Skip to content

Study to Evaluate Effect of Nebivolol on Angina in Women With Microvascular Disease

Nebivolol for the Relief of Microvascular Angina in Women

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01665508
Acronym
NIRVANA
Enrollment
12
Registered
2012-08-15
Start date
2013-04-30
Completion date
2015-05-31
Last updated
2017-04-20

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Microvascular Angina

Keywords

angina, cardiopulmonary testing, metabolomics, nebivolol

Brief summary

Women have less significant blockages of coronary arteries, however have greater symptoms and worse outcomes compared to their age-matched male counterparts. This paradox has led to the recognition and importance of the microvasculature ( small vessels) as a contributor to symptoms and outcomes. Nebivolol has unique antioxidant properties and dilates blood vessels and it is therefore proposed that treatment with nebivolol will reduce angina (chest symptoms) in women with microvascular disease as well as improve exercise capacity, reduce resource utilization and improve other measures of artery function.

Detailed description

Though women have less obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) they continue to have a greater burden of symptoms, more myocardial ischemia, and a higher rate of adverse outcomes than their age-matched male counterparts. This ostensible paradox has led to the recognition of a distinct pathophysiology of ischemic heart disease, in part related to microvascular dysfunction, and abnormal coronary reactivity. The term primary microvascular angina, (MVA) is used to describe a syndrome among patients who have symptoms suggestive of cardiac ischemia, evidence of electrocardiographic abnormalities, abnormalities on stress imaging or a history of ACS, but no evidence of obstructive epicardial coronary disease. In this population, microvascular angina causes significant morbidity and in some may contribute to increased mortality. The treatment of microvascular disease remains empirical due to lack of data regarding symptom alleviation, as well as ultimate mortality reduction. Women with ischemic heart disease and microvascular angina continue to report more frequent angina and worse quality of life. They frequently seek medical attention for the evaluation of cardiovascular symptoms including chest pain and shortness of breath. Consequently, these women incur greater healthcare costs, with more office visits, hospitalizations, and myocardial infarctions. In fact, more than one half of women without obstructive coronary disease continue to have ischemic symptoms that lead to further consumption of CAD resources, most often because of diagnostic uncertainty. In the absence of robust outcomes data to drive the care of these women with microvascular ischemia, various approaches are taken, in addition to the fundamental management of baseline risk factors. Some physicians treat these women as they would treat patients with known obstructive CAD, while some, in the setting of open coronary arteries and persistent chest pain, opt for reassurance. Nevertheless, given that these women with microvascular ischemia continue to have higher morbidity and mortality, as well as increased resource consumption, there is a widely recognized need for effective therapeutic agents to reduce symptoms, improve quality of life, decrease resource consumption, and ultimately reduce mortality. Nebivolol, due to its unique antioxidant and vasodilator properties, via its effect on NO bioactivity, and subsequent effects on the endothelium may be a potentially ideal therapeutic agent for the treatment of microvascular angina among women. For example, one previous study showed that nebivolol improved exercise parameters, as well as endothelial function, more effectively than other beta blockade with metoprolol, among patients with persistent angina and non-obstructive coronary disease. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing is an ideal diagnostic test in this study as it will provide unique information on how microvascular ischemia influences functional capacity as measured through sensitive gas exchange parameters. Because it is known that a distinct pathophysiology contributes to microvascular angina among this subset of women, these parameters provided by CPET may provide essential information regarding the mechanism of symptom mitigation should nebivolol confer therapeutic value. Furthermore, because exercise tolerance is often significantly impaired, objective measures of gas exchange that reflect submaximum and maximum fitness among these women will be useful both at baseline and on nebivolol. Peripheral arterial tone and pulse wave analysis will also be performed. PAT signal technology provides a widely validated measurement of endothelium-mediated changes in vascular tone, using non-invasive bio-sensors on the fingertips that are elicited by creating a down-stream hyperemic response. This parameter correlates well with endothelial dysfunction in coronary arteries. We will perform endothelial function testing at baseline and after 3 months. Metabolomics is an emerging field that offers the possibility of using the body's metabolites to both phenotype a disease as well as track its response to isolated perturbations, such as administration of a drug. In this study we will utilize metabolomics to define signatures of microvascular ischemia as well as nebivolol-mediated changes in metabolic profiles. Baseline metabolic profiling, as well as metabolic profiling after 3 months of nebivolol treatment will be performed in this study. This type of assessment is an ideal complement to the clinical parameters delineated above as it combines targeted mass spectrometry to measures small molecules related to nitric oxide metabolism (ie: arginine, arginosuccinate, citrulline, ornithine, cGMP, ADMA) as well as more unbiased screening of metabolites that are not known to be associated with either nebivolol exposure or microvascular angina.

Interventions

DRUGNebivolol

Patient to start nebivolol and have repeat testing in 3 months

Sponsors

Forest Laboratories
CollaboratorINDUSTRY
Massachusetts General Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
40 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* women between the ages of 40-80 * with evidence of coronary microvascular dysfunction as determined by the presence of rest and or exertional chest tightness and a history of either an elevated troponin level or positive stress test ( EKG criteria or imaging) , as well as non-obstructive coronary artery disease (\<50% epicardial obstruction) by either diagnostic catheterization with coronary angiography or CT angiography.

Exclusion criteria

* Women who cannot tolerate a beta blocker. * Women receiving Hormone Replacement Therapy * Women of child-bearing age who are not on a birth-control method. * Women with inability to exercise. * Women with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVEF less than 40%) * Women who have a medical condition that, in the Investigator's opinion, would expose them to an increased risk of a significant adverse event or interfere with assessments of safety and efficacy during the course of the trial. * Women with any current malignancy, or any clinically significant hematological, endocrine, cardiovascular, renal, hepatic, gastrointestinal or neurological disease. If there is a history of such disease but the condition has been stable for at least the past year and is judged by the investigator not to interfere with the patient's participation in the study, the patient may be included. * Women who are unable to speak, read, and understand English and are judged by the investigator to be unable or unlikely to follow the study protocol and complete all scheduled visits. * Women with any contraindications to beta blocker therapy * Women with myocardial bridging * Women with Prinzmetal's angina

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Seattle Angina Questionnaire Score3 monthsSeattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ): The SAQ is a 5 part survey that is widely used and well validated tool to assess angina stability and angina frequency among patients with coronary artery disease. The SAQ is a validated, self-administered 19-item questionnaire with 5 different dimensions of health status in patients with CAD including: angina frequency, angina stability, disease-specific quality of life, physical limitations and treatment satisfaction. Each SAQ domain score ranges from 0-100, with higher scores indicating a better health status.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Resource Utilization Questionnaire3 monthsResource utilization as determined by patient phone calls, office visits, emergency room visits, and number of hospitalizations, as well an index cost for any hospitalizations
SF36baseline and 12 week follow-upThe SF-36v2 is a commonly used instrument to assess HRQoL8. The questionnaire evaluates 8 HRQoL domains: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional and mental health. The physical component score is a composite of the SF-36v2 physical health domains (physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain and general health) and the mental component score a composite of the mental health domains (vitality, social functioning, role-emotional and mental health). Each HRQoL domain score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores corresponding to a better health status. The SF-36v2 domain scores were calculated using the QualityMetric Health Outcomes Scoring Software version 4.5.
Peak VO2 Measured by Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing3 monthsAssessment of exercise capacity (peak VO2) as determined by CPET
Peak Heart Rate as Measured by Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing3 monthsAssessment of peak heart rate as determined by CPET
Peak O2 Pulse3 monthspeak O2 pulse as measured by cardiopulmonary exercise testing
Exercise Duration3 monthsAssessment of exercise duration as determined by CPET

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Nebivolol
Testing will be performed at baseline (SAQ questionnaire, cardiopulmonary testing, resource utilization, metabolomics and vascular testing). This will be repeated on the same group of patients after 3 months of nebivolol treatment. Nebivolol: Patient to start nebivolol and have repeat testing in 3 months
12
Total12

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicNebivolol
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
12 Participants
Age, Continuous61.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10
Region of Enrollment
United States
12 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
12 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
0 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 12
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 12

Outcome results

Primary

Seattle Angina Questionnaire Score

Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ): The SAQ is a 5 part survey that is widely used and well validated tool to assess angina stability and angina frequency among patients with coronary artery disease. The SAQ is a validated, self-administered 19-item questionnaire with 5 different dimensions of health status in patients with CAD including: angina frequency, angina stability, disease-specific quality of life, physical limitations and treatment satisfaction. Each SAQ domain score ranges from 0-100, with higher scores indicating a better health status.

Time frame: 3 months

Population: 7 patients complete baseline and followup data reported below is anginal stability

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
NebivololSeattle Angina Questionnaire Scorephyisical limitation74.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 18
NebivololSeattle Angina Questionnaire Scoretreatment satisfaction81.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.5
NebivololSeattle Angina Questionnaire Scoreanginal frequency80.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 20
NebivololSeattle Angina Questionnaire Scorequalify of life62.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 33.6
NebivololSeattle Angina Questionnaire Scoreanginal stability83.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 25.8
BaselineSeattle Angina Questionnaire Scorequalify of life51.4 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 23.2
BaselineSeattle Angina Questionnaire Scoreanginal stability29.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.8
BaselineSeattle Angina Questionnaire Scorephyisical limitation67.6 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.1
BaselineSeattle Angina Questionnaire Scoreanginal frequency70.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.5
BaselineSeattle Angina Questionnaire Scoretreatment satisfaction84.4 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 13
Secondary

Exercise Duration

Assessment of exercise duration as determined by CPET

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
NebivololExercise Duration11.9 minutesStandard Deviation 1.1
BaselineExercise Duration11.8 minutesStandard Deviation 1.9
Secondary

Peak Heart Rate as Measured by Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing

Assessment of peak heart rate as determined by CPET

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
NebivololPeak Heart Rate as Measured by Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing119 beats per minuteStandard Deviation 11
BaselinePeak Heart Rate as Measured by Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing145 beats per minuteStandard Deviation 17
Secondary

Peak O2 Pulse

peak O2 pulse as measured by cardiopulmonary exercise testing

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
NebivololPeak O2 Pulse13.1 ml/beatStandard Deviation 2.3
BaselinePeak O2 Pulse11 ml/beatStandard Deviation 2.5
Secondary

Peak VO2 Measured by Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing

Assessment of exercise capacity (peak VO2) as determined by CPET

Time frame: 3 months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
NebivololPeak VO2 Measured by Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing13.1 ml/beatStandard Deviation 2.3
BaselinePeak VO2 Measured by Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing11.0 ml/beatStandard Deviation 2.5
Secondary

Resource Utilization Questionnaire

Resource utilization as determined by patient phone calls, office visits, emergency room visits, and number of hospitalizations, as well an index cost for any hospitalizations

Time frame: 3 months

Population: data was not collected

Secondary

SF36

The SF-36v2 is a commonly used instrument to assess HRQoL8. The questionnaire evaluates 8 HRQoL domains: physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional and mental health. The physical component score is a composite of the SF-36v2 physical health domains (physical functioning, role-physical, bodily pain and general health) and the mental component score a composite of the mental health domains (vitality, social functioning, role-emotional and mental health). Each HRQoL domain score ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores corresponding to a better health status. The SF-36v2 domain scores were calculated using the QualityMetric Health Outcomes Scoring Software version 4.5.

Time frame: baseline and 12 week follow-up

Population: physical functioning reported below

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
NebivololSF36physical functioning75.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.8
NebivololSF36role-physical85.4 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.9
NebivololSF36bodily pain75.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.9
NebivololSF36general health75 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.6
NebivololSF36vitality67.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.5
NebivololSF36social functioning91.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.2
NebivololSF36role-emotional90.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.3
NebivololSF36mental health81.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.1
NebivololSF36physical component50.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.9
NebivololSF36mental component55.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5
BaselineSF36mental health81.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.3
BaselineSF36physical functioning67.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.8
BaselineSF36social functioning91.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.1
BaselineSF36role-physical82.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 16
BaselineSF36mental component56.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.6
BaselineSF36bodily pain78.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.8
BaselineSF36role-emotional97.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.8
BaselineSF36general health72.8 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.1
BaselineSF36physical component48.4 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.3
BaselineSF36vitality63.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 15
Comparison: Continuous variables were reported as the mean ± (SD) and categorical data presented as frequency and percentage of the sample. Comparisons between baseline and post-treatment SAQ scores, SF-36v2 scores, and CPET variables were performed using a paired t-test for normally distributed variables or a Wilcoxon signed-rank test for non-normally distributed variables. Normality was defined by the Shapiro-Wilk test. For categorical variables, data were compared using a chi-squared test.p-value: <0.05t-test, 2 sided

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026