Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 219

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Systolic blood pressure, cardiovascular outcomes and efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) in patients with chronic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: results from PARADIGM-HF

Open access
Böhm, Michael, Young, Robin, Jhund, Pardeep S., Solomon, Scott D., Gong, Jianjian, Lefkowitz, Martin P., Rizkala, Adel R., Rouleau, Jean L., Shi, Victor C., Swedberg, Karl, Zile, Michael R., Packer, Milton, McMurray, John J.V.·2017·European Heart Journal

Abstract

Background: Compared to heart failure patients with higher systolic blood pressure (SBP), those with lower SBP have a worse prognosis. To make matters worse, the latter patients often do not receive treatment with life-saving therapies that might lower blood pressure further. We examined the association between SBP and outcomes in the Prospective Comparison of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) with an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure trial (PARADIGM-HF), as well as the effect of sacubitril/valsartan, compared with enalapril, according to baseline SBP. Methods: We analysed the effect of treatment on SBP and on the primary composite outcome (cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization), its components and all-cause death. We examined baseline SBP as a categorical (<110, 110 to < 120, 120 to < 130, 130 to < 140 and ≥140 mmHg) and continuous variable, as well as average in-trial SBP and time-updated SBP. Findings: All-cause and cardiovascular mortality rates were highest in patients with the lowest SBP whereas there was a U-shaped relationship between SBP and the rate of heart failure hospitalization. The benefit of sacubitril/valsartan over enalapril was consistent across all baseline SBP categories for all outcomes. For example, the sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril hazard ratio for the primary endpoint was 0.88 (95%CI 0.74-1.06) in patients with a baseline SBP <110 mmHg and 0.81 (0.65-1.02) for those with a SBP ≥140 mmHg (P for interaction = 0.55). Symptomatic hypotension, study drug dose-reduction and discontinuation were more frequent in patients with a lower SBP. Interpretation: In PARADIGM-HF, patients with lower SBP at randomization, notably after tolerating full doses of both study drugs during a run-in period, were at higher risk but generally tolerated sacubitril/valsartan and had the same relative benefit over enalapril as patients with higher baseline SBP.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/eurheartj/ehw570

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. 2013, Clinical profile and prognostic value of low systolic blood pressure in patients hospitalized for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: insights from the Efficacy of Vasopressin Antagonism in Heart Failure: Outcome Study with Tolvaptan (EVEREST) trial, Am Heart J, 165, 216, 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.11.004 · DOI
  2. 2013, Current management and future directions for the treatment of patients hospitalized for heart failure with low blood pressure, Heart Fail Rev, 18, 107, 10.1007/s10741-012-9315-1 · DOI
  3. SHIFT Investigators, 2014, Efficacy and safety of ivabradine in patients with chronic systolic heart failure according to blood pressure level in SHIFT, Eur J Heart Fail, 16, 810, 10.1002/ejhf.114 · DOI
  4. PARADIGM-HF Committees and Investigators, 2013, Dual angiotensin receptor and neprilysin inhibition as an alternative to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition in patients with chronic systolic heart failure: rationale for and design of the Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure trial (PARADIGM-HF), Eur J Heart Fail, 15, 1062, 10.1093/eurjhf/hft052 · DOI · Paper page
  5. PARADIGM-HF Investigators and Coordinators, 2015, Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibition compared with enalapril on the risk of clinical progression in surviving patients with heart failure, Circulation, 131, 54, 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.013748 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 2004, Multinational economic evaluation of valsartan in patients with chronic heart failure: results from the Valsartan Heart Failure Trial (Val-HeFT), Am Heart J, 148, 122, 10.1016/j.ahj.2003.12.040 · DOI
  7. Carvedilol Prospective Randomized Cumulative Survival (COPERNICUS) Study Group, 2002, Effect of carvedilol on the morbidity of patients with severe chronic heart failure: results of the carvedilol prospective randomized cumulative survival (COPERNICUS) study, Circulation, 106, 2194, 10.1161/01.CIR.0000035653.72855.BF · DOI · Paper page
  8. CIBIS Investigators and Committees, 1994, A randomized trial of beta-blockade in heart failure. The Cardiac Insufficiency Bisoprolol Study (CIBIS), Circulation, 90, 1765, 10.1161/01.CIR.90.4.1765 · DOI · Paper page
  9. MERIT-HF Study Group, 1999, Effect of metoprolol CR/XL in chronic heart failure: Metoprolol CR/XL Randomised Intervention Trial in-Congestive Heart Failure (MERIT-HF), Lancet, 353, 2001, 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04440-2 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 2016, Factors associated with noncompletion during the run-in period before randomization and influence on the estimated benefit of LCZ696 in the PARADIGM-HF trial, Circ Heart Fail, 9, e002735., 10.1161/CIRCHEARTFAILURE.115.002735 · DOI
  11. 2016, Initiating sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) in heart failure: results of TITRATION, a double-blind, randomized comparison of two uptitration regimens, Eur J Heart Fail, 18, 1193, 10.1002/ejhf.548 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 2012, Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure 2012 of the European Society of Cardiology, Bax JJ, Baumgartner H, Ceconi C, Dean V, Deaton C, Fagard R, Funck-Brentano C, Hasdai D, Hoes A, Kirchhof P, Knuuti J, Kolh P, McDonagh T, Moulin C, Popescu BA, Reiner Z, Sechtem U, Sirnes PA, Tendera M, Torbicki A, Vahanian A, Windecker S, McDonagh T, Sechtem U, Bonet LA, Avraamides P, Ben Lamin HA, Brignole M, Coca A, Cowburn P, Dargie H, Elliott P, Flachskampf FA, Guida GF, Hardman S, Jung B, Merkely B, Mueller C, Nanas JN, Nielsen OW, Orn S, Parissis JT, Ponikowski P; ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines. ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2012: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure 2012 of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC, Eur J Heart Fail, 14, 803

Cited by

See all 219

Metadata

Authors
Böhm, M., Young, R., Jhund, P. S., Solomon, S. D., Gong, J., Lefkowitz, M. P., Rizkala, A. R., Rouleau, J. L., Shi, V. C., Swedberg, K., Zile, M. R., Packer, M., & McMurray, J. J. V.
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
2017-02-01
Volume
38
Issue
15
Pages
1132-1143
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
OpenAlex
W2550696258
Cited by
219
References
3
FWCI
14.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Systolic blood pressure, cardiovascular outcomes and efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) in patients with chronic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: results from PARADIGM-HF. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurheartj/ehw570
The paper
Böhm, M., Young, R., Jhund, P. S., Solomon, S. D., Gong, J., Lefkowitz, M. P., Rizkala, A. R., Rouleau, J. L., Shi, V. C., Swedberg, K., Zile, M. R., Packer, M., & McMurray, J. J. V. (2017). Systolic blood pressure, cardiovascular outcomes and efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) in patients with chronic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: results from PARADIGM-HF. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehw570

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.