Zhao Yang, Yu Heng, Zhao Xu, Ma Ruixin, Li Ningyin, Yu Jing
1 Department of Hypertension, the Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther. 2017 Sep;22(5):447-457. doi: 10.1177/1074248417693379. Epub 2017 Mar 2.
LCZ696, a first-in-class angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor, has been demonstrated to have greater advantages in the treatment of heart failure compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, enalapril, or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). However, studies that compared the efficacy and safety of LCZ696 against valsartan in patients with hypertension are limited. To provide further evidence for the benefits of LCZ696 and to make this assessment, a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for RCTs. Twelve studies involving 3816 patients were eligible for inclusion. Seven studies compared LCZ696 with valsartan, and 5 studies compared LCZ696 with olmesartan. LCZ696 showed a significantly greater reduction in systolic blood pressure (BP; mean difference [MD] = -5.43 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -6.36 to -4.49 mm Hg; P < .001), diastolic BP (MD = -2.34 mm Hg; 95% CI: -2.67 to -2.01 mm Hg; P < .001), 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP (MD = -3.57 mm Hg, 95% CI: -4.29 to -2.85 mm Hg; P < .001), and 24-hour ambulatory diastolic BP (MD = -1.32 mm Hg, 95% CI: -1.77 to -0.78 mm Hg; P < .001) from the baseline than ARBs. LCZ696 was more effective in reducing BP (odds ratio [OR] = 5.34; 95% CI: 4.49-6.36; P < .01) and had a higher rate of BP control compared with ARBs (OR = 1.52; 95% CI: 1.37-1.69; P < .01). LCZ696 had no difference in the incidence of adverse events (OR = 1.05; 95% CI: 0.94-1.18; P = .38) or serious adverse events (OR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.51-1.24; P = .31) compared to ARBs. This meta-analysis revealed that LCZ696 has a greater antihypertensive efficacy and an equal tolerability profile.
LCZ696是首个血管紧张素受体脑啡肽酶抑制剂,已证明与血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂依那普利或血管紧张素受体阻滞剂(ARB)相比,在治疗心力衰竭方面具有更大优势。然而,比较LCZ696与缬沙坦治疗高血压患者疗效和安全性的研究有限。为了进一步证明LCZ696的益处并进行此项评估,我们对随机对照试验(RCT)进行了荟萃分析。我们在Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、EMBASE、MEDLINE、PubMed和ClinicalTrials.gov中检索RCT。12项涉及3816例患者的研究符合纳入标准。7项研究比较了LCZ696与缬沙坦,5项研究比较了LCZ696与奥美沙坦。与ARB相比,LCZ696使收缩压(BP)从基线水平显著降低更多(平均差值[MD]=-5.43 mmHg;95%置信区间[CI]:-6.36至-4.49 mmHg;P<.001),舒张压(MD=-2.34 mmHg;95%CI:-2.67至-2.01 mmHg;P<.001),24小时动态收缩压(MD=-3.57 mmHg,95%CI:-4.29至-2.85 mmHg;P<.001),以及24小时动态舒张压(MD=-1.32 mmHg,95%CI:-1.77至-0.78 mmHg;P<.001)。与ARB相比,LCZ696在降低血压方面更有效(优势比[OR]=5.34;95%CI:4.49 - 6.36;P<.01),血压控制率更高(OR=1.52;95%CI:1.37 - 1.69;P<.01)。与ARB相比,LCZ696在不良事件发生率(OR=1.