Valentina Lukashevich

Effect of the Direct Renin Inhibitor Aliskiren, the Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Losartan, or Both on Left Ventricular Mass in Patients With Hypertension and Left Ventricular Hypertrophy

Background— Left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy, a marker of cardiac end-organ damage, is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system may reduce LV mass to a greater extent than other antihypertensive agents. We compared the effect of aliskiren, the first orally active direct renin inhibitor, the angiotensin-receptor blocker losartan, and their combination on the reduction of LV mass in hypertensive patients. Methods and Results— We randomized 465 patients with hypertension, increased ventricular wall thickness, and body mass index >25 kg/m2 to receive aliskiren 300 mg, losartan 100 mg, or their combination daily for 9 months. Patients were treated to standard blood pressure targets with add-on therapy, excluding other inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and β-blockers. Patients underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for assessment of LV mass at baseline and at study completion. The primary objective was to compare change in LV mass index from baseline to follow-up in the combination and losartan arms; the secondary objective was to determine whether aliskiren was noninferior to losartan in reducing LV mass index from baseline to follow-up. Systolic and diastolic blood pressures were reduced similarly in all treatment groups (6.5±14.9/3.8±10.1 mm Hg in the aliskiren group; 5.5±15.6/3.7±10.7 mm Hg in the losartan group; 6.6±16.6/4.6±10.5 mm Hg in the combination arm; P<0.0001 within groups, P=0.81 between groups). LV mass index was reduced significantly from baseline in all treatment groups (4.9-, 4.8-, and 5.8 g/m2 reductions in the aliskiren, losartan, and combination arms, respectively; P<0.0001 for all treatment groups). The reduction in LV mass index in the combination group was not significantly different from that with losartan alone (P=0.52). Aliskiren was as effective as losartan in reducing LV mass index (P<0.0001 for noninferiority). Safety and tolerability were similar across all treatment groups. Conclusions— Aliskiren was as effective as losartan in promoting LV mass regression. Reduction in LV mass with the combination of aliskiren plus losartan was not significantly different from that with losartan monotherapy, independent of blood pressure lowering. These findings suggest that aliskiren was as effective as an angiotensin receptor blocker in attenuating this measure of myocardial end-organ damage in hypertensive patients with LV hypertrophy.

Safety and efficacy of vildagliptin versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes and moderate or severe renal impairment: a prospective 24‐week randomized placebo‐controlled trial

Aim: Assess safety/tolerability and efficacy of the DPP‐4 inhibitor vildagliptin in 515 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and moderate or severe renal impairment (RI).

Individualised treatment targets for elderly patients with type 2 diabetes using vildagliptin add-on or lone therapy (INTERVAL): a 24 week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND Guidelines suggest setting individualised targets for glycaemic control in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes, despite no evidence. We aimed to assess the feasibility of setting and achieving individualised targets over 24 weeks along with conventional HbA1c reduction using vildagliptin versus placebo. METHODS In this multinational, double-blind, 24 week study, we enrolled drug-naive or inadequately controlled (glycosylated haemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] ≥7·0% to ≤10·0%) patients with type 2 diabetes aged 70 years or older from 45 outpatient centres in Europe. Investigators set individualised treatment targets on the basis of age, baseline HbA1c, comorbidities, and frailty status before a validated automated system randomly assigned patients (1:1) to vildagliptin (50 mg once or twice daily as per label) or placebo. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were proportion of patients reaching their investigator-defined HbA1c target and HbA1c reduction from baseline to study end. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01257451, and European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials database, number 2010-022658-18. FINDINGS Between Dec 22, 2010, and March 14, 2012, we randomly assigned 139 patients each to the vildagliptin and placebo groups. 37 (27%) of 137 patients in the placebo group achieved their individualised targets by education and interactions with the study team alone and 72 (52·6%) of 137 patients achieved their target in the vildagliptin group (adjusted odds ratio 3·16, 96·2% CI 1·81-5·52; p<0·0001). This finding was accompanied by a clinically relevant 0·9% reduction in HbA1c from a baseline of 7·9% with vildagliptin and a between-group difference of -0·6% (98·8% CI -0·81 to -0·33; p<0·0001). The overall safety and tolerability was similar in the vildagliptin and placebo groups, with low incidence of hypoglycaemia and no emergence of new safety signals. INTERPRETATION This study is the first to introduce and show the feasibility of using individualised HbA1c targets as an endpoint in any type 2 diabetes population. Individualised glycaemic target levels are achievable with vildagliptin without any tolerability issues in the elderly type 2 diabetes population. FUNDING Novartis Pharma AG.

One-year safety, tolerability and efficacy of vildagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes and moderate or severe renal impairment.

Assess long‐term safety and efficacy of the dipeptidlyl peptidase-4 (DPP‐4) inhibitor vildagliptin in 369 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and moderate or severe renal impairment (RI).

Improved glycaemic control with vildagliptin added to insulin, with or without metformin, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of vildagliptin 50 mg bid as add‐on therapy to insulin in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Patients with acute coronary syndromes and elevated levels of natriuretic peptides: the results of the AVANT GARDE-TIMI 43 Trial

AIMS Elevated natriuretic peptides (NPs) are associated with an increased cardiovascular risk following acute coronary syndromes (ACSs). However, the therapeutic implications are still undefined. We hypothesized that early inhibition of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) in patients with preserved left ventricular function but elevated NPs but following ACS would reduce haemodynamic stress as reflected by a greater reduction NP compared with placebo. METHODS AND RESULTS AVANT GARDE-TIMI 43 trial, a multinational, double-blind trial, randomized 1101 patients stabilized after ACS without clinical evidence of heart failure or left ventricular function <or=40% but with an increased level of NP 3-10 days after admission to aliskiren, valsartan, their combination, and placebo. The primary endpoint was the change in NT-proBNP from baseline to Week 8. NT-proBNP declined significantly in each treatment arm, including placebo, by Week 8, though there were no differences in the reduction between treatment strategies (42% in placebo, 44% in aliskiren, 39% in valsartan, and 36% in combination arm). Although several subgroups had higher baseline levels of NP and greater reductions over the study period, there were no differences among treatment groups in any subgroup. There were no differences in clinical outcomes but there were more adverse events, including serious events and adverse events leading to early study drug discontinuation, in patients treated with active therapy. CONCLUSION In this study of a high-risk population with elevated levels of NPs but relatively preserved systolic function and no evidence of heart failure following ACS, there was no evidence for a benefit of early initiation of inhibition of RAAS with valsartan, aliskiren, or their combination compared with placebo with respect to a reduction in NP over 8 weeks of therapy. Moreover, adverse events were reported more frequently in patients assigned to active therapy.

Cardiovascular and heart failure safety profile of vildagliptin: a meta‐analysis of 17 000 patients

To report the cardiovascular (CV) safety profile and heart failure (HF) risk of vildagliptin from a large pool of studies, including trials in high‐risk patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), such as those with congestive HF and/or moderate/severe renal impairment.

Efficacy and safety of vildagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with dual combination of metformin and sulphonylurea

The broadly used combination of metformin and sulphonylurea (SU) often fails to bring patients to glycaemic goal. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of vildagliptin as add‐on therapy to metformin plus glimepiride combination in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who had inadequate glycaemic control.

Vildagliptin as add‐on therapy to insulin improves glycemic control without increasing risk of hypoglycemia in Asian, predominantly Chinese, patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of vildagliptin added onto insulin with or without metformin in an Asian, predominantly Chinese, population with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Suppression of aldosterone mediates regression of left ventricular hypertrophy in patients with hypertension

Background: High circulating aldosterone levels stimulate myocardial fibrosis and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). However, it is not clear whether suppression of aldosterone directly contributes to LVH regression in hypertensive patients. Methods: The Aliskiren in Left Ventricular Hypertrophy (ALLAY) trial randomised 465 hypertensive overweight subjects with LVH to the direct renin inhibitor aliskiren 300 mg, losartan 100 mg or the combination and followed patients for 9 months. All patients were treated to standard blood pressure targets. Left ventricular (LV) mass index (LVMI) and LV wall thickness (LVWT) were assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance. A subset of 136 patients who had plasma aldosterone concentration (ALDO) measured at baseline and study end was analysed. Results: At baseline, plasma ALDO was modestly related to systolic blood pressure, LVMI, and wall thickness (all, p < 0.05). Aliskiren, either alone or in combination, was associated with a significantly greater reduction from baseline to 9 months in plasma aldosterone than losartan alone (p < 0.02). Reduction in ALDO was related to reduction in LVMI even after adjustment for baseline ALDO, BP reduction and treatment group (p for trend = 0.042). Conclusion: In hypertensive patients with increased LVWT, aliskiren alone or in combination with the angiotensin receptor blocker losartan provides greater reduction in aldosterone compared to losartan alone. Moreover, suppression of aldosterone was associated with reduction of LVH, independently of the change in SBP, suggesting that suppression of aldosterone, a known mediator of LVH, may be particularly important for LVH regression and as a target for therapy.