Comparative Effectiveness of ACE Inhibitors and ARBs

Quick Takes

  • As first-line management of HTN, ACE inhibitors and ARBs have similar cardiovascular outcomes.
  • The number and type of adverse effects observed were greater with ACE inhibitors compared to ARBs, although some differences still need further exploration.
  • Large administrative databases may be pooled to explore comparative effectiveness between drug classes.

Study Questions:

How do angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) compare in efficacy and safety when initiated as first-line treatment for hypertension (HTN)?

Methods:

Using 5 US administrative claims databases and 3 US electronic health databases of more than 2.3 million patients initiating antihypertensive agents, researchers compared clinical endpoints, safety, and adverse effects between ACE inhibitors and ARBs using propensity score models. There were 4 primary effectiveness outcomes: acute myocardial infarction, ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or a composite of those three plus sudden cardiac death. A total of 51 secondary outcomes was analyzed focusing on known or suspected adverse events from the product labels.

Results:

When outcomes were compared with ARB use, ACE inhibitor use was associated with similar risk of acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke, or a quadruple composite with sudden cardiac death. As suggested by their affect on bradykinin, the rate of cough and angioedema were significantly higher with ACE inhibitors than ARBs. The risk of acute pancreatitis was also higher with ACE inhibitors compared to ARBs. Abnormal weight loss was higher and abnormal weight gain lower with ACE inhibitors.

Conclusions:

In the largest head-to-head propensity-matched observational network study comparison between ACE inhibitors and ARBs for first-line HTN treatment, there were no differences in cardiovascular outcomes including acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, or composite cardiovascular events. Across more than 44 adverse events studied, cough, angioedema, pancreatitis, and gastrointestinal bleeding were more frequent in patients treated with ACE inhibitors. Abnormal weight loss was more common and abnormal weight gain less common with ACE inhibitors compared to ARBs.

Perspective:

This study evaluated real-world outcome of patients with newly treated HTN initiating treatment with either an ACE inhibitor or ARB. The authors suggest the study supports starting ARBs over ACE inhibitors. However, no absolute risk values for any of the adverse effects are provided, and the issue of weight gain with ARBs compared to ACE inhibitors was not explored. The specific ACE inhibitors and ARBs used were not stated. Previous studies have reported a link between ACE inhibitors and pancreatitis. In ALLHAT (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial), use of lisinopril was associated with increased risk of hospitalized gastrointestinal bleeding compared to both chlorthalidone and amlodipine (post-hoc analysis). Prior work from this group using the same database (LEGEND-HTN [Large-Scale Evidence Generation and Evaluation Across a Network of Databases for Hypertension]) found that diuretics had lower cardiovascular events than ACE inhibitors. Because generic medications in each class are readily available, neither ACE inhibitors nor ARBs have roadblocks associated with initiation selection. In practice, first-line treatments are initiated that are easiest for the clinician to manage and patient to take. Many patients require two or more drug regimens, but this was not addressed in the study. The focus remains getting people to goal and sustaining medication adherence.

Clinical Topics: Prevention, Hypertension, Vascular Medicine

Keywords: Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors, Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists, Angiotensin II Type 2 Receptor Blockers, Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor Blockers, Hypertension


< Back to Listings