Search

AimsRecent trials have evaluated sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure (HF). We sought to assess the robustness of findings from these trials using the fragility index (FI).Methods and resultsFragility index is defined as the minimum number of patients that must be moved from the 'non-event' to the 'event' group to turn a statistically significant result to non-significant. In addition to FI, fragility quotient [(FQ); FI divided by the sample size] was calculated to assess the proportion of events that must be moved to change the significance. For statistically non-significant outcomes, reverse fragility index (RFI) and reverse fragility quotient (RFQ) were calculated. Robustness of findings after pooling data from all three trials was also assessed. A robust reduction in first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality was seen with dapagliflozin (FI = 62 and FQ = 0.013), empagliflozin (FI = 50 and FQ = 0.013), and sotagliflozin (FI = 60 and FQ = 0.049). Dapagliflozin nominally improved all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, with modest FI (n = 8 and 5) and FQ (0.002 and 0.001). Empagliflozin and sotagliflozin did not demonstrate statistically significant reductions in all-cause mortality, with modest RFI (empagliflozin: RFI = 26 and RFQ = 0.007; sotagliflozin: RFI = 6 and RFQ = 0.005). A similar trend was seen with cardiovascular mortality (empagliflozin: RFI = 24 and RFQ = 0.006; sotagliflozin: RFI = 7 and RFQ = 0.006). Upon meta-analysis, the result for first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality was robust (FI = 95 and FQ = 0.010). The reductions in all-cause (FI = 12 and FQ = 0.001) and cardiovascular mortality (FI = 9 and FQ = 0.001), while statistically significant, were fragile.ConclusionImprovement in the composite outcome of first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death was highly concordant and robust across sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor trials. In contrast, secondary endpoints of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were statistically fragile, underscoring the need to power trials for mortality to fully understand the benefit of therapies on fatal events.

AimsDiscontinuation or non-publication of trials may hinder scientific progress and violates the commitment made to research participants. We sought to identify the prevalence of discontinuation and non-publication of heart failure (HF) clinical trials.Methods and resultsWe conducted a cross-sectional search of ClinicalTrials.gov to identify all completed and discontinued HF clinical trials. We limited our search to only include trials that were completed by 31 December 2017. Trials were investigated to identify reasons for discontinuation. Informative termination was defined as trial termination due to safety or efficacy concerns. Data pertaining to the trial phase, funding, intervention, enrolment, and trial completion date were extracted for each trial. A total of 572 trials were included. Of these, 21% (n = 118) were discontinued before completion. Patient accrual was the most frequently cited reason (n = 42; 36%) for trial discontinuation, followed by informative termination (n = 16; 14%) and funding (n = 14; 12%). Overall, 24 780 patients were enrolled in trials that were terminated. Of trials that were completed and not terminated, nearly one-third (n = 131/454; 29%) were not published. Seventy-nine (24%) trials were published within 12 months, 192 (59%) within 24 months, and 252 (78%) trials within 36 months.ConclusionsDiscontinuation and non-publication of HF trials is common. This raises ethical concerns towards participants who volunteer for research and are exposed to potential risks, inconvenience, and discomfort without furthering scientific progress.

AimsThis study aimed to investigate the reporting of subgroup analyses in heart failure (HF) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to determine the strength and credibility of subgroup claims.Methods and resultsAll primary HF RCTs published in nine high-impact journals from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2017 were included. Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify factors that may favour the reporting of results in specific subgroups. Strength of the subgroup effect claimed was classified into (i) strong, (ii) likely, or (iii) suggestive. Credibility of subgroup claim was scored using a pre-specified 10 pointer criteria. Of the 261 HF RCTs studied, 107 (41%) reported subgroup analyses. Twenty-five (23%) RCTs claimed a subgroup effect for the primary outcome of which six (24%) made a strong claim, eight (32%) claimed a likely effect, and 11 (44%) suggested a possible subgroup effect. Seven of the 25 RCTs did not employ interaction testing for subgroup claims of the primary outcome. Three out of 10 pre-specified credibility criteria were satisfied by half of the trials. Fourteen trials justified the choice of subgroups, and 10 explicitly stated they were underpowered to detect differences within subgroups. Source of funding did not influence the frequency of reporting subgroup analyses (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.78-3.62, P = 0.52).ConclusionsAppropriate credibility criteria were rarely met even by HF RCTs that held strong subgroup claims. Subgroup analyses should be pre-specified, be adequately powered, present interaction terms, and be replicated in independent data before being integrated into clinical decision making.

Studies with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have yielded inconsistent results. To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all evidence for ACE-I and ARBs in patients with HFpEF, we searched PubMed, Ovid SP, Embase, and Cochrane database to identify randomized trials and observational studies that compared ACE-I or ARBs against placebo or standard therapy in HFpEF patients. Random-effect models were used to pool the data, and I2 testing was performed to assess the heterogeneity of the included studies. A total of 13 studies (treatment arm = 8676 and control arm = 8608) were analysed. Pooled analysis of randomized trials for ACE-I and ARBs (n = 6) did not show any effect on all-cause mortality [relative risk (RR) = 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.93-1.11, P = 0.68, I2  = 0%], while results from observational studies showed a significant improvement (RR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.87-0.95, P = 0.005, I2  = 81.5%). In pooled analyses of all studies, ACE-I showed a reduction of all-cause mortality (RR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.87-0.95, P = 0.01). There was no reduction in cardiovascular mortality seen, but in pooled analysis of randomized trials, there was a trend towards reduced HF hospitalization risk (RR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.83-1.01, I2  = 0%, P = 0.074). These data suggest that ACE-I and ARBs may have a role in improving outcomes of patients with HFpEF, underscoring the need for future research with careful patient selection, and trial design and conduct.

Aims: The relationship between accelerometry data and changes in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire‐Physical Limitation Score (KCCQ‐PLS) or 6 min walk test (6MWT) is not well understood. Methods and results: VITALITY‐HFpEF accelerometry substudy (n = 69) data were assessed at baseline and 24 weeks. Ordinal logistic regression models were used to assess the association between accelerometry activity and deterioration, improved, or unchanged KCCQ‐PLS (≥8.33 and ≤ −4.17 points) and 6MWT (≥32 vs. ≤ −32 m). KCCQ‐PLS score deteriorated in 16 patients, improved in 34, and was unchanged in 19. 6MWT deteriorated in 8 patients, improved in 21, and was unchanged in 19. Mean accelerometer wear was 21.4 (±2.1) h/day. Changes in hours active from baseline to 24 weeks were not significantly different among patients who exhibited deterioration, improvement, or no change in KCCQ‐PLS [odds ratio (OR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71–1.18; P = 0.48] or 6MWT (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.91–1.60; P = 0.18). Similar lack of association was observed for other accelerometry metrics and change in KCCQ and 6MWT. These findings were unaffected when KCCQ and 6MWT were examined as continuous variables. Conclusions: Accelerometer‐based activity measures did not correlate with subjective or objective standard measures of health status and functional capacity in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Further investigation of their relationships to clinical outcomes is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pulmonary arterial pressures are often used as surrogates for intravascular blood volume. However, the relationship between pressure and volume remains controversial. To contextualize and provide concrete examples and impact on clinical management, we report two cases of heart failure (one in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and one in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction) where pressure‐based measurements did not accurately represent the intravascular status and affected clinical management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]