Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Jul;98(28):e16093.
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000016093.

Effect and safety of LCZ696 in the treatment of hypertension: A meta-analysis of 9 RCT studies

Qiongqiong Li  1 , Lina Li  1 , Fanghao Wang  1 , Wei Zhang  2 , Yipeng Guo  3 , Fuzhen Wang  4 , Youxia Liu  1 , Junya Jia  1 , Shan Lin  1
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Effect and safety of LCZ696 in the treatment of hypertension: A meta-analysis of 9 RCT studies

Qiongqiong Li et al. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Jul.

Abstract

Background: LCZ696 has been introduced in patients with hypertension in several trials. Here, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect and safety of LCZ696 in hypertensive patients.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched to identify the available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect and safety of LCZ696 in hypertension patients. The last search date was October 31, 2018.

Results: Nine RCTs with 6765 subjects were finally included, in which 8 trials compared the effect and safety between LCZ696 and angiotensin receptor antagonists (ARBs). Evidences showed LCZ696, compared with ARBs, achieved a better blood pressure control rate (OR 1.24, 95% CI: 1.14-1.35), specifically, LCZ696 were better at reducing systolic blood pressure [WMD -4.11 mmHg, 95% CI: (-5.13, -3.08) mmHg], diastolic blood pressure [WMD -1.79 mmHg, 95% CI: (-2.22, -1.37) mmHg], mean 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure [WMD -3.24 mmHg, 95% CI: (-4.48, -1.99) mmHg] and mean 24-hour ambulatory diastolic blood pressure [WMD -1.25 mmHg, 95% CI: (-1.81, -0.69) mmHg]. There was no difference in the events of adverse events (risk ratio [RR] 1.01, 95% CI: 0.39-1.09), serious adverse events (RR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.52-1.22) and discontinuation of treatment for any adverse events (RR 0.79, 95% CI: 0.56-1.11) between LCZ696 group and ARB/placebo group, except LCZ696 reduced the rate of headaches (RR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.48-0.99) while increased cough (RR 2.12, 95% CI: 1.11-4.04; P = .02; I = 25%).

Conclusion: Our finding provides evidence that LCZ 696 was more effective than ARB on blood pressure control and was safe enough in patients with hypertension.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this article

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of the study selection process.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of LCZ696 with ARB groups on the outcome of systolic blood pressure. ARB = angiotensin receptor antagonist.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Comparison of LCZ696 with ARB groups on the outcome of diastolic blood pressure. ARB = angiotensin receptor antagonist.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Comparison of LCZ696 with ARB groups on the outcome of mean 24-hour ambulatory SBP. ARB = angiotensin receptor antagonist, SBP = systolic blood pressure.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Comparison of LCZ696 with ARB groups on the outcome of mean 24-hour ambulatory DBP. ARB = angiotensin receptor antagonist, DBP = diastolic blood pressure.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Comparison of LCZ696 with ARB on the blood pressure control rate. ARB = angiotensin receptor antagonist.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Kjeldsen SE. Hypertension and cardiovascular risk: general aspects. Pharmacol Res 2018;129:95–9. - PubMed
    1. Mills KT, Bundy JD, Kelly TN, et al. Global disparities of hypertension prevalence and control: a systematic analysis of population-based studies from 90 countries. Circulation 2016;134:441–50. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ali A, Abu Zar M, Kamal A, et al. American heart association high blood pressure protocol 2017: a literature review. Cureus 2018;10:e3230. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vardeny O, Claggett B, Kachadourian J, et al. Incidence, predictors, and outcomes associated with hypotensive episodes among heart failure patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan or enalapril: the PARADIGM-HF trial (prospective comparison of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor to determine impact on global mortality and morbidity in heart failure). Circ Heart Fail 2018;11:e004745. - PubMed
    1. De Vecchis R, Ariano C, Di Biase G, et al. Sacubitril/valsartan for heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction: a retrospective cohort study. Herz 2018. - PubMed

MeSH terms