Predictors of sacubitril/valsartan high dose tolerability in a real world population with HFrEF

AIMS: The angiotensin receptor‐neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val) demonstrated to be superior to enalapril in reducing hospitalizations, cardiovascular and all‐cause mortality in patients with ambulatory heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), in particular when it is maximally up‐titrated. Unfortunately, the target dose is achieved in less than 50% of HFrEF patients, thus undermining the beneficial effects on the outcomes. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the role of Sac/Val and its titration dose on reverse cardiac remodelling and determine which echocardiographic index best predicts the up‐titration success. METHODS AND RESULTS: From January 2020 to June 2021, we retrospectively identified 95 patients (65.6 [59.1–72.8] years; 15.8% females) with chronic HFrEF who were prescribed Sac/Val from the HF Clinics of 5 Italian University Hospitals and evaluated the tolerability of Sac/Val high dose (the ability of the patient to achieve and stably tolerate the maximum dose) as the primary endpoint in the cohort. We used a multivariable logistic regression analysis, with a stepwise backward selection method, to determine the independent predictors of Sac/Val maximum dose tolerability, using, as candidate predictors, only variables with a P‐value < 0.1 in the univariate analyses. Candidate predictors identified for the multivariable backward logistic regression analysis were age, sex, body mass index (BMI), chronic kidney disease (CKD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), dyslipidaemia, atrial fibrillation, systolic blood pressure (SBP), baseline tolerability of ACEi/ARBs maximum dose, left ventricle global longitudinal strain (LVgLS), LV ejection fraction (EF), tricuspid annulus plane systolic excursion (TAPSE), right ventricle (RV) fractional area change (FAC), RV global and free wall longitudinal strain (RVgLS and RV‐FW‐LS). After the multivariable analysis, only one categorical (ACEi/ARBs maximum dose at baseline) and three continuous (younger age, higher SBP, and higher TAPSE), resulted significantly associated with the study outcome variable with a strong discriminatory capacity (area under the curve 0.874, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.794–0.954) to predict maximum Sac/Val dose tolerability. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first to analyse the potential role of echocardiography and, in particular, of RV dysfunction, measured by TAPSE, in predicting Sac/Val maximum dose tolerability. Therefore, patients with RV dysfunction (baseline TAPSE <16 mm, in our cohort) might benefit from a different strategy to titrate Sac/Val, such as starting from the lowest dose and/or waiting for a more extended period of observation before attempting with the higher doses.