New heart failure drug works much better than current treatment, study finds
In a huge international study, an experimental drug for heart failure worked significantly better than the backbone of treatment, paving the way for the biggest therapeutic advance in decades.
Novartis' twice-a-day pill, known by its code name, LCZ696, reduced deaths, hospitalizations and disabling symptoms of heart failure. It had fewer serious side effects than the standard therapy, a blood-pressure-lowering medication called enalapril.
“We designed this study to try to change the cornerstone of treatment — to replace enalapril,” said lead study co-author Milton Packer, a cardiologist and heart failure researcher at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. “The results are not only compelling, but exceeded our expectations.”
In an editorial accompanying the study, published online on Saturday in the New England Journal of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania cardiologist Mariell Jessup wrote that the novel therapy may “represent a new threshold of hope for patients with heart failure.”
Heart failure, the only cardiovascular disease on the rise, affects 5 million people in the United States.
A progressive disorder, it begins when heart cells are injured by a heart attack, infection, chemotherapy or other causes. Healthy cells try to compensate by overworking and enlarging, while the body retains water and increases blood pressure in a futile effort to improve blood flow.
Until the 1980s, the standard treatments — digoxin, which strengthens heart contractions, and diuretics, which increase urine output — did nothing to reduce mortality and little to relieve the symptoms of breathlessness, fatigue and swelling.
Then enalapril was developed. It received approval in 1985 and was the first in a class of drugs called ACE inhibitors. These compounds, which lower blood pressure by widening the blood vessels, improved symptoms and survival. Further progress was made by combining ACE inhibitors with drugs that block adrenaline, as well as more sophisticated diuretics.
Even with all that, about 50 percent of heart failure patients die within five years.
The latest advance involves blocking an enzyme — neprilysin — that plays a key role in the process of blood vessel constriction, fluid retention and heart enlargement that makes the heart gradually fail.
“This is a new pathway. That's what's really exciting,” Jessup said, adding that other pharmaceutical companies are developing their own anti-neprilysin compounds.
Novartis will ask the Food and Drug Administration to approve the drug.
Novartis' new drug combines its neprilysin inhibitor with valsartan, a blood pressure-lowering drug that works a little differently from enalapril.
The pivotal study, which began in 2009, enrolled 8,400 patients with mild to moderately severe heart failure at more than 1,000 centers around the world, making it the largest clinical trial in heart failure ever undertaken. The patients were randomly assigned to take LCZ696 or enalapril, plus other medications that were part of their prescribed regimen.
The trial was stopped early, after following patients for a median of 27 months, because the new drug met criteria for “overwhelming benefit.”
Of 4,187 patients on the new drug, 914 died from cardiovascular causes or were hospitalized for worsening heart failure — 21.8 percent of the group. That's compared with 1,117 deaths and hospitalizations (26.5 percent) among 4,212 people taking enalapril.
The Novartis drug was better tolerated. Slightly less than 11 percent quit because of side effects such as dangerously low blood pressure or worsening kidney function, compared with about 12 percent for enalapril.
On a questionnaire, patients taking LCZ696 reported more improvement in heart failure symptoms and physical limitations than the comparison group.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Clintons hauled in $139M in past 8 years
- Despite U.S. dollars and bombs, effort failing to squash ISIS
- Dusty Atlantic Ocean thwarts tropical storms
- Planned Parenthood recordings release halted by judge
- Toledo better prepared to keep toxins out of tap water
- Fires’ fury unabated in California
- Baltimore slayings climb to level unseen in decades
- Georgia school returns Cosby’s money
- Planned Parenthood official says no profit from fetal organs
- Mourning, mystery shroud Lafayette days after theater shooting
- Lawyers: Immigrant mothers coerced to wear ankle monitors in Texas