Search

Background: In the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac Outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC-HF) trial, omecamtiv mecarbil, compared with placebo, reduced the risk of worsening heart failure (HF) events, or cardiovascular death in patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction. The primary aim of this prespecified analysis was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of omecamtiv mecarbil by randomization setting, that is, whether participants were enrolled as outpatients or inpatients., Methods and Results: Patients were randomized either during a HF hospitalization or as an outpatient, within one year of a worsening HF event (hospitalization or emergency department visit). The primary outcome was a composite of worsening HF event (HF hospitalization or an urgent emergency department or clinic visit) or cardiovascular death. Of the 8232 patients analyzed, 2084 (25%) were hospitalized at randomization. Hospitalized patients had higher N-terminal prohormone of B-type natriuretic peptide concentrations, lower systolic blood pressure, reported more symptoms, and were less frequently treated with a renin-angiotensin system blocker or a beta-blocker than outpatients. The rate (per 100 person-years) of the primary outcome was higher in hospitalized patients (placebo group = 38.3/100 person-years) than in outpatients (23.1/100 person-years); adjusted hazard ratio 1.21 (95% confidence interval 1.12-1.31). The effect of omecamtiv mecarbil versus placebo on the primary outcome was similar in hospitalized patients (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.78-1.01) and outpatients (hazard ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.86-1.02) (interaction P = .51)., Conclusions: Hospitalized patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction had a higher rate of the primary outcome than outpatients. Omecamtiv mecarbil decreased the risk of the primary outcome both when initiated in hospitalized patients and in outpatients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest K.F.D. has received financial support to attend educational meetings from Cytokinetics during the conduct of the study, personal fees from AstraZeneca, consulting fees from Us2.ai and research grants to his institution from AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim outside the submitted work. J.J.V.M. has received funding to his institution from Amgen and Cytokinetics for his participation in the Steering Committee for the ATOMIC-HF, COSMIC-HF, and GALACTIC-HF trials and meetings and other activities related to these trials; has received payments through Glasgow University from work on clinical trials, consulting, and other activities from Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardurion, Dal-Cor, GlaxoSmithKline, Ionis, KBP Biosciences, Novartis, Pfizer, and Theracos; has received personal lecture fees from the Corpus, Abbott, Hikma, Sun Pharmaceuticals, Medscape/Heart.Org, Radcliffe Cardiology, Servier Director, and Global Clinical Trial Partners (GCTP). R.D. has received research grants and other payment or honoraria from Amgen. G.M.F. has received grant funding to his institution from American Heart Association, Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL-Behring, Cytokinetics, Merck, Myokardia, and National Institutes of Health; has received consulting fees from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardionomic, Cytokinetics, Medtronic, Myovant, Novartis, Reprieve, Sequana, Windtree Therapeutics, and WhiteSwell; and has participated on Data Safety Monitoring boards or advisory boards for EBR Systems, LivaNova, Medtronic, Siemens, Rocket Pharma, and V-Wave. M.M. has received funding to his institution from Amgen and Cytokinetics as participant to the Executive Committee during the trial and for patients’ enrolment; has received consulting fees for participation to advisory boards from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim; has received personal fees as member of Executive or Data Monitoring Committees of sponsored clinical trials from LivaNova and Vifor Pharma; has received speaker fees from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Therapeutics for speeches at sponsored meetings; and has participated on Data Safety Monitoring boards for Actelion. S.D.S. has received grant funding to his institution from Actelion, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bellerophon, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celladon, Cytokinetics, Eidos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Lilly, Mesoblast, MyoKardia, National Institutes of Health/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Neurotronik, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Respicardia, Sanofi Pasteur, Theracos, and US2.AI; and has received consulting fees from Abbott, Action, Akros, Alnylam, American Regent, Amgen, Anacardio, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimensions, Cardior, Cardurion, CellProthera, Corvia, Cytokinetics, Daiichi Sankyo, Dinaqor, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lexicon, Lilly, Merck, Moderna, Myokardia, Novartis, Puretech Health, Quantum Genomics, Roche, Sanofi Pasteur, Sarepta, Tenaya, Theracos, and Tremeau. K.F.A. has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc., Eli Lilly USA, LivaNova USA, Merck, Novartis, and Otsuka; acted as a consultant to Amgen, Cytokinetics, Inc., Novartis, Roche Diagnostics, Relypsa, and Windtree Therapeutics. M.B. has received funds from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation; TTR 219, project No. 322900939) and personal fees from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Medtronic, Novartis, ReCor, Servier, Vifor Pharma, and Boehringer Ingelheim. A.R.G. reports consulting fees for clinical trials from Amgen, Novartis, KOWA, and Bayer outside the submitted work; personal payments or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, and Novo Nordisk outside the submitted work; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and leadership or fiduciary role as President, Bulgarian Society of Cardiology 2020-22. J.G.H. has received grants and consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Pfizer; has received personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Pfizer; and is Co-Chair of the Heart Failure Pathway Group of the Province of Alberta, Heart Failure lead at University of Calgary, and in the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines and Development Committees. M.L. has received grant funding and personal fees from Amgen; has received honoraria from Novartis; and has served as the New Zealand Chairperson for Cardiac Society Australia and New Zealand. P.P. has received research grants to his institution from Amgen and Vifor Pharma; and has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott Vascular, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Berlin Chemie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cibiem, Coridea, Impulse Dynamics, Novartis, Pfizer, Renal Guard Solutions, Servier, and Vifor Pharma. M.B.Y. reports funding to his institution from Amgen, Bayer, Novartis, and Dalcor Pharmaceuticals outside the submitted work. F.Z. reports consulting fees from Cardior, Cereno pharmaceutical, Cellprothera, Owkin, Novo Nordisk, Vifor, and Fresenius; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Boehringer and Bayer; payment for expert testimony from Cardiorentis; stock or stock options in Cereno pharmaceutical; and steering committee personal fees from Applied Therapeutics, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer, CVRx, Novartis, and Merck. B.L.C. has received consulting fees from Amgen, Cardurion, Corvia, Myokardia, and Novartis. Z.M.M. has no conflicts of interest to disclose. S.A.A. is an employee and shareholder of Amgen. P.H.D., S.B.H., S.K., and F.I.M. are employees and shareholders of Cytokinetics. J.R.T. has received personal fees as Chairperson of the GALACTIC-HF Executive Committee from Amgen and Cytokinetics; has received personal fees for research contracts and/or consulting fees from 3ive Labs, Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardurion, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Verily, ViCardia, and Windtree Therapeutics; has served as Secretary and Treasurer of Heart Failure Society of America; and is currently President-Elect of the Heart Failure Society of America. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Left ventricular (LV) circumferential and longitudinal strain provide important insight into LV mechanics and function, each contributing to volumetric changes throughout the cardiac cycle. We sought to explore this strain-volume relationship in more detail, by mathematically integrating circumferential and longitudinal strain and strain rate to predict LV volume and volumetric rates of change., Methods: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging from 229 participants from the Alberta HEART Study (46 healthy controls, 77 individuals at risk for developing heart failure [HF], 70 patients with diagnosed HF with preserved ejection fraction [HFpEF], and 36 patients with diagnosed HF with reduced ejection fraction [HFrEF]) were evaluated. LV volume was assessed by the method of disks and strain/strain rate were assessed by CMR feature tracking., Results: Integrating endocardial circumferential and longitudinal strain provided a close approximation of LV ejection fraction (EF Strain ), when compared to gold-standard volumetric assessment (EF Volume : r = 0.94, P < 0.0001). Likewise, integrating circumferential and longitudinal strain rate provided a close approximation of peak ejection and peak filling rates (PER Strain and PFR Strain , respectively) compared to their gold-standard volume-time equivalents (PER Volume , r = 0.73, P < 0.0001 and PFR Volume , r = 0.78, P < 0.0001, respectively). Moreover, each integrated strain measure differentiated patients across the HF continuum (all P < 0.01), with the HFrEF group having worse EF Strain , PER Strain , and PFR Strain compared to all other groups, and HFpEF having less favorable EF Strain and PFR Strain compared to both at-risk and control groups., Conclusions: The data herein establish the theoretical framework for integrating discrete strain components into volumetric measurements across the cardiac cycle, and highlight the potential benefit of this approach for differentiating patients along the heart failure continuum., (© 2023. Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance.)

Aims: To compare the cost-effectiveness of immediate and 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin treatment in patients with a history of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) from the UK, Canadian, German, and Spanish healthcare perspectives., Methods and Results: A cost-utility analysis was conducted using a decision-analytic Markov model with health states defined by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores, type 2 diabetes mellitus status and incidence of heart failure (HF) events. Patient-level data for patients with prior HHF from the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF) trial were used to inform the model inputs on clinical events and utility values. Healthcare costs were sourced from the relevant national reference databases and the published literature. Compared to standard therapy, immediate initiation of dapagliflozin decreased HHF (187 events), urgent HF visits (32 events) and cardiovascular mortality (18 events). Standard therapy was associated with lifetime costs of £13 224 and 4.02 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Twelve-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin was associated with total discounted lifetime costs and QALYs of £16 660 and 4.61, respectively, compared to £16 912 and 4.66, respectively, for immediate initiation. Compared to standard therapy, immediate and 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £5779 and £5821, respectively. Compared to 12-month delayed initiation, immediate initiation of dapagliflozin had an ICER of £5263. Results were similar from the Canadian, German, and Spanish healthcare perspectives., Conclusion: Both immediate and 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin are cost-effective. However, immediate initiation provides greater clinical benefits, with almost 10% additional QALYs gain, compared to 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin and should be considered standard of care., (© 2023 Health Economics and Outcomes Research, AstraZeneca and The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aim: Patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and low systolic blood pressure (SBP) have high mortality, hospitalizations, and poorly tolerate evidence-based medical treatment. Omecamtiv mecarbil may be particularly helpful in such patients. This study examined its efficacy and tolerability in patients with SBP ≤100 mmHg enrolled in the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC-HF)., Methods and Results: The GALACTIC-HF enrolled patients with baseline SBP ≥85 mmHg with a primary outcome of time to cardiovascular death or first heart failure event. In this analysis, patients were divided according to their baseline SBP (≤100 vs. >100 mmHg). Among the 8232 analysed patients, 1473 (17.9%) had baseline SBP ≤100 mmHg and 6759 (82.1%) had SBP >100 mmHg. The primary outcome occurred in 715 (48.5%) and 2415 (35.7%) patients with SBP ≤100 and >100 mmHg, respectively. Patients with lower SBP were at higher risk of adverse outcomes. Omecamtiv mecarbil, compared with placebo, appeared to be more effective in reducing the primary composite endpoint in patients with SBP ≤100 mmHg [hazard ratio (HR), 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.70-0.94] compared with those with SBP >100 mmHg (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.88-1.03; P-value for interaction = 0.051). In both groups, omecamtiv mecarbil did not change SBP values over time and did not increase the risk of adverse events, when compared with placebo., Conclusion: In GALACTIC-HF, risk reduction of heart failure outcomes with omecamtiv mecarbil compared with placebo was large and significant in patients with low SBP. Omecamtiv mecarbil did not affect SBP and was well tolerated independent of SBP values., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: M.M. has received funding to his institution from Amgen and Cytokinetics as participant to the Executive Committee during the trial and for patients’ enrolment; has received consulting fees for participation to advisory boards from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim; has received personal fees as member of Executive or Data Monitoring Committees of sponsored clinical trials from LivaNova and Vifor Pharma; has received speaker fees from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Therapeutics for speeches at sponsored meetings; and has participated on Data Safety Monitoring boards for Actelion. B.L.C. has received consulting fees from Amgen, Cardurion, Corvia, Myokardia, and Novartis. R.D. has received research grants and other payment or honoraria from Amgen. G.M.F. has received grant funding to his institution from American Heart Association, Amgen, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL-Behring, Cytokinetics, Merck, Myokardia, and National Institutes of Health; has received consulting fees from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardionomic, Cytokinetics, Medtronic, Myovant, Novartis, Reprieve, Sequana, Windtree Therapeutics, and WhiteSwell; and has participated on Data Safety Monitoring boards or advisory boards for EBR Systems, LivaNova, Medtronic, Siemens, Rocket Pharma, and V-Wave. J.J.V.M. has received funding to his institution from Amgen and Cytokinetics for his participation in the Steering Committee for the ATOMIC-HF, COSMIC-HF, and GALACTIC-HF trials and meetings and other activities related to these trials; has received personal fees from Abbott, Alkem Metabolics, Eris Lifesciences, Hikma, Lupin, Medscape/Heart.Org, ProAdWise Communications, Radcliffe Cardiology, Servier, Sun Pharmaceuticals, and The Corpus; and has received funding paid to his institution for activities related to trials or other activities from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardurion, DalCor, GlaxoSmithKline, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, KBP Biosciences, Novartis, and Theracos. S.D.S. has received grant funding to his institution from Actelion, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bellerophon, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celladon, Cytokinetics, Eidos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Lilly, Mesoblast, MyoKardia, National Institutes of Health/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Neurotronik, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Respicardia, Sanofi Pasteur, Theracos, US2.AI; and has received consulting fees from Abbott, Action, Akros, Alnylam, American Regent, Amgen, Anacardio, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimensions, Cardior, Cardurion, CellProthera, Corvia, Cytokinetics, Daiichi Sankyo, Dinaqor, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lexicon, Lilly, Merck, Moderna, Myokardia, Novartis, Puretech Health, Quantum Genomics, Roche, Sanofi Pasteur, Sarepta, Tenaya, Theracos, and Tremeau. D.B. has received research grants from Abbott, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Pfizer, SOBI, and Zoll; has received consulting fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, SOBI, and Zoll; has received speaker fees or honoraria and support for attending meetings and/or travels from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, SOBI, and Zoll; and is in the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Pulmonary Circulation and Right Ventricular Function. J.C.F. has served on the Board of Directors for the Heart Failure Society of America. C.F. has received personal fees for consulting from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Servier, and Vifor Pharma; has received honoraria for lectures and educational events from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Servier, and Vifor Pharma; has received honoraria for lectures from Novartis; has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Bayer, Servier, and Vifor Pharma; has participated on advisory boards for Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Vifor Pharma; and has received grants for medical writing from Merck Serono and Roche. E.G. has received consulting fees from AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Servier; has received personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pfizer, and Servier; and is the President of the Slovak Society of Cardiology. J.G.H. has received grants and consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Pfizer; has received personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Pfizer; and is Co-Chair of the Heart Failure Pathway Group of the Province of Alberta, Heart Failure lead at University of Calgary, and in the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines and Development Committees. J.L. has received research agreements from Amgen during the conduct of the study through the National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases. E.O. has received support to her institution (Montreal Heart Institute) for being local Principal Investigator and member of the Steering Committee of the GALACTIC-HF trial from Amgen and Cytokinetics; has received grant funding to her institution (Montreal Heart Institute) for clinical trials from AstraZeneca, American Regent, Cardurion, and Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR); has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and Janssen; has received speaker fees or other honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and has participated on Data Safety Monitoring boards or advisory boards for Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and the independent COLpEF trial. S.A.A. is an employee and shareholder of Amgen. S.B.H., S.K., and F.I.M. are employees and shareholders of Cytokinetics. J.R.T. has received personal fees as Chairperson of the GALACTIC-HF Executive Committee from Amgen and Cytokinetics; has received personal fees for research contracts and/or consulting fees from 3ive Labs, Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardurion, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Verily, ViCardia, and Windtree Therapeutics; has served as Secretary and Treasurer of Heart Failure Society of America; and is currently President-Elect of the Heart Failure Society of America. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Introduction: Heart failure (HF), and especially HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), remains a challenging condition to define. The heterogenous nature of this population may be related to a variety of underlying etiologies interacting myocardial dysfunction., Method: Alberta HEART study was a prospective, observational cohort that enrolled participants along the spectrum of heart failure including: healthy controls, people at risk of HF, and patients with HF and preserved (HFpEF) or reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We aimed to explore phenotypes of patients with HF and at-risk of developing HF. Utilising 27 detailed clinical, echocardiographic and biomarker variables, latent class analysis with and without multiple imputation was undertaken to identify distinct clinical phenotypes., Results: Of 621 participants, 191 (30.8%) and 169 (27.2%) were adjudicated by cardiologists to have HFpEF and HFrEF respectively. In the overall cohort, latent class analysis identified four distinct phenotypes. Phenotype A (n=152, 24.5%) was a healthy and low risk group. Phenotype B (n=129, 20.8%) demonstrated increased left ventricular mass and end-diastolic volumes, with elevated natriuretic peptides and clinical features of congestion. Phenotype C (n=128, 20.6%) was primarily characterised by obesity (80%) and normal indexed cardiac chamber sizes, low natriuretic peptide levels and minimal features of congestion.  Phenotype D (n=212, 34.1%) consisted of elderly patients with clinical features of congestions. Phenotypes B and D demonstrated the highest risk of mortality and hospitalization over a median follow-up of 3.7 years., Conclusion: Phenotypes with congestive features demonstrated increased risk profiles. Heart failure is a heterogenous classification which requires further work to appropriately categorise patients based on the underlying etiology or mechanism of impairment., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) is associated with a favourable prognosis compared with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (EF). We assessed whether left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) trajectory can be used to identify groups of patients with HFmrEF who have different clinical outcomes in a large retrospective study of patients with serial imaging., Methods and Results: Patients with HF and ≥2 echocardiograms performed ≥6 months apart were included if the LVEF measured 40-49% on the second study. Patients were classified as HFmrEF-Increasing if LVEF had increased ≥10% (n = 450), HFmrEF-Decreasing if LVEF had decreased ≥10% (n = 512), or HFmrEF-Stable if they did not meet other criteria (n = 389). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization after the second echocardiogram. Associations with time to first event were assessed with multivariable Cox analyses adjusted for age, co-morbidities, and medications. In total, 1351 patients with HFmrEF (median age 74, 64.2% male) were included with 28.8% exhibiting stable LVEF. During median follow-up of 15.3 months, the composite outcome occurred in 811 patients. During follow-up, patients with HFmrEF-Increasing were less likely to experience the primary outcome [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-0.88, P < 0.001] compared with HFmrEF-Stable. Patients with HFmrEF-Decreasing were more likely to experience the composite outcome in unadjusted analyses (unadjusted HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01-1.40, P = 0.040) but not adjusted analyses (adjusted HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.98-1.37, P = 0.092). Associations with death or HF hospitalizations were similar (HFmrEF-Increasing: adjusted HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.88, P = 0.005; HFmrEF-Decreasing: adjusted HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.01-1.44, P = 0.044). Patients with HFmrEF-Decreasing had a similar risk of the composite outcome as patients with HF with reduced EF (adjusted HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.89-1.20, P = 0.670). Patients with HFmrEF-Increasing were less likely to experience the composite outcome compared with patients with HF with preserved EF (adjusted HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62-0.87, P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Amongst patients with HFmrEF, those exhibiting positive LVEF trajectory were less likely to experience adverse outcomes after correcting for important confounders including medical therapy. Categorizing HFmrEF patients based on LVEF trajectory provides meaningful clinical information and may assist clinicians with management decisions., (© 2022 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Among patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), those with atrial fibrillation (AF) may respond differently to certain treatments than patients without AF. We investigated the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in patients with HFrEF with and without AF in the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure trial (DAPA-HF). We also examined the effect of dapagliflozin on new-onset AF., Methods and Results: The primary outcome was the composite of an episode of worsening HF (HF hospitalization or urgent HF visit requiring intravenous therapy) or cardiovascular death. Of the 4744 patients randomized, 1910 (40.3%) had 'any AF' (history of AF or AF on enrolment electrocardiogram). Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of worsening HF or cardiovascular death to a similar extent in patients with and without any AF [hazard ratio (HR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-0.92 and 0.74, 95% CI 0.62-0.88, respectively; p for interaction = 0.88]. Consistent benefits were observed for the components of the primary outcome, all-cause mortality, and improvement of Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score. Among patients without AF at baseline, dapagliflozin did not significantly reduce the risk of new-onset AF compared with placebo (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.60-1.22). However, patients with new-onset AF had a 5 to 6-fold higher risk of adverse outcomes when compared to those without incident AF., Conclusions: Dapagliflozin, compared with placebo, reduced the risk of worsening HF events, cardiovascular death, and all-cause death, and improved symptoms, in patients with and without AF. Dapagliflozin did not reduce the risk of new-onset AF., (© 2021 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Importance: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is a progressive clinical syndrome, and many patients' condition worsen over time despite treatment. Patients with more severe disease are often intolerant of available medical therapies., Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of omecamtiv mecarbil for the treatment of patients with severe heart failure (HF) enrolled in the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac Outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC-HF) randomized clinical trial., Design, Setting, and Participants: The GALACTIC-HF study was a global double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 randomized clinical trial that was conducted at multiple centers between January 2017 and August 2020. A total of 8232 patients with symptomatic HF (defined as New York Heart Association symptom class II-IV) and left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less were randomized to receive omecamtiv mecarbil or placebo and followed up for a median of 21.8 months (range, 15.4-28.6 months). The current post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of omecamtiv mecarbil therapy among patients classified as having severe HF compared with patients without severe HF. Severe HF was defined as the presence of all of the following criteria: New York Heart Association symptom class III to IV, left ventricular ejection fraction of 30% or less, and hospitalization for HF within the previous 6 months., Interventions: Participants were randomized at a 1:1 ratio to receive either omecamtiv mecarbil or placebo., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was time to first HF event or cardiovascular (CV) death. Secondary end points included time to CV death and safety and tolerability., Results: Among 8232 patients enrolled in the GALACTIC-HF clinical trial, 2258 patients (27.4%; mean [SD] age, 64.5 [11.6] years; 1781 men [78.9%]) met the specified criteria for severe HF. Of those, 1106 patients were randomized to the omecamtiv mecarbil group and 1152 to the placebo group. Patients with severe HF who received omecamtiv mecarbil experienced a significant treatment benefit for the primary end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.90), whereas patients without severe HF had no significant treatment benefit (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.91-1.08; P = .005 for interaction). For CV death, the results were similar (HR for patients with vs without severe HF: 0.88 [95% CI, 0.75-1.03] vs 1.10 [95% CI, 0.97-1.25]; P = .03 for interaction). Omecamtiv mecarbil therapy was well tolerated in patients with severe HF, with no significant changes in blood pressure, kidney function, or potassium level compared with placebo., Conclusions and Relevance: In this post hoc analysis of data from the GALACTIC-HF clinical trial, omecamtiv mecarbil therapy may have provided a clinically meaningful reduction in the composite end point of time to first HF event or CV death among patients with severe HF. These data support a potential role of omecamtiv mecarbil therapy among patients for whom current treatment options are limited., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02929329.

Objectives: This study sought to investigate the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in Black and White patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) enrolled in DAPA-HF (Study to Evaluate the Effect of Dapagliflozin on the Incidence of Worsening Heart Failure or Cardiovascular Death in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure)., Background: Black patients may respond differently to certain treatments for HFrEF than White patients., Methods: Patients with New York Heart Association functional class II to IV with an ejection fraction of ≤40% and elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide were eligible for DAPA-HF. Because >99% of Black patients were randomized in the Americas, this post hoc analysis considered Black and White patients enrolled only in North and South America. The primary outcome was the composite of a worsening HF event (HF hospitalization or urgent HF visit requiring intravenous therapy) or cardiovascular death., Results: Of the 4,744 patients randomized in DAPA-HF, 1,494 (31.5%) were enrolled in the Americas. Of these, 1,181 (79.0%) were White, and 225 (15.1%) were Black. Black patients had a higher rate of worsening HF events, but not mortality, compared with White patients. Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary endpoint similarly in Black patients (HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.37-1.03) and White patients (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.52-0.90; P-interaction = 0.70). Consistent benefits were observed for other prespecified outcomes, including the composite of total (first and repeat) HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death (P-interaction = 0.43) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score. Study drug discontinuation and serious adverse events were not more frequent in the dapagliflozin group than in the placebo group in either Black or White patients., Conclusions: Dapagliflozin reduced the risk of worsening HF and cardiovascular death, and it improved symptoms, similarly in Black and White patients without an increase in adverse events. (Study to Evaluate the Effect of Dapagliflozin on the Incidence of Worsening Heart Failure or Cardiovascular Death in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure [DAPA-HF]; NCT03036124)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures DAPA-HF was funded by AstraZeneca. Dr McMurray is supported by a British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence Grant (RE/18/6/34217). Dr Docherty’s employer (University of Glasgow) has been remunerated by AstraZeneca for involvement in the DAPA-HF trial; and he has also received speaker fees from AstraZeneca and Eli Lilly. Dr Ogunniyi has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Zoll and Advisory Board fees from Pfizer. Dr Desai has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Abbott, Biofourmis, Boston Scientific, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corvidia, DalCor Pharma, Relypsa, Regeneron, and Merck; grants and personal fees from Alnylam and Novartis; and personal fees from Amgen, outside the submitted work. Dr Diez has received personal fees from AstraZeneca. Dr Howlett has received research grants from University Hospital Foundation, Pfizer, and Novartis; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, Merck, Janssen, Otsuka, Servier, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, Akcea, Alnylam, and Pfizer; speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, Merck, Janssen, Servier, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Pfizer; and has participated on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Novartis, AstraZeneca, and Medtronic. Dr Nicolau has received research grants and personal fees from Vifor Pharma (National Lead Investigator [NLI]/Steering Committee [SC] member for AFFIRM); research grants from AstraZeneca (NLI), Bayer (Principal Investigator [PI] Compass), Esperion and CLS Behring (NLI/SC member), DalCor (NLI), Janssen (NLI/SC member), Novartis (PI, consultant), Novo Nordisk (PI), and Sanofi (NLI, PI, Advisory Board); and personal fees from Amgen (consultant), Bayer, Daiichi-Sankyo (speaker), Novartis, Sanofi, and Servier (speaker, Advisory Board). Dr O’Meara or her institution has received financial support for clinical trials from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, and Novartis; has served as a consultant or speaker for Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and AstraZeneca. Dr Verma has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Sun Pharmaceuticals, and Toronto Knowledge Translation Working Group during the conduct of the study; grants and personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Merck; grants from Bristol Myers Squibb; and personal fees from Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. Dr Inzucchi has received personal fees and nonfinancial support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Sanofi/Lexicon, Merck, VTV Therapeutics, and Abbott/Alere; and personal fees from AstraZeneca and Zafgen. Dr Køber has received financial from AstraZeneca; and personal fees from Novartis and Bristol Myers Squibb as a speaker. Dr Kosiborod has received personal fees from AstraZeneca and Vifor Pharma; grants, personal fees, and other from AstraZeneca; grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim; and personal fees from Sanofi, Amgen, Novo Nordisk, Merck (Diabetes), Janssen, Bayer, Applied Therapeutics, and Eli Lilly. Dr Lindholm is an employee of AstraZeneca. Dr Martinez has received personal fees from AstraZeneca. Dr Bengtsson is an employee of AstraZeneca. Dr Ponikowski has received personal fees and other from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cibiem, Novartis, and RenalGuard; personal fees from Pfizer, Servier, Respicardia, and Berlin-Chemie; financial support from Amgen; and grants, personal fees, and other from Vifor Pharma. Dr Sabatine has received grants from Bayer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Poxel, Quark Pharmaceuticals, and Takeda; grants and personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Intarcia, Janssen Research and Development, The Medicines Company, MedImmune, Merck, and Novartis; and personal fees from Anthos Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVS Caremark, Dal-Cor, Dyrnamix, Esperion, IFM Therapeutics, and Ionis; and is a member of the TIMI Study Group, which has also received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott, Aralez, Roche, and Zora Biosciences. Dr Sjöstrand is an employee of AstraZeneca. Dr Solomon has received research grants from Actelion, Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bellerophon, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celladon, Cytokinetics, Eidos, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Ionis, Lilly, Mesoblast, MyoKardia, National Institutes of Health/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Neurotronik, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Respicardia, Sanofi Pasteur, and Theracos and has consulted for Abbott, Action, Akros, Alnylam, Amgen, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardior, Cardurion, Corvia, Cytokinetics, Daiichi-Sankyo, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Merck, Myokardia, Novartis, Roche, Theracos, Quantum Genomics, Cardurion, Janssen, Cardiac Dimensions, Tenaya, Sanofi-Pasteur, Dinaqor, Tremeau, CellProThera, Moderna, American Regent, and Sarepta. Dr Langkilde is an employee of AstraZeneca. Dr Jhund’s employer (University of Glasgow) has been remunerated by AstraZeneca for involvement in the DAPA-HF and DELIVER trials; has received speaker and Advisory Board fees from Novartis; and Advisory Board fees and grants from Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr McMurray’s employer, the University of Glasgow, has been remunerated by AstraZeneca for working on the DAPA-HF, DELIVER, and DETERMINE trials as well as Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, DalCor, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Theracos, and Novartis; has received other support from Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardurion, KBP Biosciences, Ionis, and Alnylam; has received speaker fees from Abbott, Alkem Metabolics, Eris Lifesciences, Hikma, Lupin, Sun Pharmaceuticals, Medscape/Heart.Org, ProAdWise Communications, Radcliffe Cardiology, Servier, and the Corpus; and is director of Global Clinical Trial Partners Ltd., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Surveillance imaging is often used to detect remodelling, a change in cardiac geometry, and/or function; however, there are limited data in patients with chronic heart failure (HF). We sought to characterize cardiac remodelling in patients with chronic HF and evaluate its association with outcome., Methods and Results: A prospective cohort of patients at risk for HF or with chronic HF underwent cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) at baseline and 1 year. Ventricular function, volumes, mass, left atrial volume, global longitudinal strain, and myocardial scar were measured. The primary outcome was a composite of death or cardiovascular hospitalization up to 5 years from the 1 year scan. Cox regression was used to identify 1 year CMR predictors of outcome after adjusting for baseline risk. A total of 262 patients (median age 68 years, 57% males) including 96 at risk for HF, 97 with HF and preserved ejection fraction, and 69 with HF and reduced ejection fraction were included. In the patients with HF, 55 events were identified during follow-up. After adjustment for baseline clinical risk, Cox proportion hazard regressions only identified 1 year change in left ventricular (LV) mass index as a CMR predictor of outcome, adjusted hazard ratio 1.21 (1.02, 1.44) per 10% increase, P = 0.031. Cardiac remodelling defined as a 1 year change in LV mass index ≥15% was observed in 35% of patients with HF. Patients with adverse remodelling of LV mass index had more events on Kaplan-Meier analyses compared to those with no remodelling, log-rank P = 0.004 for overall cohort, P = 0.035 for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and P = 0.035 for heart failure and reduced ejection fraction., Conclusions: Cardiac remodelling is common during serial CMR assessment of patients with chronic HF. Change in LV mass predicted long-term outcomes whereas change in left ventricular ejection fraction did not., (© 2021 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)