Effects of Sacubitril-Valsartan, versus Valsartan, in Women Compared to Men with Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction: Insights from PARAGON-HF: Influence Statistics

Expert Impact

Concepts for which they have has direct influence: Heart failure , Preserved ejection fraction , Women heart failure , Women compared , Preserved ejection , Ejection fraction , Valsartan women .

Key People For Heart Failure

Top KOLs in the world
John J J V McMurray
heart failure myocardial infarction atrial fibrillation
John George Franklin Cleland
heart failure patients hf atrial fibrillation
Stephan D Anker
heart failure iron deficiency cardiac cachexia
Greegg C Fonarow
heart failure atrial fibrillation united states
Karl B Swedberg
heart failure reduced ejection fraction myocardial infarction
Piotr P Ponikowski
heart failure iron deficiency reduced ejection fraction

Effects of Sacubitril-Valsartan, versus Valsartan, in Women Compared to Men with Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction: Insights from PARAGON-HF


. BACKGROUND: Unlike heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, there is no approved treatment for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, the predominant phenotype in women. Therefore, there is a greater heart failure therapeutic deficit in women compared with men. METHODS: In a prespecified subgroup analysis, we examined outcomes according to sex in the PARAGON-HF trial (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ARB Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction), which compared sacubitril-valsartan and valsartan in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. The primary outcome was a composite of first and recurrent hospitalizations for heart failure and death from cardiovascular causes. We also report secondary efficacy and safety outcomes. RESULTS: Overall, 2479 women (51.7%) and 2317 men (48.3%) were randomized. Women were older and had more obesity, less coronary disease, and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate and NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) levels than men. For the primary outcome, the rate ratio for sacubitril-valsartan versus valsartan was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.59-0.90) in women and 1.03 (95% CI, 0.84-1.25) in men (P interaction = 0.017). The benefit from sacubitril-valsartan was attributable to reduction in heart failure hospitalization. The improvement in New York Heart Association class and renal function with sacubitril-valsartan was similar in women and men, whereas the improvement in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score was less in women than in men. The difference in adverse events between sacubitril-valsartan and valsartan was similar in women and men. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with valsartan, sacubitril-valsartan seemed to reduce the risk of heart failure hospitalization more in women than in men. Whereas the possible sex-related modification of the effect of treatment has several potential explanations, the present study does not provide a definite mechanistic basis for this finding. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01920711.