From the Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT (E.J.V.); the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Study Group, Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston (D.A.M., E.B.); Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC (A.D.D.); Novartis Pharmaceuticals, East Hanover, NJ (C.I.D., K.M., R.R.); and the Division of Cardiology, Permanente Medical Group, San Francisco, and the Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland - both in California (A.P.A.).
N Engl J Med. 2019 Feb 7;380(6):539-548. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1812851. Epub 2018 Nov 11.
Acute decompensated heart failure accounts for more than 1 million hospitalizations in the United States annually. Whether the initiation of sacubitril-valsartan therapy is safe and effective among patients who are hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure is unknown.
We enrolled patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction who were hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure at 129 sites in the United States. After hemodynamic stabilization, patients were randomly assigned to receive sacubitril-valsartan (target dose, 97 mg of sacubitril with 103 mg of valsartan twice daily) or enalapril (target dose, 10 mg twice daily). The primary efficacy outcome was the time-averaged proportional change in the N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentration from baseline through weeks 4 and 8. Key safety outcomes were the rates of worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, symptomatic hypotension, and angioedema.
Of the 881 patients who underwent randomization, 440 were assigned to receive sacubitril-valsartan and 441 to receive enalapril. The time-averaged reduction in the NT-proBNP concentration was significantly greater in the sacubitril-valsartan group than in the enalapril group; the ratio of the geometric mean of values obtained at weeks 4 and 8 to the baseline value was 0.53 in the sacubitril-valsartan group as compared with 0.75 in the enalapril group (percent change, -46.7% vs. -25.3%; ratio of change with sacubitril-valsartan vs. enalapril, 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.81; P<0.001). The greater reduction in the NT-proBNP concentration with sacubitril-valsartan than with enalapril was evident as early as week 1 (ratio of change, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.85). The rates of worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, symptomatic hypotension, and angioedema did not differ significantly between the two groups.
Among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction who were hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure, the initiation of sacubitril-valsartan therapy led to a greater reduction in the NT-proBNP concentration than enalapril therapy. Rates of worsening renal function, hyperkalemia, symptomatic hypotension, and angioedema did not differ significantly between the two groups. (Funded by Novartis; PIONEER-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02554890 .).
在美国,每年有超过 100 万人因急性失代偿性心力衰竭住院。在因急性失代偿性心力衰竭住院的患者中,起始使用沙库巴曲缬沙坦治疗是否安全有效尚不清楚。
我们纳入了在美国 129 个地点因急性失代偿性心力衰竭住院的射血分数降低的心力衰竭患者。在血流动力学稳定后,患者被随机分配接受沙库巴曲缬沙坦(目标剂量:每天两次,97 毫克沙库巴曲与 103 毫克缬沙坦)或依那普利(目标剂量:每天两次,10 毫克)治疗。主要疗效结局是通过第 4 周和第 8 周时的基线平均 NT-proBNP(N 端脑利钠肽前体)浓度的变化比例。关键安全性结局是肾功能恶化、高钾血症、有症状低血压和血管性水肿的发生率。
在 881 名接受随机分组的患者中,440 名患者被分配接受沙库巴曲缬沙坦治疗,441 名患者接受依那普利治疗。沙库巴曲缬沙坦组的 NT-proBNP 浓度平均降低幅度显著大于依那普利组;沙库巴曲缬沙坦组第 4 周和第 8 周的几何均数与基线值的比值为 0.53,依那普利组为 0.75(百分比变化:-46.7%对-25.3%;沙库巴曲缬沙坦与依那普利的变化比值:0.71;95%置信区间:0.63 至 0.81;P<0.001)。沙库巴曲缬沙坦治疗组比依那普利治疗组更早出现 NT-proBNP 浓度的显著降低(变化比值:0.76;95%置信区间:0.69 至 0.85)。两组间肾功能恶化、高钾血症、有症状低血压和血管性水肿的发生率无显著差异。
在因急性失代偿性心力衰竭住院的射血分数降低的心力衰竭患者中,起始沙库巴曲缬沙坦治疗可导致 NT-proBNP 浓度的降低幅度大于依那普利治疗。两组间肾功能恶化、高钾血症、有症状低血压和血管性水肿的发生率无显著差异。(由诺华公司资助;PIONEER-HF ClinicalTrials.gov 注册号:NCT02554890)。