Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition versus enalapril in heart failure
Journal article
McMurray, John J. V., Packer, Milton, Desai, Akshay S., Gong, Jianjian, Lefkowitz, Martin P., Rizkala, Adel R., Rouleau, Jean L., Shi, Victor C., Solomon, Scott D., Swedberg, Karl and Zile, Michael R.. (2014). Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition versus enalapril in heart failure. New England Journal of Medicine. 371(11), pp. 993 - 1004. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1409077
Authors | McMurray, John J. V., Packer, Milton, Desai, Akshay S., Gong, Jianjian, Lefkowitz, Martin P., Rizkala, Adel R., Rouleau, Jean L., Shi, Victor C., Solomon, Scott D., Swedberg, Karl and Zile, Michael R. |
---|---|
Abstract | Background: We compared the angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 with enalapril in patients who had heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction. In previous studies, enalapril improved survival in such patients. Methods: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 8442 patients with class II, III, or IV heart failure and an ejection fraction of 40% or less to receive either LCZ696 ( at a dose of 200 mg twice daily ) or enalapril ( at a dose of 10 mg twice daily ), in addition to recommended therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure, but the trial was designed to detect a difference in the rates of death from cardiovascular causes. Results: The trial was stopped early, according to prespecified rules, after a median follow-up of 27 months, because the boundary for an overwhelming benefit with LCZ696 had been crossed. At the time of study closure, the primary outcome had occurred in 914 patients ( 21.8% ) in the LCZ696 group and 1117 patients ( 26.5% ) in the enalapril group ( hazard ratio in the LCZ696 group, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.87; P < 0.001 ). A total of 711 patients ( 17.0% ) receiving LCZ696 and 835 patients ( 19.8% ) receiving enalapril died ( hazard ratio for death from any cause, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.93; P < 0.001 ); of these patients, 558 ( 13.3% ) and 693 ( 16.5% ), respectively, died from cardiovascular causes ( hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.89; P < 0.001 ). As compared with enalapril, LCZ696 also reduced the risk of hospitalization for heart failure by 21% ( P < 0.001 ) and decreased the symptoms and physical limitations of heart failure ( P=0.001 ). The LCZ696 group had higher proportions of patients with hypotension and nonserious angioedema but lower proportions with renal impairment, hyperkalemia, and cough than the enalapril group. Conclusions: LCZ696 was superior to enalapril in reducing the risks of death and of hospitalization for heart failure. ( Funded by Novartis; PARADIGM-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01035255. ) |
Year | 2014 |
Journal | New England Journal of Medicine |
Journal citation | 371 (11), pp. 993 - 1004 |
Publisher | Massachussetts Medical Society |
ISSN | 0028-4793 |
Digital Object Identifier (DOI) | https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1409077 |
Scopus EID | 2-s2.0-84907087561 |
Page range | 993 - 1004 |
Research Group | Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research |
Publisher's version | File Access Level Controlled |
Place of publication | United States |
https://acuresearchbank.acu.edu.au/item/8v18x/angiotensin-neprilysin-inhibition-versus-enalapril-in-heart-failure
Restricted files
Publisher's version
144
total views0
total downloads2
views this month0
downloads this month