Correlation of ACE2 with RAS components after Losartan treatment in light of COVID-19

Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is an important factor in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) interactions. Losartan (LOS) belongs to the angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) family. Additionally, the protective role of ACE2 restored by LOS has been suggested and clinically examined in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, clinical trials with LOS have been conducted. However, the mechanism through which LOS enhances ACE2 expression remains unclear. In addition, the response of ACE2 to LOS differs among patients. Our LOS-treated patient data revealed a correlated mechanism of ACE2 with components of the renin-angiotensinogen system. We observed a significant positive regulation of MAS1 and ACE2 expression. In the context of LOS treatment of COVID-19, ACE2 expression could depend on LOS regulated MAS1. Thus, MAS1 expression could predict the COVID-19 treatment response of LOS.

Lack of Association Between Neurohormonal Blockade and Survival in Transthyretin Cardiac Amyloidosis

Background Despite the belief that heart failure therapies are not effective in transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis, data are limited. We tested the association of neurohormonal blockade use with survival. Methods and Results A total of 309 consecutive patients with transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis were identified. Medication inventory was obtained at baseline and subsequent visits. Exposure included a neurohormonal blockade class (β‐blocker [βB], angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker, and mineralocorticoid antagonist) at baseline and subsequent visits. βB was modeled as baseline use, time‐varying use, and in an inverse probability treatment weighted model. Primary outcome was all‐cause mortality analyzed with adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. Continuing compared with stopping βB during follow‐up was tested. Mean age was 73.2 years, 84.1% were men, and 17.2% had atrial fibrillation/flutter at baseline. At the time of study entry, 49.8% were on βBs, 35.0% were on angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, and 23.9% were on mineralocorticoid antagonists. For the total cohort, there was a trend toward harm in the unadjusted model for baseline βB use, but this was neutral after adjustment. When βB use was analyzed as a time‐varying exposure, there was no association with mortality. βB discontinuation was associated with decreased mortality for the total cohort. Findings were consistent in inverse probability treatment weighted models. For angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker or mineralocorticoid antagonist use, there was no association with mortality after adjustment for the total cohort. Conclusions There was no association of neurohormonal blockade use with survival in transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis. For the total cohort, deprescribing βB may be associated with improved survival. Additional studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Randomized Evaluation of Beta Blocker and ACE-Inhibitor/Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Treatment for Post Infarct Angina in Patients With Myocardial Infarction With Non-obstructive Coronary Arteries: A MINOCA-BAT Sub Study Rationale and Design

Introduction: Myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) occurs in ~10% of all patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), with an over-representation amongst women. Remarkably, it is estimated that as many as 1 in 4 patients with MINOCA experience ongoing angina at 12 months despite having no flow-restricting stenoses in their epicardial arteries. This manuscript presents the rationale behind Randomized Evaluation of Beta Blocker and Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Treatment (ACEI/ARB) for Post Infarct Angina in MINOCA patients—The MINOCA BAT post infarct angina sub study.Methods: This trial is a registry-based, randomized, parallel, open-label, multicenter trial with 2 × 2 factorial design. The primary aim is to determine whether oral beta blockade compared with no oral beta blockade, and ACEI/ARB compared with no ACEI/ARB, reduce post infarct angina in patients discharged after MINOCA without clinical signs of heart failure and with left ventricular ejection fraction ≥40%. A total of 664 patients will be randomized into four groups; (i) ACEI/ARB with beta blocker, (ii) beta blocker only, (iii) ACEI/ARB only, or (iv) neither ACEI/ARB nor beta blocker and followed for 12 months.Results: The trial is currently recruiting in Australia and Sweden. Fifty six patients have been recruited thus far. Both sexes were equally distributed (52% women and 48% men) and the mean age was 56.3 ± 9.9 years.Conclusions: It remains unclear whether conventional secondary preventive therapies are beneficial to MINOCA patients in regard to post infarct angina. Existing registry-based literature suggest cardioprotective agents are less likely to be used in MINOCA patients. Thus, results from this trial will provide insights for future treatment strategies and guidelines specific to MINOCA patients.

Angiotensin Receptor Blocker is Associated with A Lower Fracture Risk: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background The angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) are prevalently used in the treatment of hypertension. Hypertension often presents with osteoporosis. However, over the past decade, it has been unclear whether long-term use of ACEI/ARB reduces fracture risk. This meta-analysis aims to investigate the potential clinical effects of ACEI/ARB on osteoporosis fracture (OF). Methods This meta-analysis was identified through PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Related studies about ACEI/ARB with the risk of fracture were published from inception to September, 2021. Results Nine qualified prospective designed studies, involving 3,649,785 subjects, were included in this analysis. Overall, the RR of ACEI compared with the non-users were 0.98 (95% CI: 0.88, 1.10; P < 0.001) for composite fractures and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.87, 1.05; P = 0.048) for hip fractures; the RR of ARB compared to the non-users were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.73, 0.91; P < 0.001) for composite fractures and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.74, 0.97; P = 0.028) for hip fractures. Furthermore, in the subgroup analysis, male may benefit from ARB (RR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.49, 0.89, P = 0.028), and the European may also benefit from ARB (RR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.80, 0.93, P = 0.015). Conclusions ACEI usage will not decrease the risk of osteoporosis fracture. On the contrary, ARB usage can decrease the risk of total fracture and hip fracture, especially for the male and European. Compared with ACEI, for patients at higher risk of fracture in cardiovascular diseases such as hypertension, the protective effect of ARB should be considered.