Key result
AZD9977 shows no significant difference in serum potassium change compared to spironolactone in HF.
Why the study?
This study compared the effects on serum potassium of AZD9977, a selective mineralocorticoid receptor modulator with predicted low hyperkalemia risk, versus spironolactone in patients with heart failure, preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction, and renal impairment.
Does AZD9977 reduce serum potassium elevation compared to spironolactone in patients with heart failure with preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction and renal impairment?
RCT (n=68)
Open-label
1:1
Yes
Does AZD9977 reduce serum potassium elevation compared to spironolactone in patients with heart failure with preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction and renal impairment?
Mean Difference: -0.3 (95% CI -5.3–4.4)
Absolute Event Rate: 5.7% vs 4.2%
p-value: p=0.888
In patients with HFpEF/HFmrEF and renal impairment, AZD9977 showed target engagement and a favorable safety profile, though the primary endpoint comparing serum potassium change versus spironolactone was inconclusive.
Captured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“balcinrenone has the theoretical potential to have less urinary electrolyte effects, suggesting potential superiority over classical MRAs in terms of potassium retention, whilst remaining efficacious in reducing aldosterone-mediated adverse outcomes such as fibrosis and inflammation in cardiovascular and renal tissues. Surprisingly, in healthy volunteers, balcinrenone and eplerenone similarly attenuated fludrocortisone-stimulated Na+ retention.”
Comparable potassium effects support short-term safety equivalence; leaves open whether AZD9977 offers clinical advantages over spironolactone.
This phase Ib study compared the effects of AZD9977, a selective mineralocorticoid receptor modulator with predicted low hyperkalemia risk, with spironolactone on serum potassium (sK + ) in patients with heart failure (HF) with preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction (EF; ≥40%), and renal impairment. Patients with HF with EF greater than or equal to 40% and estimated glomerular filtration rate of 40–70 ml/min/1.73 m 2 were randomized to once‐daily AZD9977 100 mg or spironolactone 25 mg for 14 days, up‐titrated to AZD9977 200 mg or spironolactone 50 mg for another 14 days. The primary end point was relative change (%) in sK + for AZD9977 versus spironolactone (baseline to day 28). Serum/urinary electrolytes, fractional excretion (FE) of Na + /K + , plasma aldosterone, cortisol, and renin, and safety were also assessed. Sixty‐eight patients were randomized (AZD9977, n = 33; spironolactone, n = 35). Mean (SD) age was 73.0 (8.5) years, 51.5% men. Mean sK + change from baseline to day 28 was 5.7% (AZD9977) and 4.2% (spironolactone), and 1.5% and 4.2% at day 14. Relative change (95% confidence interval) in sK + with AZD9977 versus spironolactone was −0.3% (−5.3% to 4.4%; day 28), and 3.4% (−0.8% to 7.5%; day 14). Median increase from baseline in plasma aldosterone at day 28 was 89.8 pmol/L for AZD9977 and 67.4 pmol/L for spironolactone. Median FE of K + was 12.9% (AZD9977) and 10.1% (spironolactone). AZD9977 was well‐tolerated. No discontinuations due to hyperkalemia occurred with either treatment. Evidence of target engagement for AZD9977 with a favorable safety profile, supports further evaluation of AZD9977 in patients with HF and renal impairment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Squire et al. (2022) conducted an RCT in Heart failure with preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction and renal impairment (n=68). AZD9977 vs. Spironolactone 25 mg once daily up-titrated to 50 mg once daily was evaluated on Relative change (%) in serum potassium (sK+) from baseline to day 28 (MD -0.3%, 95% CI -5.3% to 4.4%, p=0.888). AZD9977 resulted in a non-significant -0.3% relative change in serum potassium compared to spironolactone at day 28 in patients with heart failure and renal impairment.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: