensin (Ang) II induced by valsartan were reversed by the treatment of aliskiren and partially suppressed by the combination. The decreases in plasma Ang-(1-7) induced by aliskiren recovered in the combination group. Kidney Ang-(1-12) was increased by the combination therapy whereas the increases in urinary creatinine mediated by valsartan were reversed by addition of aliskiren. The antihypertensive and antiproteinuric actions of the combined therapy were associated with marked worsening of renal parenchymal disease and increased peritubular fibrosis. The data show that despite improvements in the surrogate end points of blood pressure, ventricular mass, and proteinuria, dual blockade of Ang II receptors and renin activity is accompanied by worsening of renal parenchymal disease reflecting a renal homeostatic stress response attributable to loss of tubuloglomerular feedback by Ang II.
Project description:This open, prospective, randomized trial aimed to assess the effects of statins in chronic kidney disease patients on optimized antiproteinuric treatment with combined angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition and angiotensin receptor blockade.After 1-month benazepril therapy followed by 1-month benazepril-valsartan combined therapy (run-in), 186 consenting patients with residual proteinuria >0.5 g/24 h were randomized to 6-month benazepril-valsartan therapy alone or combined with fluvastatin. Between-groups changes in proteinuria (primary outcome), serum lipids, and GFR were compared by ANCOVA. Analyses were blinded and by intention to treat.During the run-in, proteinuria decreased more on benazepril-valsartan than on benazepril alone. Proteinuria reduction correlated with concomitant reduction in total, LDL, and HDL cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B and apolipoprotein A levels. After randomization, median proteinuria similarly decreased from 1.2 (0.6 to 2.2) to 1.1 (0.5 to 1.7) g/24 h on fluvastatin and from 1.5 (0.8 to 2.7) to 1.0 (0.5 to 2.4) g/24 h on benazapril-valsartan therapy alone. Fluvastatin further reduced total and LDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B versus benazepril-valsartan alone, but did not affect serum triglycerides and GFR. Treatment was well tolerated.In chronic kidney disease patients with residual proteinuria despite combined angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blockade therapy, add-on fluvastatin does not affect urinary proteins, but further reduces serum lipids and is safe. Whether combined angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, angiotensin receptor blockade, and statin therapy may improve cardiovascular outcomes in this high-risk population is worth investigating.
Project description:<h4>Aims</h4>In patients at high risk of heart failure following myocardial infarction (MI) as a result of residual left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD), the angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan may result in a greater attenuation of adverse left ventricular (LV) remodelling than renin angiotensin aldosterone system inhibition alone, due to increased levels of substrates for neprilysin with vasodilatory, anti-hypertrophic, anti-fibrotic, and sympatholytic effects.<h4>Methods</h4>We designed a randomized, double-blinded, active-comparator trial to examine the effect of sacubitril/valsartan to the current standard of care in reducing adverse LV remodelling in patients with asymptomatic LVSD following MI. Eligible patients were ?3 months following MI, had an LV ejection fraction ?40% as measured by echocardiography, were New York Heart Association functional classification I, tolerant of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker at equivalent dose of ramipril 2.5 mg twice daily or greater, and taking a beta-blocker unless contraindicated or intolerant. Patients were randomized to sacubitril/valsartan (target dose 97/103 mg twice daily) or valsartan (target dose 160 mg twice daily). The primary endpoint will be change in LV end-systolic volume indexed for body surface area measured using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging over 52 weeks from randomization. Secondary endpoints include other magnetic resonance imaging-based metrics of LV remodelling, biomarkers associated with LV remodelling and neurohumoral activation, and change in patient well-being assessed using a patient global assessment questionnaire.<h4>Conclusions</h4>This trial will investigate the effect of neprilysin inhibition on LV remodelling and the neurohumoral actions of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with asymptomatic LVSD following MI.
Project description:PURPOSE:This study examined whether a CYP2D6 polymorphism (CYP2D6*4) was related to beta-blocker maintenance dose in patients with heart failure. METHODS:Logistic regression modeling was utilized in a retrospective chart-review analysis of heart-failure patients (60% Male, 90% of European descent) to assess whether CYP2D6*4 (non-functional CYP2D6 allele present in 1 of 5 individuals of European descent) is associated with maintenance dose of carvedilol (n?=?65) or metoprolol (n?=?33). RESULTS:CYP2D6*4 was associated with lower maintenance dose of metoprolol (OR 0.13 [95% CI 0.02-0.75] p?=?0.023), and a trend was observed between CYP2D6*4 and higher maintenance dose of carvedilol (OR 2.94 [95% CI 0.84-10.30] p?=?0.093). None of the patients that carried CYP2D6*4 achieved the recommended target dose of metoprolol (200 mg/day). CONCLUSION:Consistent with the role of CYP2D6 in the metabolism of metoprolol, the tolerated maintenance dose of metoprolol was lower in CYP2D6*4 carriers compared to non-carriers. Consistent with the role of CYP2D6 in activation of carvedilol, tolerated maintenance dose of carvedilol was higher in CYP2D6*4 carriers compared to non-carriers. Further investigation is warranted to ascertain the potential of CYP2D6 as a potential predictive biomarker of beta-blocker maintenance dose in heart failure patients.
Project description:Aims: ?-blockers are underused in Chinese patients with coronary heart disease. The prescribed dose is often low. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of metoprolol succinate doses of 95 mg and 190 mg on heart rate (HR) control, as well as drug tolerance, in Chinese patients with stable angina, low-dose ?-blocker use and unsatisfactory HR control. Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial in 15 clinical sites. Patients with stable angina, taking low-dose ?-blockers (equivalent to metoprolol succinate 23.75-47.5 mg/day), and having a resting HR of ? 65 bpm were enrolled and randomized to either the metoprolol 95-mg group or the 190-mg group. The change in 24-h average HR from baseline recorded by Holter monitoring and the percentages of patients with resting HR controlled to ? 60 bpm were compared between the two groups. Results: Two hundred thirty-one patients entered the intent-to-treat population for the main analysis. The change in 24-h average HR from baseline was -0.62 ± 0.66 bpm in the 95 mg group and -2.99 ± 0.62 bpm in the 190 mg group (p = 0.0077) after 8 weeks of treatment. The percentages of patients with resting HR controlled to ? 60 bpm were 24.1% (95% CI: 16.35%, 31.93%) and 40.0% (95% CI: 31.05%, 48.95%), respectively (p = 0.0019). Only 4 and 2 of the patients, respectively, discontinued the study drugs because of hypotension or bradycardia. Conclusions: The metoprolol succinate dose of 190 mg is superior to the 95 mg dose in terms of HR control, in Chinese patients with stable angina, low-dose ?-blocker use and unsatisfactory HR control. Both doses were well tolerated.
Project description:Research comparing the survival of children with familial dilated cardiomyopathy (FDCM) to that of children with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDCM) has produced conflicting results.We analyzed data from children with FDCM or IDCM using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-funded Pediatric Cardiomyopathy Registry. Compared to children with IDCM (n=647), children with FDCM (n=223) were older (mean 6.2 versus 4.5 years, P<0.001), less often had heart failure (64% versus 78%, P<0.001), had less-depressed mean left ventricular fractional shortening z scores (-7.85±3.98 versus -9.06±3.89, P<0.001) and lower end-diastolic dimension z scores (4.12±2.61 versus 4.91±2.57, P<0.001) at diagnosis. The cumulative incidence of death was lower for patients with FDCM compared with IDCM (P=0.04; hazard ratio 0.64, P=0.06), but no difference in risk of transplant or the combined death or transplant outcome. There was no difference in the proportion of children with echocardiographic normalization at 3 years of follow-up (FDCM, 30% versus IDCM, 26%; P=0.33). Multivariable analysis showed no difference in outcomes between FDCM and IDCM but for both groups older age, congestive heart failure, and increased left ventricular end-systolic dimension zscore at diagnosis were independently associated with an increased risk of death or heart transplantation (all Ps<0.001).There was no survival difference between FDCM and IDCM after adjustment for other factors. Older age, congestive heart failure, and greater left ventricular dilation at diagnosis were independently associated with increased risk of the combined end point of death or transplantation.URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00005391.
Project description:BACKGROUND:There is a paucity of data about the mechanisms by which sacubitril/valsartan (also known as LCZ696) improves outcomes in patients with heart failure. Specifically, the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on vascular function and NO bioavailability have not been investigated. We hypothesized that sacubitril/valsartan therapy increases circulating NO levels and improves vascular function in the setting of heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS:Male spontaneously hypertensive rats underwent myocardial ischemia/reperfusion surgery to induce heart failure and were followed for up to 12 weeks with serial echocardiography. Rats received sacubitril/valsartan (68 mg/kg), valsartan (31 mg/kg), or vehicle starting at 4 weeks after reperfusion. At 8 or 12 weeks of reperfusion, animals were euthanized and tissues were collected for ex vivo analyses of NO bioavailability, aortic vascular reactivity, myocardial and vascular histology, and cardiac molecular assays. Left ventricular structure and function were improved by both valsartan and sacubitril/valsartan compared with vehicle. Sacubitril/valsartan resulted in superior cardiovascular benefits, as evidenced by sustained improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction and end-diastolic pressure. Ex vivo vascular function, as measured by aortic vasorelaxation responses to acetylcholine and sodium nitroprusside, was significantly improved by valsartan and sacubitril/valsartan, with more sustained improvements afforded by sacubitril/valsartan. Furthermore, myocardial NO bioavailability was significantly enhanced in animals receiving sacubitril/valsartan therapy. CONCLUSIONS:Sacubitril/valsartan offers superior cardiovascular protection in heart failure and improves vascular function to a greater extent than valsartan alone. Sacubitril/valsartan-mediated improvements in cardiac and vascular function are likely related to increases in NO bioavailability and explain, in part, the benefits beyond angiotensin receptor blockade.
Project description:Sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced heart failure hospitalization and mortality in PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor With an Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure). However, real-world data from its use are lacking.We retrospectively assessed all baseline and follow-up data of consecutive heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction receiving therapy with sacubitril/valsartan for Class I recommendation between December 2016 and July 2017. Baseline characteristics and dose titration of sacubitril/valsartan were compared between patients in clinical practice and in PARADIGM-HF. A total of 120 patients (81% male) were switched from angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker to sacubitril/valsartan. A total of 20.1% of patients received dose uptitration. Patients were treated with an equipotential dose of renin-angiotensin system blockers before and after uptitration of sacubitril/valsartan (57 ± 29% vs. 53 ± 29% of target dose indicated by European Society of Cardiology guidelines; P = 0.286). However, they received a lower dose of sacubitril/valsartan in comparison with those in the PARADIGM-HF (219 ± 12 vs. 375 ± 75 mg; P < 0.001). In comparison with the patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan in PARADIGM-HF, patients in clinical practice were older and had a higher serum creatinine, higher New York Heart Association functional classification, and lower left ventricular ejection fraction (all P-value <0.05). Even in comparison with patients who experienced dropout during the run-in phase of PARADIGM-HF, real-world patients exhibited baseline characteristics indicative of more disease severity. Patients were at high absolute baseline risk for adverse outcome as illustrated by the EMPHASIS-HF (Eplerenone in Mild Patients Hospitalization and Survival Study in Heart Failure) risk score of 6 (inter-quartile range 3), in comparison with 5 (inter-quartile range 4) in PARADIGM-HF. After initiation of sacubitril/valsartan, New York Heart Association class significantly improved (P < 0.001), but systolic blood pressure dropped more than was reported in PARADIGM-HF (7.1 ± 8.0 vs. 3.2 ± 0.4 mmHg; P < 0.001).Patients in clinical practice exhibit baseline characteristics associated with more severe disease, which might lead to prescription of lower doses. Nevertheless, patients in clinical practice are at high risk of adverse outcome as illustrated by the EMPHASIS-HF risk score, underscoring the large potential for sacubitril/valsartan therapy to reduce the risk of heart failure hospitalization and all-cause mortality.
Project description:The safety of once-daily (qd) dosing of valsartan in heart failure (HF) patients is not known.This 10-week, double-blind trial examined the relative safety and efficacy of valsartan administered qd versus twice-daily (bid).HF patients (NYHA class II-III) receiving diuretics (87%), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (98%), beta-blockers (92%), aldosterone antagonists (25%), or digoxin (32%) were randomized to valsartan 40 mg bid (n = 60) or 80 mg qd (n = 55) and titrated to a maximum dose of 320 mg/day; doubling the dose every 2 weeks. Clinical and biochemical parameters were measured at Weeks 2, 4, 6, and 10.The average dose of valsartan at the end of study was 245 mg in the bid group vs 256 mg in the qd group (P = NS). Similar proportions of patients tolerated qd vs bid dosing (bid 67% vs qd 68%). Outcome measures including reduction in blood pressure, incidence of hypotension, renal impairment, orthostatic dizziness or fatigue, changes in serum K(+), creatinine, cystatin-C, and estimated glomerular filtration rate were similar between the 2 groups at all time-points. Brain natriuretic peptide levels decreased and plasma renin activity increased from baseline by the same amount in both groups at all time-points.Valsartan administered qd has a similar safety and tolerability profile with comparable 24-hour RAAS blockade, as assessed by increases in PRA, as bid dosing in patients with moderate to severe (NYHA class II-III) heart failure.