Search

Aims: An excessive production of aldosterone influences outcome in patients with heart failure (HF) and in obese patients. Findings from laboratory studies suggest that chronic aldosterone blockade maybe more beneficial in abdominally obese HF-prone rats. In the current study, we investigated if the clinical response to a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist in mildly symptomatic HF patients varied by abdominal obesity.Methods and Results: A total of 2587 NYHA class II, reduced ejection fraction HF (HFrEF) patients enrolled in the EMPHASIS-HF trial were randomly assigned to eplerenone and placebo. In this post hoc analysis, patients were categorized according to waist circumference (WC) (normal if WC < 102 cm in men and < 88 cm in women; abdominal obesity if WC ≥ 102 cm in men and ≥ 88 cm women). The potential statistical interaction between the treatment and WC was assessed on the primary endpoint of death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for HF and other secondary endpoints. Over a median follow-up of 21 months, a significant benefit of eplerenone for the primary outcome was noted in both normal [hazard ratio (HR) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.98, P = 0.03] and increased (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.37-0.63, P < 0.0001) WC subgroups, but the latter patients appeared to receive greater benefit than patients with normal WC (P for interaction = 0.01). This suggests a significant quantitative (treatment effect varies in magnitude by subgroup, but is always in same direction) rather than a qualitative interaction (direction of the treatment effect varies by subgroup) between eplerenone and WC in the adjusted analysis. Mean doses of eplerenone, blood pressure and serum potassium changes and adverse events were similar between WC subgroups.Conclusion: In EMPHASIS-HF, eplerenone improved outcomes in HFrEF patients with and without abdominal obesity, although the benefit appeared to be more pronounced among those with abdominal obesity. The findings are potentially hypothesis generating and need to be replicated in other HFrEF populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The ELITE study showed an association between the angiotensin II antagonist losartan and an unexpected survival benefit in elderly heart-failure patients, compared with captopril, an angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitor. We did the ELITE II Losartan Heart Failure Survival Study to confirm whether losartan is superior to captopril in improving survival and is better tolerated.Methods: We undertook a double-blind, randomised, controlled trial of 3,152 patients aged 60 years or older with New York Heart Association class II-IV heart failure and ejection fraction of 40% or less. Patients, stratified for beta-blocker use, were randomly assigned losartan (n=1,578) titrated to 50 mg once daily or captopril (n=1,574) titrated to 50 mg three times daily. The primary and secondary endpoints were all-cause mortality, and sudden death or resuscitated arrest. We assessed safety and tolerability. Analysis was by intention to treat.Findings: Median follow-up was 555 days. There were no significant differences in all-cause mortality (11.7 vs 10.4% average annual mortality rate) or sudden death or resuscitated arrests (9.0 vs 7.3%) between the two treatment groups (hazard ratios 1.13 [95.7% CI 0.95-1.35], p=0.16 and 1.25 [95% CI 0.98-1.60], p=0.08). Significantly fewer patients in the losartan group (excluding those who died) discontinued study treatment because of adverse effects (9.7 vs 14.7%, p<0.001), including cough (0.3 vs 2.7%). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: It is not known whether concomitant use of aspirin might attenuate the beneficial effects of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs). The purpose of this subgroup analysis was to explore the interaction between baseline aspirin treatment and the effect of eplerenone on the primary efficacy outcomes (composite of hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular mortality), its components, and safety markers [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and serum potassium >5.5 mmol/L] in the Eplerenone in Mild Patients Hospitalization and SurvIval Study in Heart Failure trial (EMPHASIS-HF).Methods and Results: Patients with chronic heart failure, reduced ejection fraction (HFREF), and mild symptoms were enrolled in EMPHASIS-HF. We evaluated baseline characteristics according to aspirin use. We explored the interaction between aspirin and eplerenone, using Cox proportional hazards models providing adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and P-values for interaction. Of the 2737 patients randomized, 1605 patients (58.6%) were taking aspirin. The beneficial effects of eplerenone on the primary endpoint were similar in patients not treated (adjusted HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.75) or treated (adjusted HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.87) with aspirin at baseline (interaction P-value = 0.19). We did not observe any significant modification of the safety markers by aspirin that was clinically meaningful.Conclusion: Aspirin use in patients with chronic systolic heart failure and mild symptoms did not substantially reduce the overall beneficial effects of the MRA eplerenone contrary to what has been described in some studies with ACE inhibitors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents a study that investigated the association of serum digoxin levels with mortality and hospitalization in patients with congestive heart failure and systolic left ventricular dysfunction. Design; Intervention; Outcome measures; Results; Commentary.

Background: and Methods Aldosterone is important in the pathophysiology of heart failure. In a double-blind study, we enrolled 1663 patients who had severe heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction of no more than 35 percent and who were being treated with an angiotensin-converting–enzyme inhibitor, a loop diuretic, and in most cases digoxin. A total of 822 patients were randomly assigned to receive 25 mg of spironolactone daily, and 841 to receive placebo. The primary end point was death from all causes. Results: The trial was discontinued early, after a mean follow-up period of 24 months, because an interim analysis determined that spironolactone was efficacious. There were 386 deaths in the placebo group (46 percent) and 284 in the spironolactone group (35 percent; relative risk of death, 0.70; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.60 to 0.82; P<0.001). This 30 percent reduction in the risk of death among patients in the spironolactone group was attributed to a lower risk of both death from progressive heart failure and sudden death from cardiac causes. The frequency of hospitalization for worsening heart failure was 35 percent lower in the spironolactone group than in the placebo group (relative risk of hospitalization, 0.65; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.54 to 0.77; P<0.001). In addition, patients who received spironolactone had a significant improvement in the symptoms of heart failure, as assessed on the basis of the New York Heart Association functional class (P<0.001). Gynecomastia or breast pain was reported in 10 percent of men who were treated with spironolactone, as compared with 1 percent of men in the placebo group (P<0.001). The incidence of serious hyperkalemia was minimal in both groups of patients. Conclusions: Blockade of aldosterone receptors by spironolactone, in addition to standard therapy, substantially reduces the risk of both morbidity and death among patients with severe heart failure. (N Engl J Med 1999:341:709-17.) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heart failure continues to significantly impact morbidity and mortality after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), especially when associated with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). Therefore, routine use of optimal therapy for patients with heart failure after AMI is needed in the future. Data from the Eplerenone Post–Acute Myocardial Infarction Heart Failure Efficacy and Survival Study (EPHESUS) has demonstrated that addition of eplerenone to standard therapy in patients with LVSD and clinical heart failure post-AMI significantly improves outcomes in these patients, providing the basis for acceptance of aldosterone blockade as an integral component of therapy. However, further studies are needed to more broadly explore the usefulness of aldosterone blockade in heart failure therapy. As research clarifies the many complex pathophysiologic processes involved in post-AMI remodeling, treatment should continue to move beyond symptom-targeted therapies to disease- and mechanism-targeted therapies that will further improve outcomes in the setting of heart failure post-AMI and beyond. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Impairment in left ventricular systolic function has been described in heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), but its prognostic relevance is not known. We determined whether left ventricular longitudinal strain (LS) is predictive of cardiovascular outcomes in HFpEF beyond clinical and conventional echocardiographic measures. Methods and Results: LS was assessed by 2-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography at baseline in 447 patients with HFpEF enrolled in the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) trial. At a median follow-up of 2.6 years (interquartile range, 1.5-3.9 years), 115 patients experienced the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization, or aborted cardiac arrest. Impaired LS, defined as an absolute LS <15.8%, was present in 52% of patients and was predictive of the composite outcome (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-3.66; P=0.005), cardiovascular death alone (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.44-7.12; P=0.004), and HF hospitalization alone (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-4.28; P=0.016) after adjustment for clinical and conventional echocardiographic variables. LS was the strongest echocardiographic predictor of the composite outcome. Exploratory analysis in a subset of 131 patients with follow-up LS assessed after 12 to 18 months demonstrated a trend toward improvement in LS associated with spironolactone in patients enrolled in the Americas but not in Russia or Georgia. Conclusions: Impaired left ventricular systolic function is a powerful predictor of HF hospitalization, cardiovascular death, or aborted cardiac arrest in HFpEF independent of clinical predictors. Impaired LS represents a novel imaging biomarker to identify patients with HFpEF at particularly high risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00094302. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: There is minimal evidence that HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) are beneficial in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). Treatment with statins may lead to a lower mortality in CHF, independent of cholesterol levels, CHF etiology and clinical status. Methods: In a first study, we included 3132 patients with CHF from the ELITE 2 study in whom information on body mass index (BMI) and statin use at baseline were available. In a second study, we pooled the databases of 5 tertiary referral centers with 2068 CHF patients. In this cohort 705 patients were on a statin (34%), 585 of 1202 (49%) patients with ischemic etiology, and 120 of 866 (14%) patients with non-ischemic etiology (established by coronary angiography). Findings: Patients in ELITE 2 who received statin therapy at baseline (n =397, 13%) had lower mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.61, 95% CI 0.45–0.83; p =0.0007). In univariate analysis, increasing age, NYHA class, creatinine, and decreasing BMI, LVEF, and cholesterol, as well as lack of beta-blocker treatment and ischemic etiology (all p <0.002) related to higher mortality. In multivariable analysis, statin therapy related to lower mortality independently of all these variables (adjusted HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47–0.93; p =0.017). In the second study CHF patients on statins had lower mortality (adjusted HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.44–0.77; p =0.0001). Both in patients with ischemic (p <0.0001) and non-ischemic etiology (p =0.028) statin treatment related to better survival. Interpretation: In chronic heart failure, treatment with statins is related to lower mortality, independent of cholesterol levels, disease etiology and clinical status. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The Losartan Heart Failure ELITE Study recently found that in patients with symptomatic heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction of ≤0.40, losartan compared to captopril improved survival with better tolerability. The objective of this study was to perform an economic evaluation of losartan versus captopril based on the results of the Losartan Heart Failure ELITE Study. The Losartan Heart Failure ELITE Study was a multinational, double-blind, randomized 48-week study comparing the safety and efficacy of losartan to captopril in angiotensin-converting enzyme-inhibitor-naive patients ≥65 years with symptomatic heart failure. Data on health care resource utilization were collected as part of the trial. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to estimate the lifetime benefits of treatment and the associated costs. We observed no differences between treatments in the number of hospitalizations, hospital days, and emergency room visits per patient over the trial period. We estimated the total cost of losartan to be USD 54 (95% CI: USD –1,717, USD 1,755) less per patient than captopril over this time frame. We also estimated that over the projected remaining lifetime of the study population, losartan compared to captopril would increase survival by 0.20 years (undiscounted) at an average cost of USD 769 (discounted) more per patient. This cost increase translated into a cost-effectiveness ratio of USD 4,047 per year of life gained for losartan relative to captopril. In patients with symptomatic heart failure, losartan compared to captopril increased survival with better tolerability at a cost well within the range accepted as cost-effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]