Comparison of Omapatrilat and Enalapril in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: The Omapatrilat Versus Enalapril Randomized Trial of Utility in Reducing Events (OVERTURE)

M. Packer, R. Califf, M. Konstam, H. Krum, J. McMurray, J. Rouleau, K. Swedberg
{"title":"Comparison of Omapatrilat and Enalapril in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: The Omapatrilat Versus Enalapril Randomized Trial of Utility in Reducing Events (OVERTURE)","authors":"M. Packer, R. Califf, M. Konstam, H. Krum, J. McMurray, J. Rouleau, K. Swedberg","doi":"10.1161/01.CIR.0000029801.86489.50","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background—Combined inhibition of the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) and neutral endopeptidase (NEP) may produce greater benefits in heart failure than ACE inhibition alone. Methods and Results—We randomly assigned 5770 patients with New York Heart Association class II to IV heart failure to double-blind treatment with either the ACE inhibitor enalapril (10 mg BID, n=2884) or to the ACE-NEP inhibitor omapatrilat (40 mg once daily, n=2886) for a mean of 14.5 months. The primary end point—the combined risk of death or hospitalization for heart failure requiring intravenous treatment—was used prospectively to test both a superiority and noninferiority hypothesis (based on the effect of enalapril in the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction [SOLVD] Treatment Trial). A primary end point was achieved in 973 patients in the enalapril group and in 914 patients in the omapatrilat group (hazard ratio 0.94; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.03, P =0.187)—a result that fulfilled prespecified criteria for noninferiority but not for superiority. The omapatrilat group also had a 9% lower risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization (P =0.024) and a 6% lower risk of death (P =0.339). Post hoc analysis of the primary end point with the definition used in the SOLVD Treatment Trial (which included all hospitalizations for heart failure) showed an 11% lower risk in patients treated with omapatrilat (nominal P =0.012). Conclusion—Omapatrilat reduces the risk of death and hospitalization in chronic heart failure but was not more effective than ACE inhibition alone in reducing the risk of a primary clinical event. Between-group differences in favor of omapatrilat observed in secondary and post hoc analyses warrant further study.","PeriodicalId":10194,"journal":{"name":"Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association","volume":"1 1","pages":"920-926"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"633","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000029801.86489.50","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 633

Abstract

Background—Combined inhibition of the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) and neutral endopeptidase (NEP) may produce greater benefits in heart failure than ACE inhibition alone. Methods and Results—We randomly assigned 5770 patients with New York Heart Association class II to IV heart failure to double-blind treatment with either the ACE inhibitor enalapril (10 mg BID, n=2884) or to the ACE-NEP inhibitor omapatrilat (40 mg once daily, n=2886) for a mean of 14.5 months. The primary end point—the combined risk of death or hospitalization for heart failure requiring intravenous treatment—was used prospectively to test both a superiority and noninferiority hypothesis (based on the effect of enalapril in the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction [SOLVD] Treatment Trial). A primary end point was achieved in 973 patients in the enalapril group and in 914 patients in the omapatrilat group (hazard ratio 0.94; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.03, P =0.187)—a result that fulfilled prespecified criteria for noninferiority but not for superiority. The omapatrilat group also had a 9% lower risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization (P =0.024) and a 6% lower risk of death (P =0.339). Post hoc analysis of the primary end point with the definition used in the SOLVD Treatment Trial (which included all hospitalizations for heart failure) showed an 11% lower risk in patients treated with omapatrilat (nominal P =0.012). Conclusion—Omapatrilat reduces the risk of death and hospitalization in chronic heart failure but was not more effective than ACE inhibition alone in reducing the risk of a primary clinical event. Between-group differences in favor of omapatrilat observed in secondary and post hoc analyses warrant further study.
Omapatrilat和依那普利在慢性心力衰竭患者中的比较:Omapatrilat与依那普利减少事件效用的随机试验(OVERTURE)
背景:联合抑制血管紧张素转换酶(ACE)和中性内肽酶(NEP)可能比单独抑制ACE对心力衰竭产生更大的益处。方法和结果:我们随机分配5770例纽约心脏协会II至IV级心力衰竭患者,接受ACE抑制剂依那普利(10mg BID, n=2884)或ACE- nep抑制剂奥马帕特拉(40mg,每日一次,n=2886)的双盲治疗,平均14.5个月。主要终点——因需要静脉注射治疗的心力衰竭而死亡或住院的综合风险——被前瞻性地用于检验优势和非劣效假设(基于依那普利在左心室功能障碍研究[SOLVD]治疗试验中的作用)。依那普利组973例患者达到主要终点,奥马帕特里亚组914例患者达到主要终点(风险比0.94;95% CI: 0.86 ~ 1.03, P =0.187),这一结果符合预先设定的非劣效性标准,但不符合优势标准。奥马帕特拉组心血管死亡或住院风险降低9% (P =0.024),死亡风险降低6% (P =0.339)。采用SOLVD治疗试验(包括所有因心力衰竭住院的患者)定义的主要终点的后分析显示,接受奥马帕特里拉治疗的患者风险降低11%(名义P =0.012)。结论:奥马帕特拉降低慢性心力衰竭患者的死亡和住院风险,但在降低主要临床事件的风险方面并不比单独使用ACE抑制剂更有效。在二次分析和事后分析中观察到的有利于奥马帕特拉的组间差异值得进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信