Angiotensin receptor blockers in heart failure

Collectively, a series of large, prospective randomised outcome trials has now shown that angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are of clinical value in a broad spectrum of patients with symptomatic heart failure, regardless of background therapy and ventricular function. There is a clear benefit of ARBs in patients unable to tolerate an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor and this benefit is of a similar magnitude to that obtained with an ACE inhibitor (ACE-I). Both Val-HeFT and, particularly, CHARM-Added, also show that symptoms, morbidity and mortality are further reduced if an ARB is added to an ACE-I. This benefit is not only statistically significant but clinically important. CHARM-Preserved showed that candesartan can reduce hospital admission for heart failure in patients with preserved systolic function though more definitive outcome data are needed in this group

Effects of candesartan on mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic heart failure: the CHARM-Overall programme.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) are at high risk of cardiovascular death and recurrent hospital admissions. We aimed to find out whether the use of an angiotensin-receptor blocker could reduce mortality and morbidity. METHODS: In parallel, randomised, double-blind, controlled, clinical trials we compared candesartan with placebo in three distinct populations. We studied patients with left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 40% or less who were not receiving angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors because of previous intolerance or who were currently receiving angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, and patients with LVEF higher than 40%. Overall, 7601 patients (7599 with data) were randomly assigned candesartan (n=3803, titrated to 32 mg once daily) or matching placebo (n=3796), and followed up for at least 2 years. The primary outcome of the overall programme was all-cause mortality, and for all the component trials was cardiovascular death or hospital admission for CHF. Analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS: Median follow-up was 37.7 months. 886 (23%) patients in the candesartan and 945 (25%) in the placebo group died (unadjusted hazard ratio 0.91 [95% CI 0.83-1.00], p=0.055; covariate adjusted 0.90 [0.82-0.99], p=0.032), with fewer cardiovascular deaths (691 [18%] vs 769 [20%], unadjusted 0.88 [0.79-0.97], p=0.012; covariate adjusted 0.87 [0.78-0.96], p=0.006) and hospital admissions for CHF (757 [20%] vs 918 [24%], p<0.0001) in the candesartan group. There was no significant heterogeneity for candesartan results across the component trials. More patients discontinued candesartan than placebo because of concerns about renal function, hypotension, and hyperkalaemia. INTERPRETATION: Candesartan was generally well tolerated and significantly reduced cardiovascular deaths and hospital admissions for heart failure. Ejection fraction or treatment at baseline did not alter these effects

Reduction in cardiovascular events with atorvastatin in 2,532 patients with type 2 diabetes: Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-lipid-lowering arm (ASCOT-LLA)

To access publisher full text version of this article. Please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links fieldOBJECTIVE: This study aims to establish the benefits of lowering cholesterol in diabetic patients with well-controlled hypertension and average/below-average cholesterol concentrations, but without established coronary disease. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In the lipid-lowering arm of the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial (ASCOT-LLA), 10,305 hypertensive patients with no history of coronary heart disease (CHD) but at least three cardiovascular risk factors were randomly assigned to receive 10 mg atorvastatin or placebo. Effects on total cardiovascular outcomes in 2,532 patients who had type 2 diabetes at randomization were compared. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 3.3 years, concentrations of total and LDL cholesterol among diabetic participants included in ASCOT-LLA were approximately 1 mmol/l lower in those allocated atorvastatin compared with placebo. There were 116 (9.2%) major cardiovascular events or procedures in the atorvastatin group and 151 (11.9%) events in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.98; P = 0.036). For the individual components of this composite end point, the number of events occurring in the diabetes subgroup was small. Therefore, although fewer coronary events (0.84, 0.55-1.29; P = 0.14) and strokes (0.67, 0.41-1.09; P = 0.66) were observed among the patients allocated atorvastatin, these reductions were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Atorvastatin significantly reduced the risk of major cardiovascular events and procedures among diabetic patients with well-controlled hypertension and without a history of CHD or markedly elevated cholesterol concentrations. The proportional reduction in risk was similar to that among participants who did not have diagnosed diabetes. Allocation to atorvastatin prevented approximately 9 diabetic participants from suffering a first major cardiovascular event or procedure for every 1,000 treated for 1 year

Prevention of coronary and stroke events with atorvastatin in hypertensive patients who have average or lower-than-average cholesterol concentrations, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial--Lipid Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA): a multicentre randomised controlled trial

To access publisher full text version of this article. Please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links fieldBACKGROUND: The lowering of cholesterol concentrations in individuals at high risk of cardiovascular disease improves outcome. No study, however, has assessed benefits of cholesterol lowering in the primary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) in hypertensive patients who are not conventionally deemed dyslipidaemic. METHODS: Of 19 342 hypertensive patients (aged 40-79 years with at least three other cardiovascular risk factors) randomised to one of two antihypertensive regimens in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial, 10,305 with nonfasting total cholesterol concentrations 6.5 mmol/L or less were randomly assigned additional atorvastatin 10 mg or placebo. These patients formed the lipid-lowering arm of the study. We planned follow-up for an average of 5 years, the primary endpoint being non-fatal myocardial infarction and fatal CHD. Data were analysed by intention to treat. FINDINGS: Treatment was stopped after a median follow-up of 3.3 years. By that time, 100 primary events had occurred in the atorvastatin group compared with 154 events in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.64 [95% CI 0.50-0.83], p = 0.0005). This benefit emerged in the first year of follow-up. There was no significant heterogeneity among prespecified subgroups. Fatal and non-fatal stroke (89 atorvastatin vs 121 placebo, 0.73 [0.56-0.96], p = 0.024), total cardiovascular events (389 vs 486, 0.79 [0.69-0.90], p = 0.0005), and total coronary events (178 vs 247, 0.71 [0.59-0.86], p = 0.0005) were also significantly lowered. There were 185 deaths in the atorvastatin group and 212 in the placebo group (0.87 [0.71-1.06], p = 0.16). Atorvastatin lowered total serum cholesterol by about 1.3 mmol/L compared with placebo at 12 months, and by 1.1 mmol/L after 3 years of follow-up. INTERPRETATION: The reductions in major cardiovascular events with atorvastatin are large, given the short follow-up time. These findings may have implications for future lipid-lowering guidelines

Sex differences in clinical characteristics and prognosis in a broad spectrum of patients with heart failure: results of the Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity (CHARM) program.

BACKGROUND: We wished to test previous hypotheses that sex-related differences in mortality and morbidity may be due to differences in the cause of heart failure or in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by comparing fatal and nonfatal outcomes in women and men with heart failure and a broad spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction. METHODS AND RESULTS: We compared outcomes in 2400 women and 5199 men randomized in the Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity (CHARM) program using multivariable regression analyses. A total of 1188 women (50%) had a low LVEF ( 0.40). Among the men, 3388 (65%) had a low LVEF, and 1811 had a preserved LVEF. A total of 1216 women (51%) and 3465 men (67%) had an ischemic cause of their heart failure. All-cause mortality was 21.5% in women and 25.3% in men (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.86; P<0.001). Fewer women (30.4%) than men (33.3%) experienced cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.91; P<0.001). The risks of sudden death (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.85) and death due to worsening heart failure (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.89) were reduced to a comparable extent. The adjusted risk of cardiovascular hospitalization was also lower in women (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.95), mainly because of a reduced risk of heart failure hospitalization (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.97). Women had a lower risk of death irrespective of cause of heart failure or LVEF. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with heart failure, women have lower risks of most fatal and nonfatal outcomes that are not explained, as previously suggested, by LVEF or origin of the heart failure

Role of blood pressure and other variables in the differential cardiovascular event rates noted in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Blood Pressure Lowering Arm (ASCOT-BPLA)

BACKGROUND: Results of the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Blood Pressure Lowering Arm (ASCOT-BPLA) show significantly lower rates of coronary and stroke events in individuals allocated an amlodipine-based combination drug regimen than in those allocated an atenolol-based combination drug regimen (HR 0.86 and 0.77, respectively). Our aim was to assess to what extent these differences were due to significant differences in blood pressures and in other variables noted after randomisation. METHODS: We used data from ASCOT-BPLA (n=19 257) and compared differences in accumulated mean blood pressure levels at sequential times in the trial with sequential differences in coronary and stroke events. Serial mean matching for differences in systolic blood pressure was used to adjust HRs for differences in these events. We used an updated Cox-regression model to assess the effects of differences in accumulated mean levels of various measures of blood pressure, serum HDL-cholesterol, triglycerides and potassium, fasting blood glucose, heart rate, and bodyweight on differences in event rates. FINDINGS: We noted no temporal link between size of differences in blood pressure and different event rates. Serial mean matching for differences in systolic blood-pressure attenuated HRs for coronary and stroke events to a similar extent as did adjustments for systolic blood-pressure differences in Cox-regression analyses. HRs for coronary events and stroke adjusted for blood pressure rose from 0.86 (0.77-0.96) to 0.88 (0.79-0.98) and from 0.77 (0.66-0.89) to 0.83 (0.72-0.96), respectively. Multivariate adjustment gave HRs of 0.94 (0.81-1.08) for coronary events (HDL cholesterol being the largest contributor) and 0.87 (0.73-1.05) for stroke events. INTERPRETATION: Multivariate adjustment accounted for about half of the differences in coronary events and for about 40% of the differences in stroke events between the treatment regimens tested in ASCOT-BPLA, but residual differences were no longer significant. These residual differences could indicate inadequate statistical adjustment, but it remains possible that differential effects of the two treatment regimens on other variables also contributed to the different rates noted, particularly for stroke

Use of snus and acute myocardial infarction: pooled analysis of eight prospective observational studies

The use of snus (also referred to as Scandinavian or Swedish moist smokeless tobacco), which is common in Sweden and increasing elsewhere, is receiving increasing attention since considered a tobacco smoke "potential reduction exposure product". Snus delivers a high dose of nicotine with possible hemodynamic effects, but its impact on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality is uncertain. The aim of this study was to investigate whether snus use is associated with risk of and survival after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Data from eight prospective cohort studies set in Sweden was pooled and reanalysed. The relative risk of first time AMI and 28-day case-fatality was calculated for 130,361 men who never smoked. During 2,262,333 person-years of follow-up, 3,390 incident events of AMI were identified. Current snus use was not associated with risk of AMI (pooled multivariable hazard ratio 1.04, 95 % confidence interval 0.93 to 1.17). The short-term case fatality rate appeared increased in snus users (odds ratio 1.28, 95 % confidence interval 0.99 to 1.68). This study does not support any association between use of snus and development of AMI. Hence, toxic components other than nicotine appear implicated in the pathophysiology of smoking related ischemic heart disease. Case fatality after AMI is seemingly increased among snus users, but this relationship may be due to confounding by socioeconomic or life style factors