Category: 137862-53-4

Scott, Ingrid U. published the artcileSCORE2 Report 17: Macular thickness fluctuations in anti-VEGF-treated patients with central or hemiretinal vein occlusion, Application of (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, the publication is Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology (2022), 260(5), 1491-1500, database is CAplus and MEDLINE.

To evaluate macular thickness fluctuations and their association with visual acuity outcome in eyes with macular edema (ME) secondary to central (CRVO) or hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO) treated initially with intravitreal aflibercept or bevacizumab. Post hoc anal. of 362 patients with ME secondary to CRVO or HRVO initially randomized to six monthly intravitreal injections of aflibercept or bevacizumab. Three spectral domain optical coherence tomog. (SD-OCT) central subfield thickness (CST) fluctuation measures were investigated over Months 1-12: standard deviation (SD), number of turning points (T) for each participant, and a measure denoted as Zigzag reflecting the magnitude of alternating ups and downs in a participant’s CST. Main outcome measure is Month 12 visual acuity letter score (VALS). More fluctuations occurred in eyes randomized to bevacizumab than aflibercept: SD (59.98 vs 32.12; p<0.0001), T (4.03 vs 3.53; p = 0.02) and Zigzag (24.91 vs 11.60; p =0.0003). Month 12 VALS is significantly lower for the 4th (highest) quartile of the CST fluctuation measure than for the 1st (lowest) quartile for both SD (mean difference in VALS of 7.87; 95% confidence interval: 3.03, 12.70) and Zigzag (mean difference in VALS of 5.11; 95% confidence interval: 0.29, 9.93). SD and Zigzag quartiles were no longer significantly different after Month 1 VALS was added to the regression anal. Greater CST fluctuation as assessed by SD and Zigzag was neg. associated with Month 12 VALS. However, early post-treatment VALS is a stronger predictor of VALS outcomes than the CST fluctuation measures.

Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology published new progress about 137862-53-4. 137862-53-4 belongs to amides-buliding-blocks, auxiliary class GPCR/G Protein,Angiotensin Receptor, name is (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, and the molecular formula is C14H18BClO4, Application of (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid.

Referemce:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amide,
Amide – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Scott, Ingrid U published the artcileBaseline Characteristics and Outcomes After Anti-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Therapy for Macular Edema in Participants With Hemiretinal Vein Occlusion Compared With Participants With Central Retinal Vein Occlusion: Study of Comparative Treatments for Retinal Vein Occlusion 2 (SCORE2) Report 18., COA of Formula: C24H29N5O3, the publication is JAMA ophthalmology (2022), 140(5), 458-464, database is MEDLINE.

Importance: Intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) injections are commonly used to treat eyes with macular edema secondary to hemiretinal vein occlusion (HRVO) or central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO). Information on whether differences exist in outcomes after anti-VEGF therapy can help guide treatment for each of the different disease types. Objective: To compare baseline characteristics, treatment burden, and outcomes of macular edema treatment in participants with HRVO with those of participants with CRVO. Design, Setting, and Participants: This post hoc outcome analysis from the Study of Comparative Treatments for Retinal Vein Occlusion 2 randomized clinical trial included 362 participants with macular edema caused by HRVO or CRVO treated at 66 US sites. Randomization began in September 2014, and the last month 24 follow-up visit occurred in February 2018. Data were analyzed from April 2020 to May 2021. Interventions: Eyes were initially randomized to 6 monthly intravitreal injections of aflibercept or bevacizumab and were treated according to protocol between months 6 to 12 depending on 6-month outcome. After month 12, patients were treated per investigator discretion and observed through month 60. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mean visual acuity letter score (VALS). Results: Of 362 included patients, 157 (43.4%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 68.9 (12.0) years. Outcome data were analyzed up to month 24 owing to substantial missing data at later visits. A significantly greater proportion of participants with HRVO than those with CRVO were Black (37% vs 11%). Treatment rates between months 12 to 23 were 0.36 (95% CI, 0.32-0.40) injections per month for patients with CRVO and 0.28 (95% CI, 0.19-0.36) for patients with HRVO (P = .11). The mean VALS from months 1 to 24 of an HRVO study eye exceeded that of a CRVO study eye by 5.5 (95% CI, 1.5-9.5; P = .01), consistent with the magnitude of the VALS difference between eyes with CRVO and HRVO at baseline. Eyes with CRVO presented at baseline with more macular edema than eyes with HRVO (difference in central subfield thickness [CST], 86 μm; 95% CI, 48-124; P < .001), with no difference in CST between the groups throughout months 1 to 24. Conclusions and Relevance: Black race was more prevalent among participants with HRVO than CRVO, and no differences were observed in the frequency of treatments for macular edema between eyes with CRVO and HRVO. Although eyes with CRVO presented with worse visual acuity and more macular edema on average than did eyes with HRVO, the magnitude of VALS improvement, central retinal thickness in response to anti-VEGF therapy, and treatment burden were similar between the groups.

JAMA ophthalmology published new progress about 137862-53-4. 137862-53-4 belongs to amides-buliding-blocks, auxiliary class GPCR/G Protein,Angiotensin Receptor, name is (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, and the molecular formula is C14H18BClO4, COA of Formula: C24H29N5O3.

Referemce:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amide,
Amide – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Oh, Ji-Hye published the artcileThe benefits of the earlier use of sacubitril/valsartan in de novo heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients., Recommanded Product: (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, the publication is ESC heart failure (2022), 9(4), 2435-2444, database is MEDLINE.

AIMS: We evaluated the clinical outcomes and trajectory of cardiac reverse remodelling according to the timing of sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val) use in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with de novo HFrEF who used Sac/Val between June 2017 and October 2019 were retrospectively enrolled. Patients were grouped into the earlier use group (initiation of Sac/Val < 3 months after the first HFrEF diagnosis) and the later use group (initiation of Sac/Val ≥ 3 months after the first HFrEF diagnosis). Primary outcome was a composite of HF hospitalization and cardiac death. Secondary outcomes were HF hospitalization, cardiac death, all-cause death, significant ventricular arrhythmia (ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation), and echocardiographic evidence of cardiac reverse remodelling including left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) change during follow-up. Among 115 enrolled patients, 67 were classified in the earlier use group, and 48 were classified in the later use group. Mean period of HFrEF diagnosis to Sac/Val use was 52.1 ± 14.3 days in the earlier use group, and 201.8 ± 127.3 days in the later use group. During the median follow-up of 721 days, primary outcome occurred in 21 patients (18.3%). The earlier use group experienced significantly fewer primary outcome than the later use group (10.4% vs. 29.2%, P = 0.010). The Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed better event-free survival in the earlier use group than in the later use group (log rank = 0.017). There were no significant differences in cardiac death, all-cause death, and ventricular arrhythmia between two groups (1.5% vs. 2.1%, P = 0.811; 1.5% vs. 4.2%, P = 0.375; 3.0% vs. 0%, P = 0.227, respectively). Despite a significantly lower baseline LVEF in the earlier use group (21.3 ± 6.4% vs. 24.8 ± 7.9%, P = 0.012), an early prominent increase of LVEF was noted before 6 months (35.2 ± 11.9% vs. 27.8 ± 8.8%, P = 0.007). A delayed improvement of LVEF in the later use group resulted in similar LVEF at last follow-up in both groups (40.7 ± 13.4% vs. 39.4 ± 10.9%, P = 0.686). Although the trajectory of left ventricular remodelling showed similar pattern in two groups, left atrial (LA) reverse remodelling was less prominent in the later use group during the follow-up period (final LA volume index: 43.6 ± 14.3 mL/m² vs. 55.2 ± 17.1 mL/m² , P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Earlier use of Sac/Val was related with better clinical outcome and earlier left ventricular reverse remodelling. Remodelling of LA was less prominent in the later use group implying delayed response in diastolic function.

ESC heart failure published new progress about 137862-53-4. 137862-53-4 belongs to amides-buliding-blocks, auxiliary class GPCR/G Protein,Angiotensin Receptor, name is (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, and the molecular formula is C24H29N5O3, Recommanded Product: (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid.

Referemce:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amide,
Amide – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Yang, Tsun-Yu published the artcileAnemia warrants treatment to improve survival in patients with heart failure receiving sacubitril-valsartan, COA of Formula: C24H29N5O3, the publication is Scientific Reports (2022), 12(1), 8186, database is CAplus and MEDLINE.

Abstract: Angiotensin inhibition remains a cornerstone for pharmacol. management of heart failure (HF), despite being associated with decreased Hb (Hb) levels. To investigate the effect of anemia and its treatment on patients with HF treated with sacubitril-valsartan (S/V), we conducted a retrospective study involving patients with recorded left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs) of < 40% between Jan. 2017 and Dec. 2019. We identified 677 patients, 37.7% of whom received S/V. The median follow-up period was 868 days. Anemia was associated with significantly decreased survival, increased mortality rates, and higher all-cause hospitalizations in S/V-using patients. We further analyzed 236 patients with HF who had recorded renal function, LVEF, and Hb at the initiation of S/V therapy to identify Hb patterns after S/V therapy. Of these patients, 35.6% exhibited decreasing Hb 12 mo after S/V initiation, which was associated with a lower survival rate. Among the patients who were not prescribed anemia medications, Hb of ≥ 12 (vs. < 12 g/dL) was associated with a higher survival rate; this association was absent among the patients undergoing anemia treatment. These results emphasize that consistent screening and treatment for anemia should be implemented to reduce the morbidity and mortality of patients with HF receiving S/V.

Scientific Reports published new progress about 137862-53-4. 137862-53-4 belongs to amides-buliding-blocks, auxiliary class GPCR/G Protein,Angiotensin Receptor, name is (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, and the molecular formula is C10H16O2, COA of Formula: C24H29N5O3.

Referemce:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amide,
Amide – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Servien, R. published the artcileImproved impact assessment of micropollutants release from WWTPs, Formula: C24H29N5O3, the publication is Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering (2022), 100172, database is CAplus.

During wastewater treatment, incomplete elimination of micropollutants occurs. Recently, the potential impacts of the release of some micropollutants at the scale of France have been studied. These impact calculations were incomplete due to a lack of characterization factors (CFs). In the present study, we used already developed machine learning models to complement the missing CFs. The conclusions were not modified for the impact on aquatic environment, but were mitigated for the impact on human health: the higher toxicol. potential impact could be driven by a high-emitted mass, and a high number of compounds could take a significant part of the overall impact.

Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering published new progress about 137862-53-4. 137862-53-4 belongs to amides-buliding-blocks, auxiliary class GPCR/G Protein,Angiotensin Receptor, name is (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, and the molecular formula is C15H10O2, Formula: C24H29N5O3.

Referemce:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amide,
Amide – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Liang, Ling published the artcileComparative peripheral edema for dihydropyridines calcium channel blockers treatment: A systematic review and network meta-analysis, Quality Control of 137862-53-4, the publication is Journal of Clinical Hypertension (Hoboken, NJ, United States) (2022), 24(5), 536-554, database is CAplus and MEDLINE.

Dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (DHPCCBs) are widely used to treat hypertension and chronic coronary artery disease. One common adverse effect of DHPCCBs is peripheral edema, particularly of the lower limbs. The side effect could lead to dose reduction or discontinuation of the medication. The combination of DHPCCBs and renin-angiotensin system blockers has shown to reduce the risk of DHPCCBs-associated peripheral edema compared with DHPCCBs monotherapy. Author performed the current systematic review and network meta-anal. of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to estimate the rate of peripheral edema with DHPCCBs as a class and with individual DHPCCBs and the ranking of the reduction of peripheral edema. The effects of renin-angiotensin system blockers on DHPCCBs network meta-anal. were created to analyze the ranking of the reduction of peripheral edema. A total of 3312 publications were identified and 71 studies with 56,283 patients were included. Nifedipine ranked highest in inducing peripheral edema (SUCRA 81.8%) and lacidipine (SUCRA 12.8%) ranked the least. All DHPCCBs except lacidipine resulted in higher relative risk (RR) of peripheral edema compared with placebo. Nifedipine plus angiotensin receptor blocker (SUCRA: 92.3%) did not mitigate peripheral edema and amlodipine plus angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (SUCRA: 16%) reduced peripheral edema the most. Nifedipine ranked the highest and lacidipine ranked the lowest amongst DHPCCBs for developing peripheral edema when used for cardiovascular indications. The second or higher generation of DHPCCBs combination with ACEIs or ARBs or diuretics lowered the chance of peripheral edema development compared to single DHPCCB treatment.

Journal of Clinical Hypertension (Hoboken, NJ, United States) published new progress about 137862-53-4. 137862-53-4 belongs to amides-buliding-blocks, auxiliary class GPCR/G Protein,Angiotensin Receptor, name is (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, and the molecular formula is C24H29N5O3, Quality Control of 137862-53-4.

Referemce:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amide,
Amide – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Karabulut, Umut published the artcileEffect of Sacubitril/Valsartan Combined with Dapagliflozin on Long-Term Cardiac Mortality in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction, Quality Control of 137862-53-4, the publication is Angiology (2022), 73(4), 350-356, database is CAplus and MEDLINE.

The angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor dapagliflozin have been shown to reduce rehospitalization and cardiac mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We aimed to compare the long-term cardiac and all-cause mortality of ARNI and dapagliflozin combination therapy against ARNI monotherapy in patients with HFrEF. This retrospective study involved 244 patients with HF with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-IV symptoms and ejection fraction ≤40. The patients were divided into 2 groups: ARNI monotherapy and ARNI+dapagliflozin. Median follow-up was 2.5 (.16-3.72) years. One hundred and seventy-five (71.7) patients were male, and the mean age was 65.9 (SD, 10.2) years. Long-term cardiac mortality rates were significantly lower in the ARNI+dapagliflozin group (7.4) than in the ARNI monotherapy group (19.5) (P = .01). Dapagliflozin [Hazard Ratio (HR) [95Confidence Interval (CI)] = .29 [.10-.77]; P = .014] and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) [HR (95CI) = .89 (.85-.93); P < .001] were found to be independent predictors of cardiac mortality. Our study showed a significant reduction in cardiac mortality with ARNI and dapagliflozin combination therapy compared with ARNI monotherapy.

Angiology published new progress about 137862-53-4. 137862-53-4 belongs to amides-buliding-blocks, auxiliary class GPCR/G Protein,Angiotensin Receptor, name is (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, and the molecular formula is C24H29N5O3, Quality Control of 137862-53-4.

Referemce:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amide,
Amide – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Oger, Emmanuel published the artcileEffectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers on total and cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in primary prevention: A nationwide study based on French Health Insurance Data (SNDS), Recommanded Product: (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, the publication is Journal of Clinical Hypertension (Hoboken, NJ, United States) (2022), 24(4), 438-448, database is CAplus and MEDLINE.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) both inhibit the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) but have different sites of action. Whether clin. meaningful differences exist is still debated. The authors set up a population-based nationwide retrospective cohort study with at least 5 years of follow-up based on the comprehensive French Health Insurance Database linked to the French hospital discharge database. Patients aged 50 or above, identified as ARB or ACE inhibitor new users in 2009 (at least one delivery during the year and no such delivery in 2008) were eligible. Exclusion criteria included history of cancer, cardiovascular disease, or chronic renal insufficiency. Main outcome measure was overall mortality. Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular deaths, major cardiovascular events, and major or other cardiovascular events. Out of 407 815 eligible patients, 233 682 (57%) were ARB users; two-third had no previous exposure to antihypertensive drug. Based on propensity-score based Cox model, ARB new user group had a better overall (HR: .878, 95%CI, .854 to .902), and cardiovascular (HR: .841, 95%CI, .800 to .84) survival and had a lower risk for major cardiovascular events (HR: .886, 95%CI, .868 to .905). Statistically significant quant. interactions were detected with diabetes. Considering subgroup analyses, ARBs had a better survival than ACE inhibitors in nondiabetic patients.

Journal of Clinical Hypertension (Hoboken, NJ, United States) published new progress about 137862-53-4. 137862-53-4 belongs to amides-buliding-blocks, auxiliary class GPCR/G Protein,Angiotensin Receptor, name is (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, and the molecular formula is C24H29N5O3, Recommanded Product: (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid.

Referemce:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amide,
Amide – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Rakugi, Hiromi published the artcileEfficacy of sacubitril/valsartan versus olmesartan in Japanese patients with essential hypertension: a randomized, double-blind, multicenter study, Computed Properties of 137862-53-4, the publication is Hypertension Research (2022), 45(5), 824-833, database is CAplus and MEDLINE.

This phase III study assessed the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan compared with those of olmesartan in Japanese patients with essential hypertension. Patients (n = 1161, aged ≥20 years) with mild to moderate hypertension (mean sitting systolic blood pressure [msSBP] ≥150 to <180 mmHg) were randomized to receive sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg (n = 387), sacubitril/valsartan 400 mg (n = 385), or olmesartan 20 mg (n = 389) once daily for 8 wk. The primary assessment was a reduction in msSBP from baseline with sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg vs. olmesartan 20 mg at Week 8. Secondary assessments included msSBP reduction with sacubitril/valsartan 400 mg vs. olmesartan at Week 8 and reductions in mean sitting diastolic blood pressure (msDBP), mean sitting pulse pressure (msPP), and overall blood pressure (BP) control rate for all treatment groups at Week 8. Sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg provided a significantly greater reduction in msSBP from baseline than olmesartan at Week 8 (between-treatment difference: -5.01 mmHg [95% confidence interval: -6.95 to -3.06 mmHg, P < 0.001 for noninferiority and superiority]). Greater reductions in msSBP with sacubitril/valsartan 400 mg vs. olmesartan, as well as in msDBP and msPP with both doses of sacubitril/valsartan vs. olmesartan (P < 0.05 for all), were also observed Patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan achieved an overall higher BP control rate. The safety and tolerability profiles of sacubitril/valsartan were generally comparable to those of olmesartan. The adverse event rate with sacubitril/valsartan was not dose-dependent. Treatment with sacubitril/valsartan was effective and provided superior BP reduction, with a higher proportion of patients achieving target BP goals than treatment with olmesartan in Japanese patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension.

Hypertension Research published new progress about 137862-53-4. 137862-53-4 belongs to amides-buliding-blocks, auxiliary class GPCR/G Protein,Angiotensin Receptor, name is (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, and the molecular formula is C24H29N5O3, Computed Properties of 137862-53-4.

Referemce:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amide,
Amide – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Kim, Moo Jun published the artcileAcute Tubular Necrosis Associated with Angiotensin Receptor-neprilysin Inhibitor., Recommanded Product: (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, the publication is Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) (2022), 61(10), 1573-1576, database is MEDLINE.

Sacubitril/valsartan, an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), significantly reduces mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, a considerable number of patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan experience hypotension, oliguria, progressive azotemia, and renal failure as adverse events. These issues have been linked to significant gaps in the usage and dosing of guideline-directed medical therapy with ARNI in patients with HFrEF. We herein report a relevant case of pathologically proven acute tubular necrosis after the first dose of sacubitril/valsartan, highlighting the importance of optimizing the medical therapy in an outpatient with HFrEF.

Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) published new progress about 137862-53-4. 137862-53-4 belongs to amides-buliding-blocks, auxiliary class GPCR/G Protein,Angiotensin Receptor, name is (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid, and the molecular formula is C24H29N5O3, Recommanded Product: (S)-2-(N-((2′-(1H-Tetrazol-5-yl)-[1,1′-biphenyl]-4-yl)methyl)pentanamido)-3-methylbutanoic acid.

Referemce:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amide,
Amide – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics