Search

Aim: Eplerenone reduces the risk of cardiovascular death or first hospitalization for heart failure (HF) in patients with HF and a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but it is still frequently underused in routine practice. We evaluated the time course of benefits of eplerenone after its initiation in HFrEF patients from the EMPHASIS‐HF trial. Methods and results: The EMPHASIS‐HF trial was a double‐blind randomized clinical trial assessing the effect of eplerenone in patients (n = 2737, mean age 68.6 ± 7.6 years, 22.3% women) with HFrEF and mild symptoms. The time trajectories for the effect of eplerenone versus placebo on the primary composite endpoint (cardiovascular death or first hospitalization for HF) were investigated using Cox proportional hazards models with truncated data at each day post‐randomization. A significant reduction in the primary composite endpoint was observed 26 days after randomization (hazard ratio 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.34–1.00, p = 0.049). Eplerenone was first associated with a significant reduction in the primary endpoint in 35 days or less in most subgroups, including patients with HF history ≥18 months (day 24), estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min (day 12), ischaemic HF aetiology (day 28), age ≥65 years (day 28), narrow QRS (day 30), higher MAGGIC score (day 35), lower potassium (day 30), left ventricular ejection fraction ≥30% (day 28) or already treated with beta‐blockers (day 25). Conclusions: Eplerenone provides statistically significant and clinically meaningful benefits shortly after treatment initiation in most patients, irrespective of clinical profile. This result reinforces the need for an early initiation of eplerenone in HFrEF, as part of rapidly instituting guideline‐directed medical therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) improve outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but are underutilized. Hyperkalaemia may be one reason, but the underlying reasons for underuse are unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the independent predictors of MRA underuse in a large and unselected HFrEF cohort.Methods and Results: We included patients with HFrEF (ejection fraction <40%), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-IV and heart failure (HF) duration ≥6 months from the Swedish HF Registry. Logistic regression analysis identified independent associations between 39 demographic, clinical, co-treatment, and socioeconomic predictors and MRA non-use. Of 11 215 patients, 27% were women; mean age was 75 ± 11 years; only 4443 (40%) patients received MRA. Selected characteristics independently associated with MRA non-use were in descending order of magnitude: lower creatinine clearance (<60 mL/min), no need for diuretics, no cardiac resynchronization therapy/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, higher blood pressure, no digoxin use, higher ejection fraction, outpatient setting, older age, lower income, ischaemic heart disease, male sex, follow-up in primary vs. specialty care, lower NYHA class, and absence of hypertension diagnosis. Plasma potassium and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide levels were not associated with MRA non-use.Conclusion: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists remain underused in HFrEF. Their use does not decrease with elevated potassium but does with impaired renal function, even in the creatinine clearance 30-59.9 mL/min range where MRAs are not contraindicated. MRA underuse may be further related to non-specialist care, milder HF and no use of other HF therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Health status outcomes, including symptoms, function, and quality of life, are worse for Black compared with White patients with heart failure. Sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) reduce cardiovascular mortality and improve health status in patients with heart failure, but whether the health status benefit of SGLT2is is similar across races is not established. The objective of this study was to compare the treatment effect of SGLT2is (versus placebo) on health status for Black compared with White patients with heart failure. METHODS: We combined patient-level data from 3 randomized clinical trials of SGLT2is: DEFINE-HF (Dapagliflozin Effect on Symptoms and Biomarkers in Patients With Heart Failure; n=263), PRESERVED-HF (Dapagliflozin in Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure; n=324), and CHIEF-HF (A Study on Impact of Canagliflozin on Health Status, Quality of Life, and Functional Status in Heart Failure; n=448). These 3 United States–based trials enrolled a substantial proportion of Black patients, and each used the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) to measure health status at baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment. Among 1035 total participants, selecting self-identified Black and White patients with complete information yielded a final analytic cohort of 935 patients. The primary endpoint was KCCQ Clinical Summary score. Twelve-week change in KCCQ with SGLT2is versus placebo was compared between Black and White patients by testing the interaction between race and treatment using multivariable linear regression models adjusted for trial, baseline KCCQ (as a restricted cubic spline), race, and treatment. The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. RESULTS: Among 935 participants, 236 (25%) self-identified as Black, and 469 (50.2%) were treated with an SGLT2i. Treatment with an SGLT2i, compared with placebo, resulted in KCCQ Clinical Summary score improvements at 12 weeks of +4.0 points (95% CI, 1.7–6.3; P =0.0007) in White patients and +4.7 points (95% CI, 0.7–8.7; P =0.02) in Black patients, with no significant interaction by race and treatment (P =0.76). Other KCCQ scales showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with an SGLT2i resulted in consistent and significant improvements in health status for both Black and White patients with heart failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Loop diuretics are a primary therapy for the symptomatic treatment of heart failure (HF), but whether torsemide improves patient symptoms and quality of life better than furosemide remains unknown. As prespecified secondary end points, the TRANSFORM-HF trial (Torsemide Comparison With Furosemide for Management of Heart Failure) compared the effect of torsemide versus furosemide on patient-reported outcomes among patients with HF. Methods: TRANSFORM-HF was an open-label, pragmatic, randomized trial of 2859 patients hospitalized for HF (regardless of ejection fraction) across 60 hospitals in the United States. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to a loop diuretic strategy of torsemide or furosemide with investigator-selected dosage. This report examined effects on prespecified secondary end points, which included Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS; assessed as adjusted mean difference in change from baseline; range, 0–100 with 100 indicating best health status; clinically important difference, ≥5 points) and Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (range, 0–6; score ≥3 supporting evaluation for depression) over 12 months. Results: Baseline data were available for 2787 (97.5%) patients for KCCQ-CSS and 2624 (91.8%) patients for Patient Health Questionnaire-2. Median (interquartile range) baseline KCCQ-CSS was 42 (27–60) in the torsemide group and 40 (24–59) in the furosemide group. At 12 months, there was no significant difference between torsemide and furosemide in change from baseline in KCCQ-CSS (adjusted mean difference, 0.06 [95% CI, –2.26 to 2.37]; P =0.96) or the proportion of patients with Patient Health Questionnaire-2 score ≥3 (15.1% versus 13.2%: P =0.34). Results for KCCQ-CSS were similar at 1 month (adjusted mean difference, 1.36 [95% CI, –0.64 to 3.36]; P =0.18) and 6-month follow-up (adjusted mean difference, –0.37 [95% CI, –2.52 to 1.78]; P =0.73), and across subgroups by ejection fraction phenotype, New York Heart Association class at randomization, and loop diuretic agent before hospitalization. Irrespective of baseline KCCQ-CSS tertile, there was no significant difference between torsemide and furosemide on change in KCCQ-CSS, all-cause mortality, or all-cause hospitalization. Conclusions: Among patients discharged after hospitalization for HF, a strategy of torsemide compared with furosemide did not improve symptoms or quality of life over 12 months. The effects of torsemide and furosemide on patient-reported outcomes were similar regardless of ejection fraction, previous loop diuretic use, and baseline health status. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03296813. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors improve outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, less is known about their effectiveness in patients with HFrEF and advanced kidney disease. In the Medicare-linked Organized Program to Initiate Lifesaving Treatment in Hospitalized Patients with Heart Failure (OPTIMIZE-HF), 1582 patients with HFrEF (ejection fraction ≤40%) had advanced kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m2). Of these, 829 were not receiving angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) prior to admission, of whom 214 were initiated on these drugs prior to discharge. We calculated propensity scores for receipt of these drugs for each of the 829 patients and assembled a matched cohort of 388 patients, balanced on 47 baseline characteristics (mean age 78 years; 52% women; 10% African American; 73% receiving beta-blockers). Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated comparing 2-year outcomes in 194 patients initiated on ACE inhibitors or ARBs to 194 patients not initiated on those drugs. The combined endpoint of heart failure readmission or all-cause mortality occurred in 79% and 84% of patients initiated and not initiated on ACE inhibitors or ARBs, respectively (HR associated with initiation, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.63-0.98). Respective HRs (95% CI) for the individual endpoints of - Respective HRs (95% CI) for the individual endpoints of all-cause mortality and heart failure readmission were 0.81 (0.63–1.03) and 0.63 (0.47–0.85). The findings from our study add new information to the body of cumulative evidence that suggest that renin-angiotensin system inhibitors may improve clinical outcomes in patients with HFrEF and advanced kidney disease. These hypothesis-generating findings need to be replicated in contemporary patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To evaluate the effect of finerenone by baseline HbA1c, HbA1c variability, diabetes duration and baseline insulin use on cardiorenal outcomes and diabetes progression. Materials and Methods: Composite efficacy outcomes included cardiovascular (cardiovascular death, non‐fatal myocardial infarction, non‐fatal stroke or hospitalization for heart failure), kidney (kidney failure, sustained ≥ 57% estimated glomerular filtration rate decline or renal death) and diabetes progression (new insulin initiation, increase in antidiabetic medication, 1.0% increase in HbA1c from baseline, new diabetic ketoacidosis diagnosis or uncontrolled diabetes). Results: In 13 026 participants, risk reductions in the cardiovascular and kidney composite outcomes with finerenone versus placebo were consistent across HbA1c quartiles (P interaction.52 and.09, respectively), HbA1c variability (P interaction.48 and.10), diabetes duration (P interaction.12 and.75) and insulin use (P interaction.16 and.52). HbA1c variability in the first year of treatment was associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular and kidney events (hazard ratio [HR] 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07‐1.35; P =.0016 and HR 1.36; 95% CI 1.21‐1.52; P <.0001, respectively). There was no effect on diabetes progression with finerenone or placebo (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.95‐1.04). Finerenone was well‐tolerated across subgroups; discontinuation and hospitalization because of hyperkalaemia were low. Conclusions: Finerenone efficacy was not modified by baseline HbA1c, HbA1c variability, diabetes duration or baseline insulin use. Greater HbA1c variability appeared to be associated with an increased risk of cardiorenal outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Diabetic retinopathy, phase III study, randomized trial, type 2 diabetes Keywords: diabetic retinopathy; phase III study; randomized trial; type 2 diabetes EN diabetic retinopathy phase III study randomized trial type 2 diabetes 894 898 5 02/03/23 20230301 NES 230301 BACKGROUND/CONTEXT Diabetic retinopathy (DR) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are two major forms of microvascular complications in patients with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes (T2D), with shared risk factors (such as poor glycaemic control, smoking, hypertension and dyslipidaemia) and clinical manifestations (microvascular lesions).[1] The steroid hormone aldosterone, which binds to mineralocorticoid receptors, promotes vascular pathology in the retina relevant to the development of DR[2]; antagonism of the retinal mineralocorticoid receptor-aldosterone system may delay progression.[3] Finerenone, a potent and selective, orally administered, non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA), slowed progression of CKD and reduced the risk of cardiovascular outcomes versus placebo in patients with CKD and T2D in the FIDELIO-DKD (NCT02540993; n = 5674) and FIGARO-DKD (NCT02545049; n = 7352) randomized phase 3 trials.[[4]] In total, 2657 (46.8%) patients in FIDELIO-DKD and 2265 (30.8%) in FIGARO-DKD had DR at baseline.[[6]] No further details on DR were collected in these studies. Effect of finerenone on the occurrence of vision-threatening complications in patients with non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy: Pooled analysis of two studies using routine ophthalmological examinations from clinical trial participants (ReFineDR/DeFineDR) Diabetic retinopathy is a prognostic factor for progression of chronic kidney disease in the patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. [Extracted from the article]

Aims: To explore the modifying effect of glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist (GLP‐1RA) use on outcomes with finerenone across a wide spectrum of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the pooled analysis of FIDELIO‐DKD and FIGARO‐DKD. Materials and methods: Patients with T2D and CKD treated with optimized renin‐angiotensin system blockade were randomized to finerenone or placebo. Effects of finerenone on a cardiovascular composite outcome (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure) and a kidney composite outcome (kidney failure, sustained ≥57% estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] decline, or renal death), change in urine albumin‐to‐creatinine ratio (UACR), and safety were analysed by GLP‐1RA use. Results: Of 13 026 patients, 944 (7.2%) used GLP‐1RAs at baseline. Finerenone reduced the risk of the cardiovascular composite outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52–1.11 with GLP‐1RA; HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79–0.96 without GLP‐1RA; P‐interaction = 0.63) and the kidney composite outcome (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.45–1.48 with GLP‐1RA; HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67–0.89 without GLP‐1RA; P‐interaction = 0.79) irrespective of baseline GLP‐1RA use. Reduction in UACR with finerenone at Month 4 was –38% in patients with baseline GLP‐1RA use compared with –31% in those without GLP‐1RA use (P‐interaction = 0.03). Overall safety and incidence of hyperkalaemia were similar, irrespective of GLP‐1RA use. Conclusions: The cardiorenal benefits of finerenone on composite cardiovascular and kidney outcomes and UACR reduction in patients with CKD and T2D appear to be maintained, regardless of GLP‐1RA use. Subsequent studies are needed to investigate any potential benefit of this combination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the author's views on a research which finds that N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP)-guided management reduces rehospitalization of heart failure (HF) patients. The author observes that adding NT-proBNP-guided management in HF results in significant reduction in mortality, however, it is still unclear whether measurement of NT-proBNP should become a routine part of HF management.

The article presents information on the review of effectiveness of the remote patient monitoring (RPM) for management of patients with heart failures. The studies assessed the effects of RPM in patients with chronic heart failure. Many databases were searched for full-text articles of randomized controlled trials. The study highlighted that RPM reduces mortality and hospitalization for heart failure in comparison to usual care. Also discussion on the result is presented.

The article presents information on the research study conducted to find the frequency and hospitalization after diagnosis of heart failure. 1077 patients with prognostic factors including age, hypertension, body mass index underwent the study. The study found that 83 percent of patients had 1 hospitalization after diagnosis of heart failure and more than half of them were for noncardiovascular causes.

The article discusses the findings of the study ONTARGET and TRANSCEND which examines the efficacy of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibition and blockade to reduce the mortality and morbidity rate of cardiovascular diseases in the U.S. It notes that the effectiveness of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) with angiotensin receptor blocking agents has been studied. It relates that the effective strategy to prevent the effects of RAAS activation has been provided.

A response by Doctor Pitt Bertram to a letter to the editor about his article "Comparative Effectiveness of Β -Blockers in Elderly Patients With Heart Failure" in the 2008 issue is presented.

The article comments on a study by W. Marz, et. al. on the relationship between N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and risk of cardiovascular (CV) and all-cause mortality in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). According to the author, the study results extend the prognostic use of NT-proBNP and may improve risk stratification in patients with CAD.

The author reflects on a study, conducted by W.E. Boden and colleagues, which compares the effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) plus optimal medical therapy (OMT) and OMT alone for preventing cardiovascular events in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). He views that the use of drug-eluting stents (DLS) in the study was suboptimal; however, no evidence exists that DLS decrease the incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) compared with bare-metal stents.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Sudden Death in Patients with Myocardial Infarction" in the June 23, 2005 issue.

Presents the author's comments on the effectiveness of peridischarge multidisciplinary treatment programme in hospitals. Role of physician and nurse management programmes in reducing hospital admission for heart failure; Use of proven pharmacological strategies and optimal closing in reducing total mortality; Prevention of hypertension and other cardiovascular risk factors.

The article focuses on the effectiveness of statins in the treatment of stable coronary heart disease (CHD). Secondary prevention trials have shown that statins reduce the clinical consequences of atherosclerosis, including death from cardiovascular causes and heart failure. Current guidelines for patients with stable CHD recommend a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level of less than 100 mg per deciliter. Researcher J.C. LaRosa and associates have studied the effectiveness and safety of reducing LDL cholesterol levels in patients with stable CHD to less than 70 mg per deciliter. The article states that patients and their physicians should be careful in weighing the benefits of a reduction in the risk of cardiovascular events against death risks from noncardiovascular causes.

The author presents his views on angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors for patients with vascular diseas whtihout left ventricle dysfunction. He notes that a study titled "Prevention of Events with Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibition Trial," which showed that patients who received trandolapril experienced no positive effects from the drug.

The article comments on the study conducted to analyses the efficacy of Candesartan to reduce mortality and hospital admissions in chronic heart failure (CHF). The study extends the knowledge of the role of angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARBs) in patients with CHF. It is likely mat ARBs used at the appropriate dose, such as valsartan 160 mg twice daily or candesartan 32 mg daily, are equivalent to target doses of an ACE inhibitor, such as enalapril 10 mg twice daily. In patients with severe heart failure, an aldosterone blocker might be the preferred agent to add to an ACE inhibitor and a β-blocker rather than an ARB based on the results of a study.

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.

A response by B. Pitt to a letter to the editor about his article "Eplerenone, a Selective Aldosterone Blocker, in Patients With Left Ventricular Dysfunction After Myocardial Infarction" in a 2003 issue is presented.

Background: Aldosterone blockade reduces mortality and morbidity among patients with severe heart failure. We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the effect of eplerenone, a selective aldosterone blocker, on morbidity and mortality among patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by left ventricular dysfunction and heart failure. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to eplerenone (25 mg per day initially, titrated to a maximum of 50 mg per day; 3313 patients) or placebo (3319 patients) in addition to optimal medical therapy. The study continued until 1012 deaths occurred. The primary end points were death from any cause and death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, or ventricular arrhythmia. Results: During a mean follow-up of 16 months, there were 478 deaths in the eplerenone group and 554 deaths in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.85; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.75 to 0.96; P=0.008). Of these deaths, 407 in the eplerenone group and 483 in the placebo group were attributed to cardiovascular causes (relative risk, 0.83; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.72 to 0.94; P=0.005). The rate of the other primary end point, death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for cardiovascular events, was reduced by eplerenone (relative risk, 0.87; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.79 to 0.95; P=0.002), as was the secondary end point of death from any cause or any hospitalization (relative risk, 0.92; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.86 to 0.98; P=0.02). There was also a reduction in the rate of sudden death from cardiac causes (relative risk, 0.79; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.64 to 0.97; P=0.03). The rate of serious hyperkalemia was 5.5 percent in the eplerenone group and 3.9 percent in the placebo group (P=0.002), whereas the rate of hypokalemia was 8.4 percent in the eplerenone group and 13.1 percent in the placebo group (P<0.001). Conclusions: The addition of eplerenone to optimal medical therapy reduces morbidity and mortality among patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by left ventricular dysfunction and heart failure. N Engl J Med 2003;348:1309-21. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A response from Bertram Pitt and Alfonso Perez to several letters to the editor on their article "The Effect of Spironolactone on Morbidity and Mortality in Patients With Severe Heart Failure," previously published in the September 2, 1999 issue of the "New England Journal of Medicine" is presented.

Key Points: Question: Does torsemide reduce all-cause mortality compared with furosemide in patients with heart failure following hospitalization? Findings: In this randomized clinical trial of 2859 patients, 26.1% of patients randomized to torsemide and 26.2% randomized to furosemide died over a median follow-up of 17.4 months without a significant difference between groups. Meaning: Among patients discharged after hospitalization for heart failure, torsemide compared with furosemide did not result in a significant difference in all-cause mortality over 12 months; however, interpretation of these findings is limited by loss to follow-up and participant crossover and nonadherence. Importance: Although furosemide is the most commonly used loop diuretic in patients with heart failure, some studies suggest a potential benefit for torsemide. Objective: To determine whether torsemide results in decreased mortality compared with furosemide among patients hospitalized for heart failure. Design, Setting, and Participants: TRANSFORM-HF was an open-label, pragmatic randomized trial that recruited 2859 participants hospitalized with heart failure (regardless of ejection fraction) at 60 hospitals in the United States. Recruitment occurred from June 2018 through March 2022, with follow-up through 30 months for death and 12 months for hospitalizations. The final date for follow-up data collection was July 2022. Interventions: Loop diuretic strategy of torsemide (n = 1431) or furosemide (n = 1428) with investigator-selected dosage. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality in a time-to-event analysis. There were 5 secondary outcomes with all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization and total hospitalizations assessed over 12 months being highest in the hierarchy. The prespecified primary hypothesis was that torsemide would reduce all-cause mortality by 20% compared with furosemide. Results: TRANSFORM-HF randomized 2859 participants with a median age of 65 years (IQR, 56-75), 36.9% were women, and 33.9% were Black. Over a median follow-up of 17.4 months, a total of 113 patients (53 [3.7%] in the torsemide group and 60 [4.2%] in the furosemide group) withdrew consent from the trial prior to completion. Death occurred in 373 of 1431 patients (26.1%) in the torsemide group and 374 of 1428 patients (26.2%) in the furosemide group (hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.89-1.18]). Over 12 months following randomization, all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization occurred in 677 patients (47.3%) in the torsemide group and 704 patients (49.3%) in the furosemide group (hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.83-1.02]). There were 940 total hospitalizations among 536 participants in the torsemide group and 987 total hospitalizations among 577 participants in the furosemide group (rate ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.84-1.07]). Results were similar across prespecified subgroups, including among patients with reduced, mildly reduced, or preserved ejection fraction. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients discharged after hospitalization for heart failure, torsemide compared with furosemide did not result in a significant difference in all-cause mortality over 12 months. However, interpretation of these findings is limited by loss to follow-up and participant crossover and nonadherence. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03296813 This clinical trial compares the efficacy of torsemide vs furosemide in decreasing the risk of death from any cause among patients hospitalized for heart failure (regardless of ejection fraction). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Spironolactone is currently used in a large proportion of patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), yet its effect on cardiac structure and function in a large population has not been well established. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of spironolactone on key echocardiographic parameters in HFpEF. Methods and results: An individual‐patient‐data meta‐analysis of three randomized trials (HOMAGE, Aldo‐DHF, and TOPCAT) was performed comparing spironolactone (9–12 month exposure) to placebo (or control) for the changes in left atrial volume index (LAVi), left ventricular mass index (LVMi), interventricular septum (IVS) thickness, E/e′ ratio, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) among patients with stage B (HOMAGE) or C (Aldo‐DHF and TOPCAT) HFpEF. Analysis of covariance was used to test the effect of spironolactone on echocardiographic changes. A total of 984 patients were included in this analysis: 452 (45.9%) from HOMAGE, 398 (40.4%) from Aldo‐DHF, and 134 (13.6%) from TOPCAT. The pooled‐cohort patient's median age was 71 (66–77) years and 39% were women. Median LAVi was 29 (24–35) ml/m2, LVMi 100 (84–118) g/m2, IVS thickness 12 (10–13) mm, E/e′ ratio 11 (9–13), and LVEF 64 (59–69)%. Spironolactone reduced LAVi by −1.1 (−2.0 to −0.1) ml/m2 (p = 0.03); LVMi by −3.6 (−6.4 to −0.8) g/m2 (p = 0.01); IVS thickness by −0.2 (−0.3 to −0.1) mm (p = 0.01); E/e′ ratio by −1.3 (−2.4 to −0.2) (p = 0.02); and increased LVEF by 1.7 (0.8–2.6)% (p < 0.01). No treatment‐by‐study heterogeneity was found except for E/e′ ratio with a larger effect in Aldo‐DHF and TOPCAT (interaction p < 0.01). Conclusions: Spironolactone improved cardiac structure and function of patients with HFpEF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: Finerenone reduced the risk of kidney and cardiovascular events in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and type 2 diabetes in the FIDELIO-DKD and FIGARO-DKD phase 3 studies. Effects of finerenone on outcomes in patients taking sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) were evaluated in a prespecified pooled analysis of these studies. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients with type 2 diabetes and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) ≥30 to ≤5,000 mg/g and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥25 mL/min/1.73 m2 were randomly assigned to finerenone or placebo; SGLT2is were permitted at any time. Outcomes included cardiovascular composite (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure) and kidney composite (kidney failure, sustained ≥57% eGFR decline, or renal death) end points, changes in UACR and eGFR, and safety outcomes. RESULTS: Among 13,026 patients, 877 (6.7%) received an SGLT2i at baseline and 1,113 (8.5%) initiated one during the trial. For the cardiovascular composite, the hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.87 (95% CI 0.79–0.96) without SGLT2i and 0.67 (95% CI 0.42–1.07) with SGLT2i. For the kidney composite, the HRs were 0.80 (95% CI 0.69–0.92) without SGLT2i and 0.42 (95% CI 0.16–1.08) with SGLT2i. Baseline SGLT2i use did not affect risk reduction for the cardiovascular or kidney composites with finerenone (Pinteraction = 0.46 and 0.29, respectively); neither did SGLT2i use concomitant with study treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Benefits of finerenone compared with placebo on cardiorenal outcomes in patients with CKD and type 2 diabetes were observed irrespective of SGLT2i use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Disorders of potassium homeostasis can potentiate the already elevated risk of arrhythmia in heart failure. Heart failure patients have a high prevalence of chronic kidney disease, which further heightens the risk of hyperkalemia, especially when renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors are used. Acute treatment for hyperkalemia may not be tolerated in the long term. Recent data for patiromer and sodium zirconium cyclosilicate, used to treat and prevent high serum potassium levels on a more chronic basis, have sparked interest in the treatment of hyperkalemia, as well as the potential use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors in patients who were previously unable to take these drugs or tolerated only low doses. This review discusses the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and outcomes of hyperkalemia in heart failure; provides an overview of traditional and novel ways to approach management of hyperkalemia; and discusses the need for further research to optimally treat heart failure. [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]

During ATMOSPHERE, a trial comparing aliskiren, enalapril, or both for heart failure, two other trials suggested harm from aliskiren in patients with diabetes, and regulators stopped aliskiren in such patients in ATMOSPHERE. The data monitoring committee suggests that regulators should trust the DMC to ensure patient safety in a clinical trial. The trial sponsor (Novartis) and the regulatory agencies have responded in letters to the editor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A response is presented by Bertram Pitt, David Waters and William Virgil Brown to a letter to the editor about their article "Aggressive lipid-lowering therapy compared with angioplasty in stable coronary artery disease" which appeared in the July 8, 1999 issue.

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]

Background: Percutaneous coronary revascularization is widely used in improving symptoms and exercise performance in patients with ischemic heart disease and stable angina pectoris. In this study, we compared percutaneous coronary revascularization with lipid-lowering treatment for reducing the incidence of ischemic events. Methods: We studied 341 patients with stable coronary artery disease, relatively normal left ventricular function, asymptomatic or mild-to-moderate angina, and a serum level of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol of at least 115 mg per deciliter (3.0 mmol per liter) who were referred for percutaneous revascularization. We randomly assigned the patients either to receive medical treatment with atorvastatin, at 80 mg per day (164 patients), or to undergo the recommended percutaneous revascularization procedure (angioplasty) followed by usual care, which could include lipid-lowering treatment (177 patients). The follow-up period was 18 months. Results: Twenty-two (13 percent) of the patients who received aggressive lipid-lowering treatment with atorvastatin (resulting in a 46 percent reduction in the mean serum LDL cholesterol level, to 77 mg per deciliter [2.0 mmol per liter]) had ischemic events, as compared with 37 (21 percent) of the patients who underwent angioplasty (who had an 18 percent reduction in the mean serum LDL cholesterol level, to 119 mg per deciliter [3.0 mmol per liter]). The incidence of ischemic events was thus 36 percent lower in the atorvastatin group over an 18-month period (P=0.048, which was not statistically significant after adjustment for interim analyses). This reduction in events was due to a smaller number of angioplasty procedures, coronary-artery bypass operations, and hospitalizations for worsening angina. As compared with the patients who were treated with angioplasty and usual care, the patients who received atorvastatin had a significantly longer time to the first ischemic event (P=0.03). Conclusions: In low-risk patients with stable coronary artery disease, aggressive lipid-lowering therapy is at least as effective as angioplasty and usual care in reducing the incidence of ischemic events. (N Engl J Med 1999;341:70-6.) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors are foundational therapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but underlying mechanisms of benefit are not well defined. We sought to investigate the relationships between sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor treatment, changes in metabolic pathways, and outcomes using targeted metabolomics.Methods: DEFINE-HF (Dapagliflozin Effects on Biomarkers, Symptoms and Functional Status in Patients With HF With Reduced Ejection Fraction) was a placebo-controlled trial of dapagliflozin in HFrEF. We performed targeted mass spectrometry profiling of 63 metabolites (45 acylcarnitines [markers of fatty acid oxidation], 15 amino acids, and 3 conventional metabolites) in plasma samples at randomization and 12 weeks. Using mixed models, we identified principal components analysis-defined metabolite clusters that changed differentially with treatment and examined the relationship between change in metabolite clusters and change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores and NT-proBNP (N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide). Models were adjusted for relevant clinical covariates and nominal P<0.05 with false discovery rate-adjusted P<0.10 was used to determine statistical significance.Results: Among the 234 DEFINE-HF participants with targeted metabolomic data, the mean age was 62.0±11.1 years, 25% were women, 38% were Black, and mean ejection fraction was 27±8%. Dapagliflozin increased ketone-related and short-chain acylcarnitine as well as medium-chain acylcarnitine principal components analysis-defined metabolite clusters compared with placebo (nominal P=0.01, false discovery rate-adjusted P=0.08 for both clusters). However, ketosis (β-hydroxybutyrate levels >500 μmol/L) was achieved infrequently (3 [2.5%] in dapagliflozin arm versus 1 [0.9%] in placebo arm) and supraphysiologic levels were not observed. Increases in long-chain acylcarnitine, long-chain dicarboxylacylcarnitine, and aromatic amino acid metabolite clusters were associated with decreases in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores (ie, worse quality of life) and increases in NT-proBNP levels, without interaction by treatment group.Conclusions: In this study of targeted metabolomics in a placebo-controlled trial of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in HFrEF, we observed effects of dapagliflozin on key metabolic pathways, supporting a role for altered ketone and fatty acid biology with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in patients with HFrEF. Only physiologic levels of ketosis were observed. In addition, we identified several metabolic biomarkers associated with adverse HFrEF outcomes.Registration: URL: https://www.Clinicaltrials: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02653482. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) form a cornerstone of the management of heart failure (HF), but little is known about the long-term effects of MRA therapy on kidney function. We evaluated acute and chronic estimated glomerular function (eGFR) slopes in the two largest completed trials testing steroidal MRAs in chronic HF.Methods and Results: We conducted parallel post hoc eGFR slope analyses in two multinational, double-blind randomized, placebo-controlled trials of steroidal MRAs in chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction (EMPHASIS-HF) and preserved ejection fraction (TOPCAT Americas region). GFR was estimated using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation. Annual slopes of eGFR were assessed by generalized random coefficient models. Least square mean differences in eGFR slopes between steroidal MRA and placebo arms were assessed. Median follow-up was 1.8 years (EMPHASIS-HF) and 3.3 years (TOPCAT Americas). From baseline to month 4-6 ('acute eGFR slope'), compared to placebo, MRA treatment led to an acute decline in eGFR of -2.4 ml/min/1.73 m2 (95% confidence interval [CI] -3.4 to -1.4; p < 0.001) and -2.0 ml/min/1.73 m2 (95% CI -3.0 to -1.8; p < 0.001) in EMPHASIS-HF and TOPCAT Americas, respectively. From month 4-6 to end of study, there was no difference in 'chronic eGFR slope' between MRA and placebo arms (-0.3 ml/min/1.73 m2 /year [95% CI -1.3 to 0.7; p = 0.53] and 0.1 ml/min/1.73 m2 /year [95% CI -1.4 to 1.7; p = 0.86]) in EMPHASIS-HF and TOPCAT Americas, respectively.Conclusions: Steroidal MRAs result in acute declines in eGFR but do not modify long-term kidney disease trajectories in chronic HF with reduced or preserved ejection fraction.Clinical Trial Registration: EMPHASIS-HF (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00232180) and TOPCAT (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00094302). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) antagonism is a well-established treatment modality for patients with hypertension, heart failure, and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) post-myocardial infarction (MI). There are emerging data showing potential benefits of MR antagonists in other cardiovascular conditions. Studies have shown association between MR activation and the development of myocardial fibrosis, coronary artery disease, metabolic syndrome, and cerebrovascular diseases. This review examines the preclinical and clinical data of MR antagonists for novel indications including heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF), pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), arrhythmia, sudden cardiac death, valvular heart disease, metabolic syndrome, renal disease, and stroke. MR antagonists are not licensed for these conditions yet; however, emerging data suggest that indication for MR antagonists are likely to broaden; further studies are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist finerenone and the sodium–glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT-2i) canagliflozin reduce cardiorenal risk in albuminuric patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). At first glance, the results of Finerenone in Reducing Kidney Failure and Disease Progression in Diabetic Kidney Disease (FIDELIO-DKD) (ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02540993) and Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes with Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation (CREDENCE) appear disparate. In FIDELIO-DKD, the primary endpoint had an 18% [95% confidence interval (CI) 7–27] relative risk reduction; in CREDENCE, the primary endpoint had a 30% (95% CI 18–41) relative risk reduction. Unlike CREDENCE, the FIDELIO-DKD trial included patients with high albuminuria but excluded patients with symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The primary endpoint in the FIDELIO-DKD trial was kidney specific and included a sustained decline in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of ≥40% from baseline. In contrast, the primary endpoint in the CREDENCE trial included a sustained decline in eGFR of ≥57% from baseline and cardiovascular (CV) death. This post hoc exploratory analysis investigated how differences in trial design—inclusion/exclusion criteria and definition of primary outcomes—influenced observed treatment effects. Methods Patients from FIDELIO-DKD who met the CKD inclusion criteria of the CREDENCE study (urine albumin: creatinine ratio >300–5000 mg/g and an eGFR of 30–<90 mL/min/1.73 m2 at screening) were included in this analysis. The primary endpoint was a cardiorenal composite (CV death, kidney failure, eGFR decrease of ≥57% sustained for ≥4 weeks or renal death). Patients with symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction were excluded from FIDELIO-DKD. Therefore, in a sensitivity analysis, we further adjusted for the baseline prevalence of heart failure. Results Of 4619/5674 (81.4%) patients who met the subgroup inclusion criteria, 49.6% were treated with finerenone and 50.4% received placebo. The rate of the cardiorenal composite endpoint was 43.9/1000 patient-years with finerenone compared with 59.5/1000 patient-years with placebo. The relative risk was significantly reduced by 26% with finerenone versus placebo [hazard ratio (HR) 0.74 (95% CI 0.63–0.87)]. In CREDENCE, the rate of the cardiorenal composite endpoint was 43.2/1000 patient-years with canagliflozin compared with 61.2/1000 patient-years with placebo; a 30% risk reduction was observed with canagliflozin [HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.59–0.82)]. Conclusions This analysis highlights the pitfalls of direct comparisons between trials. When key differences in trial design are considered, FIDELIO-DKD and CREDENCE demonstrate cardiorenal benefits of a similar magnitude. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the standard of care, patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) progress to dialysis, are hospitalized for heart failure and die prematurely. Overactivation of the mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) causes inflammation and fibrosis that damages the kidney and heart. Finerenone, a nonsteroidal, selective MR antagonist, confers kidney and heart protection in both animal models and Phase II clinical studies; the effects on serum potassium and kidney function are minimal. Comprising the largest CKD outcomes program to date, FIDELIO-DKD (FInerenone in reducing kiDnEy faiLure and dIsease prOgression in Diabetic Kidney Disease) and FIGARO-DKD (FInerenone in reducinG cArdiovascular moRtality and mOrbidity in Diabetic Kidney Disease) are Phase III trials investigating the efficacy and safety of finerenone on kidney failure and cardiovascular outcomes from early to advanced CKD in T2D. By including echocardiograms and biomarkers, they extend our understanding of pathophysiology; by including quality of life measurements, they provide patient-centered outcomes; and by including understudied yet high-risk cardiorenal subpopulations, they have the potential to widen the scope of therapy in T2D with CKD. Trial registration number: FIDELIO-DKD (NCT02540993) and FIGARO-DKD (NCT02545049) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical trials have demonstrated morbidity and mortality benefits of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists ( MRAs) in patients with heart failure. These studies have used either spironolactone or eplerenone as the MRA. It is generally believed that these two agents have the same effects, and the data from studies using one drug could be extrapolated for the other. National and international guidelines do not generally discriminate between spironolactone and eplerenone, but strongly recommend using an MRA for patients with heart failure due to LV systolic dysfunction and post-infarct LV systolic dysfunction. There are no major clinical trials directly comparing the efficacy of these two drugs. This article aims to compare the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of spironolactone and eplerenone, and to analyse the available data for their cardiovascular indications and adverse effects. We have also addressed the role of special circumstances including co-morbidities, concomitant drug therapy, cost, and licensing restrictions in choosing an appropriate MRA for a particular patient, thus combining an evidence-based approach with personalized medicine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spironolactone might improve the prognosis of patients with heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (HFpEF), but the mechanisms by which it acts are uncertain. Serum concentrations of procollagen type I carboxy-terminal propeptide (PICP) reflect the synthesis of type I collagen and correlate well with histologically proven cardiac fibrosis. To investigate the effect of spironolactone on serum PICP concentration in patients with stage B and C HFpEF across three trials (HOMAGE, ALDO-DHF, and TOPCAT) for which measurements of serum PICP were available. Random-effects meta-analysis. A total of 1038 patients with PICP measurements available both at baseline and 9–12 months were included in this analysis: 488 (47.0%) from HOMAGE, 386 (37.2%) from ALDO-DHF, and 164 (15.8%) from TOPCAT. The median (percentile 25 – 75) serum PICP was 98 (76–128) ng/mL. Compared to placebo or usual care, administration of spironolactone for 9 to 12 months reduced serum PICP by −7.4 ng/mL, 95%CI -13.9 to −0.9, P -value =0.02. The effect was moderately heterogeneous (I2 = 64%) with the most pronounced effect seen in TOPCAT where PICP was reduced by −27.0 ng/mL, followed by HOMAGE where PICP was reduced by −8.1 ng/mL, and was least marked in ALDO-DHF where PICP changed by −2.9 ng/mL. The association between spironolactone and serum PICP was not mediated substantially by blood pressure. Spironolactone reduced serum concentrations of PICP in patients with HFpEF with different severity and stages of disease. These findings are consistent with spironolactone having an anti-fibrotic effect. • Serum concentrations of procollagen type I carboxy-terminal propeptide (PICP) reflect the synthesis of type I collagen and correlate with cardiac fibrosis. • Administration of spironolactone for 9 to 12 months reduced serum PICP by −7.4 ng/mL, 95%CI -13.9 to −0.9, P-value =0.02, in HFpEF. • The association between spironolactone and serum PICP was not mediated substantially by blood pressure, findings consistent with spironolactone having an anti-fibrotic effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inflammation plays a central role in the genesis and progression of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). C-reactive protein (CRP) is widely used as means to assess systemic inflammation, and elevated levels of CRP have been associated with poor HF prognosis. Identification of chronic low-grade inflammation in outpatients can be performed measuring high-sensitivity CRP (hsCRP). The clinical characteristics and outcome associations of a pro-inflammatory state among outpatients with HFpEF requires further study. Using a biomarker subset of TOPCAT-Americas (NCT00094302), we aim to characterize HFpEF patients according to hsCRP levels and study the prognostic associations of hsCRP. hsCRP was available in a subset of 232 participants. Comparisons were performed between patients with hsCRP <2 mg/L and ≥ 2 mg/L. Cox regression models were used to study the association between hsCRP and the study outcomes. Compared to patients with hsCRP <2 mg/L (n = 89, 38%), those with hsCRP ≥2 mg/L (n = 143, 62%) had more frequent HF hospitalizations prior to randomization, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, orthopnea, higher body mass index, and worse health-related quality-of-life. A hsCRP level ≥ 2 mg/L was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalizations: hsCRP ≥2 mg/L vs <2 mg/L adjusted HR 2.36, 95%CI 1.27–4.38, P = 0.006. Spironolactone did not influence hsCRP levels from baseline to month 12: gMean ratio = 1.11, 95%CI 0.87–1.42, P = 0.39. A hsCRP ≥2 mg/L identified HFpEF patients with a high risk of HF events and cardiovascular mortality. Spironolactone did not influence hsCRP levels at 12 months. • Inflammation plays a central role in the progression of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). • hsCRP was available in a subset of TOPCAT-Americas. Comparisons were performed between hsCRP <2 mg/L and ≥ 2 mg/L. • Patients with hsCRP ≥2 mg/L experienced an increased risk of HF events. Spironolactone did not change hsCRP levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]