Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor in Japanese Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction　― Baseline Characteristics and Treatment of PARALLEL-HF Trial ―

Efficacy and Safety of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Japanese Patients With Chronic Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction ― Results From the PARALLEL-HF Study ―

“…These variations reflect the characteristics of the study patient population in Japan (Supplementary Table 1). 19 The subgroup analyses, including NYHA class (I/II vs. III/IV) and NT-proBNP levels (<1,600 pg/mL vs. ≥1,600 pg/mL) demonstrated consistent in NT-proBNP at Week 2 (25.7%, P<0.0001), which was sustained even at Month 6 (18.9%, P=0.0104). This is in line with the early and sustained improvement in biomarkers of myocardial wall stress and injury by sacubitril/valsartan in PARADIGM-HF.…”

“…The percentages of use of the latter three classes of agents were similar to those in the PARADIGM-HF study (Supplementary Table 1). 19 PARALLEL-HF had a median follow up of 33.9 months in the sacubitril/valsartan group with no patient lost to follow up, compared with 27 months in PARADIGM-HF. 7 In this well-treated cohort of Japanese HFrEF patients, the primary composite outcome of CEC-confirmed CV death or HF hospitalization was similar between the 2 treatment groups (HR 1.09 [95% CI, 0.65-1.82]; P=0.6260) (Table 2, Figure 2).…”

“…Sacubitril/Valsartan in Japanese HFrEF Patients results (Figure 3). The MAGGIC risk score was slightly higher in PARALLEL-HF than in PARADIGM-HF (median [IQR]: 23 [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] vs. 20 [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24]). 20 However, score distribution was similar between studies, suggesting that mortality risk for patients enrolled in PARALLEL-HF was similar to that in PARADIGM-HF.…”

“…20 However, score distribution was similar between studies, suggesting that mortality risk for patients enrolled in PARALLEL-HF was similar to that in PARADIGM-HF. 7,19 Additionally, patients in PARALLEL-HF were well treated with evidence-based HF therapy, including ACEi, ARB, β-blocker, MRA, or diuretic, prior to study enrollment ( Table 1). The percentages of use of the latter three classes of agents were similar to those in the PARADIGM-HF study (Supplementary Table 1).…”

<p>MAGGIC Risk Model Predicts Adverse Events and Left Ventricular Remodeling in Non-Ischemic Dilated Cardiomyopathy</p>

“…Since its inception in 2013, the MAGGIC risk score has been validated several times for its ability to discriminate adverse events in HF patients with the ejection fraction reducing, ejection fraction preserving, and mixed types. 14,15,[22][23][24][25] Here we validated the prognostic value of MAGGIC risk score for adverse events of DCM patients. Our results were consistent with those of DCM patients reported by Moneghetti et al demonstrating that MAGGIC risk score was independently related to adverse events.…”