Why the study?
Does sacubitril/valsartan improve heart failure hospitalizations and mortality in patients with HFrEF compared to standard of care?
Does sacubitril/valsartan improve heart failure hospitalizations and mortality in patients with HFrEF compared to standard of care?
Hazard Ratio: 0.8
Absolute Risk Reduction: 4.7%
Number Needed to Treat: 21
p-value: p=<0.001
This review highlights the historical development and clinical superiority of sacubitril/valsartan over standard therapy for improving hard clinical outcomes in HFrEF.
Heart failure (HF) is one of the leading causes of morbidity, mortality, and health care expenditures in the US and worldwide. For three decades, the pillars of treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) were medications that targeted the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) and the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). Prior attempts to augment the natriuretic peptide system (NPS) for the management of HF failed either due to lack of significant clinical benefit or due to the unacceptable side effect profile. This review article will discuss the NPS, the failure of early drugs which targeted the NPS as therapies for HF, and the sequence of events which led to the development of sacubitril plus valsartan (Entresto; LCZ696; Novartis). LCZ696 has been shown to be superior to the standard of care available for treatment of HFrEF in several substantial hard endpoints including heart failure hospitalizations, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yandrapalli et al. (2017) conducted a review in Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (n=8,442). Sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) vs. Enalapril 10 mg twice daily was evaluated on Composite of death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for HF (HR 0.80, p=<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: