ArticleESC heart failure2025
Real-world comparative effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan versus RAS inhibition alone in patients with de novo heart failure.
Article in ESC heart failure, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global trend and predictors of non-labelled sacubitril-valsartan dosing: results from IKNOW-HF survey.ESC heart failure · 2026Article
- Article
- Real-world comparative effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan versus RAS inhibition alone in patients with de novo heart failure.ESC heart failure · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsLarge-scale, real-world data on early initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in patients newly diagnosed (de novo) with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are limited. We examined the effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan versus angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) on all-cause and cause-specific hospitalizations among patients with de novo HFrEF from the Optum® dataset in the United States.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included adult patients with de novo HFrEF (diagnosed ≤30 days) with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40% who were first prescribed with sacubitril/valsartan or ACEi/ARB from 1 January 2016 to 31 March 2020. The primary endpoint (all-cause hospitalization) and secondary endpoints were analysed in propensity score-matched cohorts.
resultsA cohort of 3290 patients with de novo HFrEF who were prescribed with sacubitril/valsartan and a propensity-matched cohort of 6580 patients who were prescribed with ACEi/ARB were analysed. Overall, the mean (SD) age of patients was 63 (14) years, 34% were women, and baseline characteristics were balanced across treatment groups. Hypertension (67%), diabetes (33%) and chronic kidney disease (28%) were highly prevalent comorbidities. Patients in the sacubitril/valsartan cohort when compared with the ACEi/ARB cohort had lower annual rates of all-cause hospitalizations [incidence rate ratio (IRR): 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.75-0.89, P < 0.001], cardiovascular (CV) hospitalizations (IRR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.73-0.87, P < 0.001) and HF hospitalizations (IRR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.78-0.95, P = 0.002).
conclusionsAmong patients with de novo HFrEF, sacubitril/valsartan (compared with that of ACEi/ARB) was associated with fewer all-cause, CV and HF hospitalizations. These findings are consistent with clinical trial evidence suggesting potential benefits of early initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with HFrEF, including those soon after diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.