Minneapolis VA Health Care System and University of Minnesota (O.V.). University of Colorado, Aurora (S.M.P.). Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard University, Boston, MA (B.C., A.S.D., S.D.S.). Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ (J.K., M.L., V.S.). University of Glasgow, United Kingdom (J.J.V.M.). Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, TX (M.P.). Université de Montréal, Canada (J.R.). Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston (M.R.Z.). University of Gothenburg, Sweden (K.S.).
Circ Heart Fail. 2018 Apr;11(4):e004745. doi: 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.117.004745.
In PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure), heart failure treatment with sacubitril/valsartan reduced the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization compared with enalapril but resulted in more symptomatic hypotension. Concern on hypotension may be limiting use of sacubitril/valsartan in appropriate patients.
We characterized patients in PARADIGM-HF by whether they reported hypotension during study run-in periods (enalapril, followed by sacubitril/valsartan) and after randomization and assessed whether hypotension modified the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan. Of the 10 513 patients entering the enalapril run-in, 136 (1.3%) experienced hypotension and 93 (68%) were unable to continue to the next phase; of 9419 patients entering the sacubitril/valsartan run-in period, 228 (2.4%) patients experienced hypotension and 51% were unable to successfully complete the run-in. After randomization, 388 (9.2%) participants had 501 hypotensive events with enalapril, and 588 (14.0%) participants had 803 hypotensive events with sacubitril/valsartan (<0.001). There was no difference between randomized treatment groups in the number of participants who discontinued therapy because of hypotension. Individuals with a hypotensive event in either group were older, had lower blood pressure at randomization, and were more likely to have an implantable cardioverter defibrillator. Participants with hypotensive events during run-in who were ultimately randomized derived similar efficacy from sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril as those without hypotensive events ( interaction>0.90).
Hypotension was more common with sacubitril/valsartan relative to enalapril in PARADIGM-HF but did not differentially affect permanent discontinuations. Patients with hypotension during run-in derived similar benefit from sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril as those who did not experience hypotension.
在 PARADIGM-HF(血管紧张素受体脑啡肽酶抑制剂与血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂治疗心力衰竭的前瞻性比较)研究中,与依那普利相比,沙库巴曲缬沙坦治疗心力衰竭降低了心血管死亡或心力衰竭住院的主要复合终点,但导致更多的症状性低血压。对低血压的担忧可能限制了沙库巴曲缬沙坦在合适患者中的应用。
我们根据患者在研究导入期(依那普利,然后是沙库巴曲缬沙坦)和随机分组后是否报告低血压来描述 PARADIGM-HF 中的患者,并评估低血压是否改变了沙库巴曲缬沙坦的疗效。在进入依那普利导入期的 10513 名患者中,136 名(1.3%)发生低血压,93 名(68%)无法进入下一阶段;在进入沙库巴曲缬沙坦导入期的 9419 名患者中,228 名(2.4%)患者发生低血压,51%无法成功完成导入期。随机分组后,依那普利组有 388 名(9.2%)参与者发生 501 次低血压事件,沙库巴曲缬沙坦组有 588 名(14.0%)参与者发生 803 次低血压事件(<0.001)。随机治疗组因低血压而停止治疗的参与者人数无差异。在两组中,发生低血压事件的参与者年龄更大,随机血压更低,并且更有可能植入植入式心脏复律除颤器。在导入期发生低血压事件的参与者最终随机接受沙库巴曲缬沙坦治疗的疗效与未发生低血压事件的参与者相似(交互作用>0.90)。
与依那普利相比,沙库巴曲缬沙坦在 PARADIGM-HF 中更常见,但不会对永久性停药产生不同影响。在导入期发生低血压的患者从沙库巴曲缬沙坦中获得的益处与未发生低血压的患者相似。