Vasodilatory Properties of Sacubitril/Valsartan Explored in Hypertensives Aged Over 55 Years: A Meta-Analysis
- 22 Downloads
A complete assessment of the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan for hypertension is not available yet.
Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by incorporating only RCTs including patients aged > 55 years in which the antihypertensive efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan were compared with those of a reference drug (comparator). The mean reductions in systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure in the sitting position (msSBP and msDBP, respectively)were assumed as primary efficacy endpoints. Even mean reduction in ambulatory systolic blood pressure (maSBP) and ambulatory diastolic blood pressure(maDBP), were explored. Adverse events (AEs) were taken as safety outcomes.
Five RCTs were included for a total of 1513 patients for analysis. In all studies, the comparator drug was an ARB (valsartan in two cases and olmesartan in the remaining three cases). Compared with ARBs, after 12 weeks there was a significant reduction in msSBP (weight mean difference [WMD] = − 5.41 mmHg, 95% CI − 7.0 to − 3.8; P < 0.01), msDBP (WMD = − 1.22 mmHg, 95% CI : − 2.15 to − 0.3; P < 0.01), maSBP (WMD = − 4.58 mmHg, 95% CI: − 5.62 to − 3.54; P < 0.01) and maDBP (WMD = − 2.17 mm Hg, 95% Cl: − 2.78 to − 1.56; P < 0.01).
Comparison with ARBs consistently showed superiority of the antihypertensive effect of sacubitril/valsartan. Therefore, based on the preliminary evidence derived from these small trials, sacubitril/valsartan could be proposed as an elective drug for hypertension in patients aged over 55.
KeywordsSacubitril/valsartan Hypertension Elderly Meta-analysis
The authors Renato De Vecchis and Carmelina Ariano declare that the present article has not benefitted from any source of funding.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
Author Renato De Vecchis declares that he has no conflict of interest. Author Carmelina Ariano declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Research involving human participants and/or animals
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent from individual participants was not required for this study.
- 1.Kario K, Sun N, Chiang FT, Supasyndh O, Baek SH, Inubushi-Molessa A, Zhang Y, Gotou H, Lefkowitz M, Zhang J. Efficacy and safety of LCZ696, a first-in-class angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor, in Asian patients with hypertension: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Hypertension. 2014;63(4):698–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Izzo JL Jr, Zappe DH, Jia Y, Hafeez K, Zhang J. Efficacy and safety of crystalline valsartan/sacubitril (LCZ696) compared with placebo and combinations of free valsartan and sacubitril in patients with systolic hypertension: the RATIO study. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 2017;69(6):374–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Wang TD, Tan RS, Lee HY, Ihm SH, Rhee MY, Tomlinson B, Pal P, Yang F, Hirschhorn E, Prescott MF, Hinder M, Langenickel TH. Effects of sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) on natriuresis, diuresis, blood pressures, and NT-proBNP in salt-sensitive hypertension. Hypertension. 2017;69(1):32–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Schmieder RE, Wagner F, Mayr M, Delles C, Ott C, Keicher C, Hrabak-Paar M, Heye T, Aichner S, Khder Y, Yates D, Albrecht D, Langenickel T, Freyhardt P, Janka R, Bremerich J. The effect of sacubitril/valsartan compared to olmesartan on cardiovascular remodelling in subjects with essential hypertension: the results of a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study. Eur Heart J. 2017;38(44):3308–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar