Search

Background: Empagliflozin reduces the risk of heart failure (HF) hospitalizations but not all-cause mortality when started within 14 days of acute myocardial infarction (AMI)., Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the association of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), congestion, or both, with outcomes and the impact of empagliflozin in reducing HF risk post-AMI., Methods: In the EMPACT-MI (Trial to Evaluate the Effect of Empagliflozin on Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Mortality in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial, patients were randomized within 14 days of an AMI complicated by either newly reduced LVEF<45%, congestion, or both, to empagliflozin (10 mg daily) or placebo and were followed up for a median of 17.9 months., Results: Among 6,522 patients, the mean baseline LVEF was 41 ± 9%; 2,648 patients (40.6%) presented with LVEF <45% alone, 1,483 (22.7%) presented with congestion alone, and 2,181 (33.4%) presented with both. Among patients in the placebo arm of the trial, multivariable adjusted risk for each 10-point reduction in LVEF included all-cause death or HF hospitalization (HR: 1.49; 95% CI: 1.31-1.69; P < 0.0001), first HF hospitalization (HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.37-1.96; P < 0.0001), and total HF hospitalizations (rate ratio [RR]: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.51-2.36; P < 0.0001). The presence of congestion was also associated with a significantly higher risk for each of these outcomes (HR: 1.52, 1.94, and RR: 2.03, respectively). Empagliflozin reduced the risk for first (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.60-0.98) and total (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.50-0.89) HF hospitalizations, irrespective of LVEF or congestion, or both. The safety profile of empagliflozin was consistent across baseline LVEF and irrespective of congestion status., Conclusions: In patients with AMI, the severity of left ventricular dysfunction and the presence of congestion was associated with worse outcomes. Empagliflozin reduced first and total HF hospitalizations across the range of LVEF with and without congestion. (Trial to Evaluate the Effect of Empagliflozin on Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Mortality in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction [EMPACT-MI]; NCT04509674)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Funding support was provided by Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly and Company. Dr Udell has served on the advisory boards of Boehringer Ingelheim, Novavax, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; has received speaker honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly; and has received research funding to his institution from Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novartis. Dr Petrie has received research funding from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, SQ Innovations, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Pharmacosmos; and has served as a consultant and on trial committees for Akero, Applied Therapeutics, Amgen, AnaCardio, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, AbbVie, Bayer, Horizon Therapeutics, Takeda, Cardiorentis, Pharmacosmos, Siemens, Eli Lilly, Vifor, New Amsterdam, Moderna, Teikoku, LIB Therapeutics, and 3R Lifesciences. Dr Jones has received research grants from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Novartis, PCORI, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Dr Mattheus is an employee of Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Seide is an employee of Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Amir has served as a national principal investigator and as a steering committee member for the study; has participated in paid lectures and advisory board meetings and has clinical trials with Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Bahit has received modest honoraria from MSD, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Anthos Therapeutics. Dr Bauersachs has received honoraria for lectures or consulting from Novartis, Vifor, Bayer, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Cardior, CVRx, BMS, Amgen, Corvia, Norgine, Edwards Lifesciences, and Roche, unrelated to this work; and has received research support for the department from Zoll, CVRx, Abiomed, Norgine, and Roche, unrelated to this work. Dr Bayes-Genis has lectured and/or participated in advisory boards for Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Roche, and Vifor. Dr Goodman has received research grant support (steering committee or data and safety monitoring committee) and/or speaker or consulting honoraria (advisory boards) from Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, CYTE Ltd, Daiichi-Sankyo/American Regent, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, JAMP Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk A/C, Pendopharm/Pharmascience, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier, Tolmar Pharmaceuticals, and Valeo Pharma; and has received salary support or honoraria from the Canadian Heart Failure Society, Canadian Heart Research Centre, and MD Primer, Canadian VIGOUR Centre, Cleveland Clinic Coordinating Center for Clinical Research, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Jewish General Hospital, New York University Clinical Coordinating Centre, PERFUSE Research Institute, Peter Munk Cardiac Centre Clinical Trials and Translation Unit, and the TIMI Study Group (Brigham Health). Dr Goto has served on the advisory boards of Antos Therapeutic and Janssen; and has received honoraria from the American Heart Association (Associate Editor); and has served on the grant evaluation committee for the Nakatani Foundation and the Kaketsuken Foundation. Dr Gasior is an employee of Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Jamal is an employee of Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Januzzi has served as a trustee of the American College of Cardiology; has served as a board member of Imbria Pharmaceuticals; has served as director at Jana Care; has received research support from Abbott, Applied Therapeutics, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, HeartFlow, Innolife, Medtronic, and Roche; has received consulting income from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beckman, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Prevencio, Quidel/Ortho, and Roche; and has participated in clinical endpoint committees/data safety monitoring boards for Abbott, AbbVie, Axon, Bayer, CVRx, Medtronic, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda. Dr Lopes has received research grants or contracts from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Sanofi; has received funding for educational activities or lectures from Pfizer, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Novo Nordisk; and has received funding for consulting or other services from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Martinez-Traba is an employee of Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Parikh has served as a consultant for Medtronic; and has received institutional research grants from Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Parkhomenko has received research grants and personal fees from Bayer, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squib/Pfizer, and Daiichi-Sankyo. Dr Schou has received lecture fees from Novartis, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novo Nordisk. Dr van der Meer has received grant support from the European Research Council (ERC CoG 101045236, DISSECT-HF) and the University Medical Centre Groningen; and Dr van der Meer’s employer, has received consultancy fees and/or grants from Novartis, Pharmacosmos, Vifor Pharma, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Pharma Nord, BridgeBio, Novo Nordisk, Daiichi-Sankyo, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Ionis. Dr Vinereanu has received research grants and consultancy fees from Boehringer Ingelheim; and has received research grants from Bayer Healthcare, Novartis, and Servier. Dr Zieroth has received research grant support, served on advisory boards for, or participated in speaker engagements with AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche, Salubrisbio, Servier, and Vifor Pharma; has served on a clinical trial committee or as a national lead for studies sponsored by AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer; and has nonindustry relationships with the Canadian Medical and Surgical KT Group, CCS, CHFS, Charite, EOCI, Liv, Medscape, Ology, PACE-CME, Radcliffe, Reach MD, and the Translational Medicine Academy. Dr Brueckmann is an employee of Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Sumin is an employee of Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Bhatt has served on the advisory boards of Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, and Stasys; has served on the Board of Directors of the American Heart Association New York City, Angiowave (with stock options), Bristol Myers Squibb (with stock), DRS.LINQ (with stock options), and High Enroll (with stock); has served as a consultant for Broadview Ventures, GlaxoSmithKline, Hims, SFJ, and Youngene; has served on data monitoring committees for Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific (Chair, PEITHO trial), Cleveland Clinic, Contego Medical (Chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi-Sankyo; for the ABILITY-DM trial, funded by Concept Medical; for ALLAY-HF, funded by Alleviant Medical), Novartis, Population Health Research Institute; and Rutgers University (for the NIH-funded MINT Trial); has received honoraria from the American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; Chair, ACC Accreditation Oversight Committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/Bristol Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (clinical trial steering committees), CSL Behring (American Heart Association lecture), Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest Editor; Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME (Course Director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer), WebMD (CME steering committees), Wiley (steering committee); has served as Deputy Editor for Clinical Cardiology; has been named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, which assigned it to Lexicon; neither Dr Bhatt nor Brigham and Women’s Hospital receives any income from this patent); has received research funding from Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89Bio; has received royalties from Elsevier (Editor, Braunwald’s Heart Disease); has served as site co-investigator for Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, and Vascular Solutions; has served as a trustee of the American College of Cardiology; and has conducted unfunded research for FlowCo. Dr Hernandez has served as a consultant to Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Eidos, GlaxoSmithKline, Intellia, Intercept, Myokardia, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Prolaio, and TikkunLev; and has received research funding from American Regent, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Verily. Dr Butler has served as a consultant for Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AskBio, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardiocell, Cardior, CSL Bearing, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Daxor, Edwards, Element Science, Faraday, Foundry, G3P, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva, Ionis, Lexicon, Eli Lilly, LivaNova, Janssen, Medtronics, Merck, Occlutech, Owkin, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharmain, Prolaio, Regeneron, Renibus, Roche, Salamandra, Sanofi, SC Pharma, Secretome, Sequana, SQ Innovation, Tenex, Tricog, Ultromics, Vifor, and Zoll. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Empagliflozin reduces the risk of heart failure (HF) events in patients with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, chronic kidney disease, or prevalent HF irrespective of ejection fraction. Whereas the EMPACT-MI trial (Effect of Empagliflozin on Hospitalization for Heart Failure and Mortality in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction) showed that empagliflozin does not reduce the risk of the composite of hospitalization for HF and all-cause death, the effect of empagliflozin on first and recurrent HF events after myocardial infarction is unknown., Methods: EMPACT-MI was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial that randomized 6522 patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction at risk for HF on the basis of newly developed left ventricular ejection fraction of <45% or signs or symptoms of congestion to receive empagliflozin 10 mg daily or placebo within 14 days of admission. In prespecified secondary analyses, treatment groups were analyzed for HF outcomes., Results: Over a median follow-up of 17.9 months, the risk for first HF hospitalization and total HF hospitalizations was significantly lower in the empagliflozin compared with the placebo group (118 [3.6%] versus 153 [4.7%] patients with events; hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.60, 0.98]; P =0.031, for first HF hospitalization; 148 versus 207 events; rate ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.51, 0.89]; P =0.006, for total HF hospitalizations). Subgroup analysis showed consistency of empagliflozin benefit across clinically relevant patient subgroups for first and total HF hospitalizations. The need for new use of diuretics, renin-angiotensin modulators, or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists after discharge was less in patients randomized to empagliflozin versus placebo (all P <0.05)., Conclusions: Empagliflozin reduced the risk of HF in patients with left ventricular dysfunction or congestion after acute myocardial infarction., Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04509674., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Hernandez has served as a consultant for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Eidos, GlaxoSmithKline, Intellia, Intercept, MyoKardia, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Prolaio, and TikkunLev; and has received research funding from American Regent, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Verily. Dr Bhatt has served on advisory boards for ANGIOWave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Stasys; on the board of directors for American Heart Association New York City, ANGIOWave (stock options), Bristol Myers Squibb (stock), DRS.LINQ (stock options), and High Enroll (stock); has served as a consultant for Broadview Ventures, GlaxoSmithKline, Hims, SFJ, and Youngene; has served on data monitoring committees for Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific (chair, PEITHO trial), Cleveland Clinic, Contego Medical (chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi Sankyo; for the ABILITY-DM trial, funded by Concept Medical; for ALLAY-HF, funded by Alleviant Medical), Novartis, Population Health Research Institute, and Rutgers University (for the NIH-funded MINT Trial); has received honoraria from American College of Cardiology (senior associate editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; chair, ACC accreditation oversight committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/Bristol Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (editor-in-chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (clinical trial steering committees), CSL Behring (AHA lecture), Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (editor-in-chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest editor; associate editor), K2P (co-chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME (course director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer), WebMD (CME steering committees), and Wiley (steering committee); other: Clinical Cardiology (deputy editor); is named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham and Women’s Hospital, which was assigned to Lexicon (neither Dr Bhatt nor Brigham and Women’s Hospital receives any income from this patent); has received research funding from Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89Bio; has received royalties from Elsevier (editor, Braunwald’s Heart Disease); has served as site coinvestigator for Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, and Vascular Solutions; has served as trustee for American College of Cardiology; and performed unfunded research for FlowCo. Dr Butler has served as a consultant to Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AskBio, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardiocell, Cardior, CSL Bearing, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Daxor, Edwards, Element Science, Faraday, Foundry, G3P, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva, Ionis, Lexicon, Lilly, LivaNova, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, Occlutech, Owkin, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharmain, Prolaio, Regeneron, Renibus, Roche, Salamandra, Sanofi, SC Pharma, Secretome, Sequana, SQ Innovation, Tenex, Tricog, Ultromics, Vifor, and Zoll. Dr Goto reports serving as Associate Editor for Circulation and receipt of a steering committee fee from the Duke Clinical Research Institute for EMPACT-MI. Dr Lopes reports research grants or contracts from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Aventis; funding for educational activities or lectures from Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, and Novo Nordisk; and funding for consulting or other services from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Amir reports serving as National PI-Steering committee member for the study and participated in paid lectures and advisory board meetings and clinical trials in Dr Amir’s department at Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Beyes-Genis has lectured or participated in advisory boards for Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Medtronic, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics, and Vifor. Dr Bahit reports modest honorarium from MSD, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Anthos Therapeutics. Dr Bauersachs received honoraria for lectures/consulting from Novartis, Vifor, Bayer, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Cardior, CVRx, BMS, Amgen, Corvia, Norgine, Edwards, and Roche not related to this article; and research support for Dr Bauersachs’ department from Zoll, CVRx, Abiomed, Norgine, and Roche, not related to this article. Dr Schou reports lecture fees from Novartis, Astra Zeneca, Bohringer, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Steg reports research grants from Amarin and Sanofi; clinical trial participation for Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Idorsia, Janssen, Novartis, Novo-Nordisk, and Sanofi; consulting or speaking for Amarin, Amgen, and Novo-Nordisk; and serving as senior associate editor at Circulation. Dr Parikh reports serving as a consultant for Medtronic, Inc and receipt of an institutional research grant from Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Januzzi reports participation as a trustee of the American College of Cardiology, board member of Imbria Pharmaceuticals, and director at Jana Care; has received research support from Abbott, Applied Therapeutics, Bayer, BBMS, HeartFlow Inc, Innolife, and Roche Diagnostics, and consulting income from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beckman, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Janssen, Medtronic, Novartis, Prevencio, Quidel/Ortho, Roche Diagnostics, and Vascular Dynamics; and participates in clinical end point committees or data safety monitoring boards for Abbott, AbbVie, Bayer, CVRx, Medtronic, Pfizer, Roche Diagnostics, and Takeda. Dr Goodman reports research grant support (eg, steering committee or data and safety monitoring committee) or speaker or consulting honoraria (eg, advisory boards) from Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, CYTE Ltd, Daiichi-Sankyo/American Regent, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, JAMP Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk A/C, Pendopharm/Pharmascience, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier, Tolmar Pharmaceuticals, and Valeo Pharma; and salary support or honoraria from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario/University of Toronto (Polo) Chair, Canadian Heart Failure Society, Canadian Heart Research Centre and MD Primer, Canadian VIGOUR Centre, Cleveland Clinic Coordinating Centre for Clinical Research, Duke Clinical Research Institute, New York University Clinical Coordinating Centre, PERFUSE Research Institute, and TIMI Study Group (Brigham Health). Dr van der Meer reports support from the European Research Council (ERC CoG 101045236, DISSECT-HF); the UMCG, which employs Dr van der Meer, received consultancy fees or grants from Novartis, Pharmacosmos, Vifor Pharma, Astra Zeneca, Pfizer, Pharma Nord, BridgeBio, Novo Nordisk, Daiichi Sankyo, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Ionis. Dr Petrie reports research funding from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, SQ Innovations, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Pharmacosmos; and consultancy or trial committee participation from Akero, Applied Therapeutics, Amgen, AnaCardio, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Astra Zeneca, Novo Nordisk, AbbVie, Bayer, Horizon Therapeutics, Takeda, Cardiorentis, Pharmacosmos, Siemens, Eli Lilly, Vifor, New Amsterdam, Moderna, Teikoku, LIB Therapeutics, and 3R Lifesciences. Dr Parkhomenko reports research grants and personal fees from Bayer, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS/Pfizer, and Daiichi-Sankyo. Dr Vinereanu reports research grants and consultancy fees from Boehringer Ingelheim and research grants from Bayer Healthcare, Novartis, and Servier Pharmaceuticals LLC. Dr Zieroth reports research grant support, served on advisory boards for, or had speaker engagements with AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche, Salubrisbio, Servier, and Vifor Pharma; and serves on a clinical trial committee or as a national lead for studies sponsored by AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Novartis and Pfizer; nonindustry participation includes Canadian Medical and Surgical KT Group, CCS, CHFS, Charite, EOCI, Liv, Medscape, Ology, PACE-CME, Radcliffe, Reach MD, and Translational Medicine Academy. Dr Jones reports research grants from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Novartis, PCORI, and the National Institutes of Health. Drs Seide, Mattheus, Zwiener, Sumin, Gasior, Jamal, and Brueckmann are employees of Boehringer Ingelheim.

Background: Empagliflozin improves cardiovascular outcomes in patients with heart failure, patients with type 2 diabetes who are at high cardiovascular risk, and patients with chronic kidney disease. The safety and efficacy of empagliflozin in patients who have had acute myocardial infarction are unknown., Methods: In this event-driven, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients who had been hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction and were at risk for heart failure to receive empagliflozin at a dose of 10 mg daily or placebo in addition to standard care within 14 days after admission. The primary end point was a composite of hospitalization for heart failure or death from any cause as assessed in a time-to-first-event analysis., Results: A total of 3260 patients were assigned to receive empagliflozin and 3262 to receive placebo. During a median follow-up of 17.9 months, a first hospitalization for heart failure or death from any cause occurred in 267 patients (8.2%) in the empagliflozin group and in 298 patients (9.1%) in the placebo group, with incidence rates of 5.9 and 6.6 events, respectively, per 100 patient-years (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 1.06; P = 0.21). With respect to the individual components of the primary end point, a first hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 118 patients (3.6%) in the empagliflozin group and in 153 patients (4.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.98), and death from any cause occurred in 169 (5.2%) and 178 (5.5%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.19). Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of empagliflozin and were similar in the two trial groups., Conclusions: Among patients at increased risk for heart failure after acute myocardial infarction, treatment with empagliflozin did not lead to a significantly lower risk of a first hospitalization for heart failure or death from any cause than placebo. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly; EMPACT-MI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04509674.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Heart failure is the most common cardiovascular complication during pregnancy and the postpartum period. It is associated with increased risk of maternal morbidity and mortality as well as potentially life-threatening foetal pathology. Management of heart failure in pregnancy requires expert knowledge of cardiovascular disease as well as obstetrics which underscores the importance of multidisciplinary cardio-obstetrics teams in order to optimize diagnosis, treatment and outcome. This includes counselling of women at risk before and during the course of pregnancy in order to strengthen the relationship between medical specialists and patients, as well as to allow patient-centred delivery of care and improve quality of life., (© 2024 European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Frailty is a severe, common co-morbidity associated with heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The impact of frailty on HFpEF outcomes may affect treatment choices in HFpEF. The impact of frailty on HFpEF patients and any impact on the clinical benefits of sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibition in HFpEF have been described in only a limited number of trials. Whether the SGLT2 inhibitor empagliflozin would improve or worsen frailty status when given to HFpEF patients is also not known. The aims of this study were, therefore, to evaluate, in HFpEF patients enrolled in the EMPEROR-Preserved trial (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction), the impact of frailty on clinical outcomes, and on the effects of empagliflozin, as well as the effect of empagliflozin on frailty status during treatment period., Methods: We calculated a cumulative deficit-derived frailty index (FI) using 44 variables including clinical, laboratory and quality of life parameters recorded in EMPEROR-Preserved. Patients were classified into four groups: non-frail (FI < 0.21), mild frailty (0.21 to <0.30), moderate frailty (0.30 to <0.40) and severe frailty (≥0.40). Clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life were evaluated according to baseline FI along with the effect of empagliflozin on chronological changes in FI (at 12, 32 and 52 weeks)., Results: The patient distribution was 1514 (25.3%), 2100 (35.1%), 1501 (25.1%) and 873 (14.6%) in non-frail, mild frailty, moderate frailty and severe frailty, respectively. Severe frailty patients tended to be female and have low Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) scores, more co-morbidities and more polypharmacy. Incidence rates of the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization increased as frailty worsened (hazard ratio [HR] of each FI category compared with the non-frail group: 1.10 [95% confidence interval, CI, 0.89-1.35], 2.00 [1.63-2.47] and 2.61 [2.08-3.27] in the mild frailty, moderate frailty and severe frailty groups, respectively; P trend < 0.001). Compared with placebo, empagliflozin reduced the risk for the primary outcome across the four FI categories, HR: 0.59 [95% CI 0.42-0.83], 0.79 [0.61-1.01], 0.77 [0.61-0.96] and 0.90 [0.69-1.16] in non-frail to severe frailty categories, respectively (P value for trend = 0.097). Empagliflozin also improved other clinical outcomes and KCCQ score across frailty categories. Compared with placebo, empagliflozin-treated patients had a higher likelihood of being in a lower FI category at Weeks 12, 32 and 52 (P < 0.05), odds ratio: 1.12 [95% CI 1.01-1.24] at Week 12, 1.21 [1.09-1.34] at Week 32 and 1.20 [1.09-1.33] at Week 52., Conclusions: Empagliflozin improved key efficacy outcomes with a possible diminution of effect in very frail patients. Empagliflozin also improved frailty status during follow-up., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: The presence of ischemic heart disease impacts prognosis in patients affected by heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). It is not well known how the extent of vascular disease impacts prognoses and responses to therapy in this setting., Methods: In this post hoc analysis of the EMPEROR-Reduced trial, outcomes and the effects of empagliflozin, were assessed in study participants according to the extent (none vs mono 1 vs poly [≥ 2] vascular bed) of vascular disease. Vascular disease was defined as investigator-reported coronary artery disease (CAD), peripheral artery disease (PAD) and cerebrovascular disease at baseline. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Incidence rates are presented per 100 person-years (py) of follow-up., Results: Of the 3730 study participants enrolled, 1324 (35.5%) had no vascular disease, 1879 (50.4%) had monovascular disease, and 527 (14.1%) had polyvascular disease. Participants with polyvascular disease tended to be older and male and to have had histories of hypertension, diabetes and smoking. In the placebo arm, a significantly higher risk for cardiovascular death existed in those with polyvascular disease (HR 1.57, 95% CI1.02, 2.44, compared to those with no vascular disease). In adjusted analysis, the benefit of empagliflozin in cardiovascular death or hospitalization due to HF, HF hospitalization, cardiovascular death, renal composite endpoint, estimated glomerular filtration slope changes, and health status scores were seen across the 3 groups (interaction P > 0.05 for all) but were attenuated in those with polyvascular disease. Adverse events were higher in those with polyvascular disease, but no major differences were noted between empagliflozin or placebo assignment in the 3 groups., Conclusion: In patients with HFrEF, the extent of vascular disease is associated with the risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Empagliflozin offers cardiovascular and renal benefits in HFrEF across the extent of vascular disease, but this benefit is attenuated in those with polyvascular disease., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: There are limited data on health status and changes in it over time across major subgroups of patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), including ejection fraction spectrum, age, sex, region, body mass index (BMI), and comorbidities including diabetes, chronic kidney disease (CKD), anaemia, and atrial fibrillation/flutter., Methods and Results: In the EMPEROR-Preserved trial, the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) was assessed at baseline, 12, 32 and 52 weeks. Determinants of baseline KCCQ score and change over time, and the impact of empagliflozin on KCCQ scores were studied in specified subgroups. A Cox model was used to assess the association between 5- and 10-point increase and 5-point decrease in KCCQ score from baseline to week 12 and later outcomes. Among 2979 participants in the placebo arm, mean KCCQ clinical summary score (CSS) was 70.7 (20.8). Older age, female sex, BMI, anaemia, and a history of diabetes, and CKD were associated with worse scores. KCCQ-CSS score improved during follow-up; patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter at enrollment (p trend = 0.014) and CKD (p trend < 0.001) had less improvement. A 5-point increase in KCCQ-CSS at week 12 was associated with lower risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (5%), cardiovascular death (8%), and first heart failure hospitalization (4%) subsequently. A similar trend was seen with KCCQ total symptom score (TSS) and overall summary score (OSS). Empagliflozin improved KCCQ-CSS, -TSS and -OSS scores similarly across subgroups studied except for greater improvement in patients with the highest BMI (p trend = 0.153, 0.08 and 0.078, respectively)., Conclusion: Health status in patients with HFpEF is impaired, especially in elderly, women, and those with obesity and comorbidities. Empagliflozin improved health status among all key subgroups studied with a greater effect in obese patients., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background & Objectives: Heart failure (HF) is emerging as a major health problem in India. The profile of HF in India is divergent from elsewhere in the world. While cardiologists must equip themselves with the requisite clinical management tools, scientists and health policymakers would need epidemiological data on HF and information on the resources required to meet the challenges ahead. The aim of this study was to identify the lacunae and to suggest recommendations to improve HF research., Methods: We surveyed a multidisciplinary group of HF experts using a two stage process. An email-based survey was conducted using a structured questionnaire, followed by an online discussion. The experts prioritized the major challenges in convergence research in India and inter-rater agreement values were calculated. In addition, they enlisted potential research gaps and barriers in the domains of epidemiology, diagnostics, management and technology and suggested recommendations to overcome those barriers., Results: The experts identified a paucity of data on HF burden, lack of state-of-the-art diagnostic facilities and trained personnel, overt dependence on imported devices/equipment/reagents, lack of interaction/awareness/information among stakeholders and lack of biobanks, as major barriers in HF research. Three fourths of the experts agreed that lack of interaction among stakeholders was the major challenge with the highest inter-rater agreement in both stages (19 out of 25 and 11 out of 17, respectively). The experts recommended the creation of multidisciplinary taskforces dedicated to population sciences, data sciences, technology development and patient management with short-, intermediate- and long-term strategies., Interpretation & Conclusions: The study generated a wish list for advances in HF research and management, and proposed recommendations for facilitating convergence research as a way forward to reduce the burden of HF in India.

Heart failure is associated with an increased frequency of hospitalization, reduced life span, and greater risk to public health, thus posing a challenge. In India, torsemide is one of the commonly used loop diuretics for decongestion in heart failure. However, this use of torsemide, including its dosing, and up/down titration, is based on practical experience. Loop diuretic therapy for heart failure patients poses several dilemmas due to the lack of robust evidence based on which treatment decisions can be made. To guide physicians on the optimal use of torsemide in heart failure patients with or without renal impairment, a panel of expert cardiologists and nephrologists from India convened to develop this expert opinion document for the use of torsemide. This expert opinion on torsemide will pave the way for optimal management with loop diuretic therapy in real-world heart failure patients., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2023, Chopra et al.)

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) represents a highly heterogeneous clinical syndrome affected in its development and progression by many comorbidities. The left ventricular diastolic dysfunction may be a manifestation of various combinations of cardiovascular, metabolic, pulmonary, renal, and geriatric conditions. Thus, in addition to treatment with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors in all patients, the most effective method of improving clinical outcomes may be therapy tailored to each patient's clinical profile. To better outline a phenotype-based approach for the treatment of HFpEF, in this joint position paper, the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, the European Heart Rhythm Association and the European Hypertension Society, have developed an algorithm to identify the most common HFpEF phenotypes and identify the evidence-based treatment strategy for each, while taking into account the complexities of multiple comorbidities and polypharmacy., (© 2023 European Society of Cardiology.)

Transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (ATTR-CM) is a rare and under-recognized disorder characterized by the aggregation of transthyretin-derived insoluble amyloid fibrils in the myocardium. Heterogeneity of symptoms at presentation, makes its diagnosis often delayed. An expert panel gathered on a virtual platform across India to conduct a meeting for developing a guiding tool for ATTR-CM diagnosis. The panel recommended younger age (≥40 years) for suspecting ATTR-CM and thick-walled non-dilated hypokinetic ventricle was considered as one of the important red flags. Electrocardiogram (ECG) and echocardiography (ECHO) findings were recommended as primary tests to raise the suspicion while nuclear scintigraphy and hematological tests were recommended to confirm the diagnosis and rule out amyloid light-chain (AL) amyloidosis. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and biopsy were recommended in case of ambiguity in the presence of red flags. Considering the lack of expert guidelines in the Indian scenario, a standardized diagnostic algorithm was also proposed., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None of the authors have any conflicts of interest to declare. All authors have received honorarium from Pfizer for their services as a member of the ATTR-CM Expert Panel Meeting., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier, a division of RELX India, Pvt. Ltd.)

Background: Women and men with heart failure (HF) and preserved ejection fraction may differ in their clinical characteristics and their response to therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of sex on the effects of empagliflozin in patients with HF and preserved ejection fraction enrolled in the EMPEROR-Preserved trial (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction)., Methods: The effects of empagliflozin on the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for HF and on secondary outcomes (including total HF hospitalization, cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores) were compared in women and men in the overall cohort and in subgroups defined by left ventricular ejection fraction (41%-49%, 50%-59%, and ≥60%). The effects of empagliflozin on physiological measures, including changes in systolic blood pressure, uric acid, hemoglobin, body weight, and natriuretic peptide levels, were also assessed., Results: Of the 5988 patients randomized, 2676 (44.7%) were women. In the placebo arm, women tended to have lower risk for adverse outcomes, including a lower risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.56, 0.84]). Compared with placebo, empagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for HF to a similar degree in both sexes (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.69, 0.96] for men; and hazard ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.61, 0.92] for women; P interaction =0.54). Sex did not modify the relationship between empagliflozin and outcomes across ejection fraction groups. Similar results were seen for secondary outcomes and physiological measures. Compared with placebo, empagliflozin improved the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score to a similar extent in both sexes (1.38 for men versus 1.63 for women at 52 weeks; P interaction =0.77); the results were similar for Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score and total summary score., Conclusions: Empagliflozin produced similar benefits on outcomes and health status in women and men with HF and preserved ejection fraction., Registration: URL: https://www., Clinicaltrials: gov; Unique identifier: NCT03057951.

Background: Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is a challenging medical emergency with high mortality and its prevalence is increasing in India. There is paucity of data on ADHF in the country., Methods: Indian College of Cardiology National Heart Failure Registry (ICCNHFR) is an on-going observational registry on ADHF contributed by 22 hospitals across India; and we present the in-hospital and 30-day outcomes of ADHF patients enrolled from August 2018 to July 2019. Major objective included capturing demographics, comorbid conditions, aetiology, prescription patterns and assessing clinical outcomes., Results: Of 5269 patients (mean age: 61.90 ± 13.85 years) enrolled in this study, males were predominant (67.09%). Mean duration of hospitalization was 5.74 ± 4.74 days. Ischemic heart disease was the most common (75.44%) aetiology. Abnormal electrocardiogram readings were found in most patients (89.86%). LVEF of ˂40% was found in 68.29% of patients. In-hospital mortality rates were 6.98%. The 30-day cumulative mortality was 12.35% and 30-day rehospitalization rate was 7.98%. At discharge, all guideline-based medical therapy (GDMT) were prescribed only to 24.99% of patients and 23.72% adhered to the prescription until 30 days. Older age, high serum creatinine levels and poor LVEF contributed to high mortality and rehospitalization., Conclusion: Patients with ADHF were younger and predominantly males. Usage of GDMT in ADHF patients was low (24.99%) and the in-hospital mortality was high. Older age, high serum creatinine levels, poor LVEF contributed for 30-day mortality and rehospitalization. This data on ADHF, could help in developing strategies to improve outcomes for HF patients in India., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in Asia exhibit many differences from those in other parts of the world., Objectives: This study sought to investigate the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin, compared with placebo, in HFrEF patients in Asia, compared with those elsewhere, enrolled in the DAPA-HF (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure) trial., Methods: Patients in New York Heart Association functional class II to IV with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% and elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide were eligible for the DAPA-HF trial. The primary outcome in the DAPA-HF trial was the composite of an episode of worsening HF (HF hospitalization or urgent HF visit requiring intravenous therapy) or cardiovascular death., Results: Of the 4,744 patients in the DAPA-HF trial, 1,096 (23.1%) were enrolled in Asia; 721 (15.2% overall, 65.8% of patients in Asia) were enrolled in East Asia (237 in China, 343 in Japan, and 141 in Taiwan), 138 (2.9% overall, 12.6% in Asia) in South-East Asia (Vietnam), and 237 (5.0% overall, 21.6% in Asia) in South Asia (India). Patients from Asia had similar rates of worsening HF events and mortality compared with patients elsewhere. Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary endpoint to the same extent in patients from Asia (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.87) as elsewhere (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.89) ( P for interaction = 0.32). Consistent benefits were observed for the other prespecified outcomes and among the regions of Asia. Study drug discontinuation and prespecified adverse events did not differ between regions., Conclusions: Dapagliflozin, compared with placebo, reduced the risk of worsening HF events and cardiovascular death to the same extent in Asian patients as elsewhere. (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: This study was funded by AstraZeneca. Dr McMurray was supported by a British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence Grant RE/18/6/34217. Dr Docherty has received grant support from Novartis and speaker fees from AstraZeneca; and his employer, the University of Glasgow, has been remunerated for his time spent working on the DAPA-HF trial. Dr Anand has received fees for serving on a steering committee from AstraZeneca, ARCA biopharma, Amgen, and LivaNova; for serving as chair of a data and safety monitoring board from Boston Scientific; for serving on an endpoint committee from Boehringer Ingelheim; and for serving on an advisory board from Zensun. Dr Chiang has received honorarium for lectures from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi. Dr Chopra has received consulting fees from Novartis. Dr Desai has received consulting fees from Abbott, Biofourmis, Boston Scientific, Boehringer Ingelheim, DalCor Pharmaceuticals, and Regeneron; grant support (paid to Brigham and Women’s Hospital) and consulting fees from Alnylam Pharmaceuticals and Novartis; and advisory board fees from Corvidia and Relypsa. Dr Kitakaze has received grant support and lecture fees from Astellas Pharma, Sanofi, Pfizer, Ono Pharmaceutical, Novartis, and Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma; lecture fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Kowa Pharmaceutical, Sawai Pharmaceutical, MSD, Shionogi, Kureha, Taisho Toyama Pharmaceutical, Takeda Pharmaceutical, and Toa Eiyo; and manuscript fees from Japan Medical Data Center. Dr Verma has received grant support, lecture fees, and advisory board fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Janssen, and Merck; lecture fees from Sun Pharmaceutical Industries and EOCI Pharmacomm; grant support and advisory board fees from Amgen; and lecture fees and advisory board fees from Sanofi and Eli Lilly. Dr Vinh has reported that he has no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose. 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 other support from AstraZeneca and personal fees from Novartis and Bristol Myers Squibb as a speaker. Dr Kosiborod has received personal fees from AstraZeneca; received grants, personal fees, and other from AstraZeneca; received grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim; and served as consultant for Vifor Pharma and personal fees from Sanofi, Amgen, Novo Nordisk, Merck (Diabetes), Janssen, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Glytec, Novartis, Applied Therapeutics, Amarin, and Eli Lilly. Dr Martinez has received personal fees from AstraZeneca. Drs Bengtsson, Langkilde, and Sjostrand are full-time employees of AstraZeneca. Dr Ponikowski has received personal fees and other from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, BMS, Cibiem, Novartis, and RenalGuard; personal fees from Pfizer, Servier, Respicardia, and Berlin-Chemie; other 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, DalCor, Dyrnamix, Esperion, IFM Therapeutics, and Ionis. Dr Sabatine has served as 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 Solomon has received grants from AstraZeneca, Bellerophon, Celladon, Ionis, Lone Star Heart, Mesoblast, National Institutes of Health/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Sanofi Pasteur, and Eidos; grants and personal fees from Alnylam, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Gilead, GSK, MyoKardia, Novartis, Theracos, Bayer, and Cytokinetics; and personal fees from Akros, Corvia, Ironwood, Merck, Roche, Takeda, Quantum Genomics, AoBiome, Janssen, Cardiac Dimensions, Tenaya, and Daiichi Sankyo. Dr Jhund has received other from AstraZeneca; personal fees from Novartis and Cytokinetics; and grants from Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr McMurray has received nonfinancial support and other from AstraZeneca, Cardiorentis, Amgen, Oxford University/Bayer, Theracos, Abbvie, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline, Vifor-Fresenius, Kidney Research UK, and Novartis; and other support from Bayer, DalCor, Pfizer, Merck, and Bristol Myers Squibb., (© 2022 The Authors.)

Aim: There is an association between heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and insulin resistance, but less is known about the diabetic continuum, and in particular about pre-diabetes, in HFpEF. We examined characteristics and outcomes of participants with diabetes or pre-diabetes in PARAGON-HF., Methods and Results: Patients aged ≥50 years with left ventricular ejection fraction ≥45%, structural heart disease and elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were eligible. Patients were classified according to glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c): (i) normal HbA1c, <6.0%; (ii) pre-diabetes, 6.0%-6.4%; (iii) diabetes, ≥6.5% or history of diabetes. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular (CV) death and total heart failure hospitalizations (HFH). Of 4796 patients, 50% had diabetes and 18% had pre-diabetes. Compared to patients with normal HbA1c, patients with pre-diabetes and diabetes more often were obese, had a history of myocardial infarction and had lower Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores, while patients with diabetes had more clinical evidence of congestion, but similar NT-proBNP concentrations. The risks of the primary composite outcome (rate ratio [RR] 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-1.88), total HFH (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.39-2.02) and CV death (hazard ratio [HR] 1.35, 95% CI 1.07-1.71) were higher among patients with diabetes, compared to those with normal HbA1c. Patients with pre-diabetes had a higher risk (which was intermediate between that of patients with diabetes and those with normal HbA1c) of the primary outcome (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00-1.60) and HFH (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.03-1.77), but not of CV death (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.75-1.40). Patients with diabetes treated with insulin had worse outcomes than those not, and those with 'lean diabetes' had similar mortality rates to those with a higher body mass index, but lower rates of HFH., Conclusion: Pre-diabetes is common in patients with HFpEF and is associated with worse clinical status and greater risk of HFH., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01920711., (© 2021 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction have significant impairment in health-related quality of life. In the EMPEROR-Preserved trial (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction), we evaluated the efficacy of empagliflozin on health-related quality of life in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and whether the clinical benefit observed with empagliflozin varies according to baseline health status., Methods: Health-related quality of life was measured with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) at baseline and 12, 32, and 52 weeks. Patients were divided by baseline KCCQ Clinical Summary Score (CSS) tertiles, and the effect of empagliflozin on outcomes was examined. The effect of empagliflozin on KCCQ-CSS, Total Symptom Score, and Overall Summary Score was evaluated. Responder analyses were performed to compare the odds of improvement and deterioration in KCCQ related to treatment with empagliflozin., Results: The effect of empagliflozin on reducing the risk of time to cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization was consistent across baseline KCCQ-CSS tertiles (hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.69-1.00], 0.70 [95% CI, 0.55-0.88], and 0.82 [95% CI, 0.62-1.08] for scores <62.5, 62.5-83.3, and ≥83.3, respectively; P trend=0.77). Similar results were seen for total heart failure hospitalizations. Patients treated with empagliflozin had significant improvement in KCCQ-CSS versus placebo (+1.03, +1.24, and +1.50 at 12, 32, and 52 weeks, respectively; P <0.01); similar results were seen for Total Symptom Score and Overall Summary Score. At 12 weeks, patients on empagliflozin had higher odds of improvement ≥5 points (odds ratio, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.10-1.37]), ≥10 points (odds ratio, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.03-1.27]), and ≥15 points (odds ratio, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.02-1.26]) and lower odds of deterioration ≥5 points in KCCQ-CSS (odds ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.75-0.97]). A similar pattern was seen at 32 and 52 weeks, and results were consistent for Total Symptom Score and Overall Summary Score., Conclusions: In patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, empagliflozin reduced the risk for major heart failure outcomes across the range of baseline KCCQ scores. Empagliflozin improved health-related quality of life, an effect that appeared early and was sustained for at least 1 year. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03057951.

Background: The prevalence of hypertension in the young adult population is rising in India. Increased arterial stiffness due to RAAS activation and increased sympathetic overactivity due to stress have been implicated as primary factors for the same. This study was aimed to understand the Indian clinician's perspective on approach to management of hypertension in young adults., Methods: A cross sectional observational survey using a structured questionnaire was conducted online with 2287clinicians (cardiologists, diabetologists, consultant physicians and family physicians)., Results: The prevalence of hypertension was 10-30% as per opinion of 64.8% clinicians. The top three risk factors for hypertension in young were perceived to be smoking, mental stress and obesity. Around 57.4% respondents opined that both increased heart rate and systolic blood pressure were markers of sympathetic overactivity. More than 60% respondents across specialities preferred ARBs to treat hypertension in young adults. Amongst the ARBs, telmisartan was the preferred ARB by &gt;80% respondents. Metoprolol was the preferred beta blocker by almost 64% respondents. The objective of selection of beta-blocker by majority of clinicians due to sympathetic overactivity. Telmisartan and Metoprolol single pill combination achieved the BP goal in 40-60% of patients as reported by 41.3% of the physicians. The combination therapy was well tolerated in young hypertensive patients., Conclusions: Initiation of an early and appropriate antihypertensive treatment in young population may lower the burden of cardiovascular disease in this population. ARBs and beta -blockers were the preferred class of anti-hypertensive drugs in the cohort of young hypertensive patients ., (© Journal of the Association of Physicians of India 2011.)

Background: There are concerns that Asian patients respond differently to some medications. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of evolocumab among Asian vs. other subjects in the FOURIER trial, which randomized stable atherosclerosis patients to receive either evolocumab or placebo., Methods and results: Effects of adding evolocumab vs. placebo to background statin therapy on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reductions, cardiovascular outcomes, and adverse events were compared among 27,564 participants with atherosclerotic disease, according to self-reported Asian (n=2,723) vs. other (n=24,841) races followed for a median of 2.2 years in the FOURIER trial. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina, or coronary revascularization. At randomization, Asians had slightly lower LDL-C (median 89 [IQR 78-104] mg/dL vs. 92 [80-109] mg/dL; P<0.001) and were much less likely to be on a high-intensity statin (33.3% vs. 73.3%; P<0.001). Evolocumab lowered LDL-C more in Asians than in others (66% vs. 58%; P<0.001). The effect of evolocumab on the primary endpoint was similar in Asians (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.61-1.03) and others (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.93; P interaction=0.55). There was no excess of serious adverse events with evolocumab among Asians over others., Conclusions: Use of evolocumab robustly lowers LDL-C and is equally efficacious in lowering the risk of cardiovascular events and safe in Asians as it is in others.

Aim: This retrospective study compares admissions and outcomes due to acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) during the COVID-19 pandemic from 25 March to 25 July 2020 with the historical patient control who were admitted during the same period in 2019., Methods and Results: Data of the participating hospitals was collected and analysed from the ICC NHFR (Indian College of Cardiology National Heart Failure Registry) for 2019 and 2020. Total number of ADHF admissions, demographics, aetiology, co-morbid conditions and in-hospital mortality was compared and analysed. A significant decrease in the number of hospital admissions due to ADHF from 2019 to 2020 (1056 vs. 526 respectively) was noted. Incidence of admissions with <40% ejection fraction (EF) reduced in 2020 (72.4% and 80.2% in2020 and 2019)and >40% (EF) increased (27.6% and 19.8% in 2019 and 2020 respectively, p = 0.0005). Ischemic heart disease (IHD) was the most common aetiology (78.59% in 2019 and 80.98% in 2020, p = 0.268). The in-hospital mortality was numerically higher in 2020 (10%) than in 2019 (8%), but not statistically significant (p = 0.161)., Conclusion: This study from the registry shows that the incidence of ADHF admissions during COVID-19 lockdown significantly reduced compared to the previous year. Demographic patterns remained similar but patients presenting with de-novo HF increased; IHD was the most common cause. The in-hospital mortality was numerically higher during the lockdown. The impact of lockdown perhaps led to fewer hospitalisations and this is to be factored in future strategies to address health care delivery during such crises., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Authors declare no conflict of interest for this manuscript., (Copyright © 2021 Cardiological Society of India. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a global public health problem with important regional differences. We investigated these differences in the PARAGON-HF trial (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Global Outcomes in HFpEF), the largest and most inclusive global HFpEF trial., Methods: We studied differences in clinical characteristics, outcomes, and treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan in 4796 patients with HFpEF from the PARAGON-HF trial, grouped according to geographic region., Results: Regional differences in patient characteristics and comorbidities were observed: patients from Western Europe were oldest (mean 75±7 years) with the highest prevalence of atrial fibrillation/flutter (36%); Central/Eastern European patients were youngest (mean 71±8 years) with the highest prevalence of coronary artery disease (50%); North American patients had the highest prevalence of obesity (65%) and diabetes (49%); Latin American patients were younger (73±9 years) and had a high prevalence of obesity (53%); and Asia-Pacific patients had a high prevalence of diabetes (44%), despite a low prevalence of obesity (26%). Rates of the primary composite end point of total hospitalizations for HF and death from cardiovascular causes were lower in patients from Central Europe (9 per 100 patient-years) and highest in patients from North America (28 per 100 patient-years), which was primarily driven by a greater number of total hospitalizations for HF. The effect of treatment with sacubitril-valsartan was not modified by region (interaction P >0.05)., Conclusions: Among patients with HFpEF recruited worldwide in PARAGON-HF, there were important regional differences in clinical characteristics and outcomes, which may have implications for the design of future clinical trials. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01920711.

Aim: Ensuring adherence to guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) is an effective strategy to reduce mortality and readmission rates for heart failure (HF). Use of a checklist is one of the best tools to ensure GDMT. The aim was to develop a consensus document with a robust checklist for stabilized acute decompensated HF patients with reduced ejection fraction. While there are multiple checklists available, an India-specific checklist that is easy to fill and validated by regional and national subject matter experts (SMEs) is required., Methodology: A total of 25 Cardiology SMEs who consented to participate from India discussed data from literature, current evidence, international guidelines and practical experiences in two national and four regional meetings., Results: Recommendations included HF management, treatment optimization, and patient education. The checklist should be filled at four time points- (a) transition from intensive care unit to ward, (b) at discharge, (c) 1st follow-up and (d) subsequent follow-up. The checklist is the responsibility of the consultant or the treating physician which can be delegated to a junior resident or a trained HF nurse., Conclusion: This checklist will ensure GDMT, simplify transition of care and can be used by all doctors across India. Institutions, associations, and societies should recommend this checklist for adaptability in public and private hospital. Hospital administrations should roll out policy for adoption of checklist by ensuring patient files have the checklist at the time of discharge and encourage practice of filling it diligently during follow-up visits., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest Development of the checklist, writing/editorial support were funded by Novartis Healthcare Pvt Ltd, India. The Sponsor reviewed the initial draft and subsequent versions of the manuscript for own data accuracy and for proprietary evaluation. The authors were advisors of National and Regional Steering Committee Meetings across India to formulate the consensus document and received honoraria from Novartis., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Anaemia is defined by WHO as Hb < 13.0 g/dL in male adults and <12.0 g/dL in female adults. It is a common comorbidity in patients of heart failure with both HFrEF and HFpEF. The incidence ranges between 30% and 50%, though in certain communities, it is likely to be higher still. Elderly age, severe heart failure, poor nutrition, and elevation of inflammatory markers are associated with a higher incidence of anaemia. However, the commonest contributing factor to anaemia in HF is iron deficiency. In a Canadian study of 12 065 patients, the incidence of absolute ID was 21% in anaemic patients. Many other western studies have also quoted incidences varying between 35% and 43%. The earlier attempts to improve outcomes by supplementation with Erythropoietic-stimulating factors were unsuccessful and resulted in a higher incidence of thrombotic events. Iron deficiency (ID) has emerged as an important factor in patients of HF, even in those without anaemia and worsens outcomes. It is defined as Ferritin levels below 100 mcg/L or 100-299 μg/L with transferrin saturation of <20%. Attempts to correct ID by oral supplementation have been unsuccessful as seen in IRON-HF and IRONOUT-HF trials. FAIR-HF and CONFIRM-HF conclusively established the role of IV Iron in improving exercise capacity and quality of life in patients with HFrEF. ESC guidelines have given a class IC indication for testing all heart failure patients for ID, and an IIaA recommendation for its correction by IV ferric carboxymaltose was found to be deficient. Ongoing trials will establish the role of IV iron in improving mortality and in HFpEF patients and in patients with acute heart failure., (© 2020 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Concern about hypotension often leads to withholding of beneficial therapy in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin, which lowers systolic blood pressure (SBP),according to baseline SBP in Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure trial (DAPA-HF)., Methods and Results: Key inclusion criteria were: New York Heart Association Class II-IV, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40%, elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level, and SBP ≥95 mmHg. The primary outcome was a composite of worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death. The efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin were examined using SBP as both a categorical and continuous variable. A total of 1205 patients had a baseline SBP <110 mmHg; 981 ≥ 110 < 120; 1149 ≥ 120 < 130; and 1409 ≥ 130 mmHg. The placebo-corrected reduction in SBP from baseline to 2 weeks with dapagliflozin was -2.54 (-3.33 to -1.76) mmHg (P < 0.001), with a smaller between-treatment difference in patients in the lowest compared to highest SBP category. Patients in the lowest SBP category had a much higher rate (per 100 person-years) of the primary outcome [20.6, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 17.6-24.2] than those in the highest SBP category (13.8, 11.7-16.4). The benefit and safety of dapagliflozin was consistent across the range of SBP; hazard ratio (95% CI) in each SBP group, lowest to highest: 0.76 (0.60-0.97), 0.76 (0.57-1.02), 0.81 (0.61-1.08), and 0.67 (0.51-0.87), P interaction = 0.78. Study drug discontinuation did not differ between dapagliflozin and placebo across the SBP categories examined., Conclusion: Dapagliflozin had a small effect on SBP in patients with HFrEF and was superior to placebo in improving outcomes, and well tolerated, across the range of SBP included in DAPA-HF., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03036124., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: In the DAPA-HF trial (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse-Outcomes in Heart Failure), the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor dapagliflozin reduced the risk of worsening heart failure and death in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. We examined the efficacy and tolerability of dapagliflozin in relation to background diuretic treatment and change in diuretic therapy after randomization to dapagliflozin or placebo., Methods: We examined the effects of study treatment in the following subgroups: no diuretic and diuretic dose equivalent to furosemide <40, 40, and >40 mg daily at baseline. We examined the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death or a worsening heart failure event and its components, all-cause death and symptoms., Results: Of 4616 analyzable patients, 736 (15.9%) were on no diuretic, 1311 (28.4%) were on <40 mg, 1365 (29.6%) were on 40 mg, and 1204 (26.1%) were taking >40 mg. Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary end point across each of these subgroups: hazard ratios were 0.57 (95% CI, 0.36-0.92), 0.83 (95% CI, 0.63-1.10), 0.77 (95% CI, 0.60-0.99), and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.63-0.97), respectively ( P for interaction=0.61). The hazard ratio in patients taking any diuretic was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.68-0.90). Improvements in symptoms and treatment toleration were consistent across the diuretic subgroups. Diuretic dose did not change in most patients during follow-up, and mean diuretic dose did not differ between the dapagliflozin and placebo groups after randomization., Conclusions: The efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin were consistent across the diuretic subgroups examined in DAPA-HF. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03036124.

Aims: The aim of this study was to examine whether left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) modified efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin 10 mg compared with placebo in the 4744 patients with LVEF ≤40% randomized in the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure trial (DAPA-HF)., Methods and Results: We examined whether LVEF, analysed categorically or continuously, modified the effect of dapagliflozin. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of a worsening heart failure (HF) event (unplanned HF hospitalization/an urgent HF visit requiring intravenous therapy) or cardiovascular death. Mean LVEF was 31.1% and LVEF categories analysed were: <26% (n = 1143), 26-30% (n = 1018), 31-35% (n = 1187), and >35% (n = 1396). Each 5% decrease in LVEF was associated with a higher risk of the primary outcome [hazard ratio (HR) 1.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-1.24]. The benefit of dapagliflozin was consistent across the spectrum of LVEF: the dapagliflozin vs. placebo HR was 0.75 (95% CI 0.59-0.95) for LVEF <26%, 0.75 (0.57-0.98) for LVEF 26-30%, 0.67 (0.51-0.89) for LVEF 31-35%, and 0.83 (0.63-1.09) for LVEF >35% (P for interaction = 0.762). Similarly, the effect of dapagliflozin on the components of the primary endpoint was not modified by baseline LVEF (P for interaction for cardiovascular death = 0.974, and for worsening HF = 0.161). Safety of dapagliflozin was also consistent across the range of LVEF and neither efficacy nor safety were modified by diabetes status., Conclusion: Left ventricular ejection fraction was a significant predictor of hospitalization and mortality in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction but did not modify the beneficial effect of dapagliflozin, overall or separately, in patients with and without diabetes., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03036124., (© 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has important implications for the safety of participants in clinical trials and the research staff caring for them and, consequently, for the trials themselves. Patients with heart failure may be at greater risk of infection with COVID-19 and the consequences might also be more serious, but they are also at risk of adverse outcomes if their clinical care is compromised. As physicians and clinical trialists, it is our responsibility to ensure safe and effective care is delivered to trial participants without affecting the integrity of the trial. The social contract with our patients demands no less. Many regulatory authorities from different world regions have issued guidance statements regarding the conduct of clinical trials during this COVID-19 crisis. However, international trials may benefit from expert guidance from a global panel of experts to supplement local advice and regulations, thereby enhancing the safety of participants and the integrity of the trial. Accordingly, the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology on 21 and 22 March 2020 conducted web-based meetings with expert clinical trialists in Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and Asia. The main objectives of this Expert Position Paper are to highlight the challenges that this pandemic poses for the conduct of clinical trials in heart failure and to offer advice on how they might be overcome, with some practical examples. While this panel of experts are focused on heart failure clinical trials, these discussions and recommendations may apply to clinical trials in other therapeutic areas., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: The authors sought to evaluate the prognostic significance of baseline N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), whether NT-proBNP modified the treatment response to sacubitril/valsartan, and the treatment effect of sacubitril/valsartan on NT-proBNP overall and in key subgroups., Background: Sacubitril/valsartan reduces NT-proBNP in heart failure (HF) with both reduced and preserved ejection fraction (EF), but did not significantly reduce total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death compared with valsartan in patients with HF with preserved EF (HFpEF)., Methods: In the PARAGON-HF (Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 Compared to Valsartan, on Morbidity and Mortality in Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction) trial, 4,796 patients with HFpEF and elevated NT-proBNP were randomized to sacubitril/valsartan or valsartan. NT-proBNP was measured at screening in all patients and at 5 subsequent times in >2,700 patients: before, between, and after sequential valsartan and sacubitril/valsartan run-in periods, and 16 and 48 weeks post-randomization., Results: Median NT-proBNP was 911 pg/ml (interquartile range: 464 to 1,613 pg/ml) at screening. Screening NT-proBNP was strongly associated with the primary endpoint, total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death (rate ratio [RR]: 1.68 per log increase in NT-proBNP, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.53 to 1.85; p < 0.001). This relationship was stronger in patients with atrial fibrillation (adjusted RR: 2.33 [95% CI: 1.89 to 2.87] vs. 1.58 [95% CI: 1.42 to 1.75] in patients without atrial fibrillation; p interaction <0.001) and weaker in obese patients (adjusted RR: 1.50 [95% CI: 1.31 to 1.71] vs. 1.92 [95% CI: 1.70 to 2.17] in nonobese patients; p interaction <0.001). Screening NT-proBNP did not modify the treatment effect of sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan (p interaction = 0.96). Sacubitril/valsartan reduced NT-proBNP by 19% (95% CI: 14% to 23%; p < 0.001) compared with valsartan 16 weeks post-randomization, with similar reductions in men (20%) and women (18%), and in patients with left ventricular EF ≤57% (20%) and >57% (18%). Decreases in NT-proBNP predicted lower subsequent risk of the primary endpoint., Conclusions: Baseline NT-proBNP predicted HF events but did not modify the sacubitril/valsartan treatment effect in patients with HFpEF. Sacubitril/valsartan reduced NT-proBNP consistently in men and women, and in patients with lower or higher EF. (Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 Compared to Valsartan, on Morbidity and Mortality in Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction [PARAGON-HF]; NCT01920711)., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Additional treatments are needed for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors may be an effective treatment for patients with HFrEF, even those without diabetes., Objective: To evaluate the effects of dapagliflozin in patients with HFrEF with and without diabetes., Design, Setting, and Participants: Exploratory analysis of a phase 3 randomized trial conducted at 410 sites in 20 countries. Patients with New York Heart Association classification II to IV with an ejection fraction less than or equal to 40% and elevated plasma N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide were enrolled between February 15, 2017, and August 17, 2018, with final follow-up on June 6, 2019., Interventions: Addition of once-daily 10 mg of dapagliflozin or placebo to recommended therapy., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the composite of an episode of worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death. This outcome was analyzed by baseline diabetes status and, in patients without diabetes, by glycated hemoglobin level less than 5.7% vs greater than or equal to 5.7%., Results: Among 4744 patients randomized (mean age, 66 years; 1109 [23%] women; 2605 [55%] without diabetes), 4742 completed the trial. Among participants without diabetes, the primary outcome occurred in 171 of 1298 (13.2%) in the dapagliflozin group and 231 of 1307 (17.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.60-0.88]). In patients with diabetes, the primary outcome occurred in 215 of 1075 (20.0%) in the dapagliflozin group and 271 of 1064 (25.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.63-0.90]) (P value for interaction = .80). Among patients without diabetes and a glycated hemoglobin level less than 5.7%, the primary outcome occurred in 53 of 438 patients (12.1%) in the dapagliflozin group and 71 of 419 (16.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.47-0.96]). In patients with a glycated hemoglobin of at least 5.7%, the primary outcome occurred in 118 of 860 patients (13.7%) in the dapagliflozin group and 160 of 888 (18.0%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.59-0.94]) (P value for interaction = .72). Volume depletion was reported as an adverse event in 7.3% of patients in the dapagliflozin group and 6.1% in the placebo group among patients without diabetes and in 7.8% of patients in the dapagliflozin group and 7.8% in the placebo group among patients with diabetes. A kidney adverse event was reported in 4.8% of patients in the dapagliflozin group and 6.0% in the placebo group among patients without diabetes and in 8.5% of patients in the dapagliflozin group and 8.7% in the placebo group among patients with diabetes., Conclusions and Relevance: In this exploratory analysis of a randomized trial of patients with HFrEF, dapagliflozin compared with placebo, when added to recommended therapy, significantly reduced the risk of worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death independently of diabetes status., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03036124.

Background: The proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor alirocumab significantly reduces low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)., Objective: This study (ODYSSEY EAST) assessed the efficacy and safety of alirocumab vs ezetimibe in high cardiovascular risk patients from Asia., Methods: Patients (n = 615) from China, India, and Thailand with hypercholesterolemia at high cardiovascular risk on maximally tolerated statin were randomized (2:1) to alirocumab (75 mg every 2 weeks [Q2W]; with dose increase to 150 mg Q2W at week 12 if week 8 LDL-C was >1.81 mmol/L [>70 mg/dL]) or ezetimibe (10 mg daily) for 24 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage change in calculated LDL-C from baseline to week 24. Safety was assessed throughout., Results: Baseline data were similar in both groups. LDL-C levels were reduced from baseline to week 24 by 56.0% and 20.3% in the alirocumab and ezetimibe groups, respectively (P < .0001 vs ezetimibe). Overall, 18.8% of alirocumab-treated patients received a dose increase to 150 mg Q2W. At week 24, 85.1% of alirocumab-treated and 40.5% of ezetimibe-treated patients reached LDL-C <1.81 mmol/L (<70 mg/dL, P < .0001 vs ezetimibe). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 68.5% of alirocumab-treated and 63.1% of ezetimibe-treated patients, with upper respiratory tract infection the most common (alirocumab: 13.3%; ezetimibe: 14.1%). Injection-site reactions occurred more frequently in alirocumab-treated patients (2.7%) than in ezetimibe-treated patients (1.0%)., Conclusions: Alirocumab significantly reduced LDL-C vs ezetimibe in high cardiovascular risk patients from Asia and was generally well tolerated. These findings are consistent with previous ODYSSEY studies., (Copyright © 2020 National Lipid Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In patients with type 2 diabetes, inhibitors of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) reduce the risk of a first hospitalization for heart failure, possibly through glucose-independent mechanisms. More data are needed regarding the effects of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with established heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, regardless of the presence or absence of type 2 diabetes., Methods: In this phase 3, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 4744 patients with New York Heart Association class II, III, or IV heart failure and an ejection fraction of 40% or less to receive either dapagliflozin (at a dose of 10 mg once daily) or placebo, in addition to recommended therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of worsening heart failure (hospitalization or an urgent visit resulting in intravenous therapy for heart failure) or cardiovascular death., Results: Over a median of 18.2 months, the primary outcome occurred in 386 of 2373 patients (16.3%) in the dapagliflozin group and in 502 of 2371 patients (21.2%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.85; P<0.001). A first worsening heart failure event occurred in 237 patients (10.0%) in the dapagliflozin group and in 326 patients (13.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.83). Death from cardiovascular causes occurred in 227 patients (9.6%) in the dapagliflozin group and in 273 patients (11.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.98); 276 patients (11.6%) and 329 patients (13.9%), respectively, died from any cause (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.97). Findings in patients with diabetes were similar to those in patients without diabetes. The frequency of adverse events related to volume depletion, renal dysfunction, and hypoglycemia did not differ between treatment groups., Conclusions: Among patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, the risk of worsening heart failure or death from cardiovascular causes was lower among those who received dapagliflozin than among those who received placebo, regardless of the presence or absence of diabetes. (Funded by AstraZeneca; DAPA-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03036124.)., (Copyright © 2019 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Randomized clinical trials initially used heart failure (HF) patients with low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) to select study populations with high risk to enhance statistical power. However, this use of LVEF in clinical trials has led to oversimplification of the scientific view of a complex syndrome. Descriptive terms such as 'HFrEF' (HF with reduced LVEF), 'HFpEF' (HF with preserved LVEF), and more recently 'HFmrEF' (HF with mid-range LVEF), assigned on arbitrary LVEF cut-off points, have gradually arisen as separate diseases, implying distinct pathophysiologies. In this article, based on pathophysiological reasoning, we challenge the paradigm of classifying HF according to LVEF. Instead, we propose that HF is a heterogeneous syndrome in which disease progression is associated with a dynamic evolution of functional and structural changes leading to unique disease trajectories creating a spectrum of phenotypes with overlapping and distinct characteristics. Moreover, we argue that by recognizing the spectral nature of the disease a novel stratification will arise from new technologies and scientific insights that will shape the design of future trials based on deeper understanding beyond the LVEF construct alone., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: India has one of the largest population of heart failure (HF) patients in the world; yet only limited information is available about HF in India., Methods: This observational study was performed at Medanta- The Medicity, a large, tertiary-care institute in the National Capital Region of India. Records of HF patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) registered at Medanta HF clinic during the period early 2014 to mid-2017 were reviewed. Disease characteristics and one-year mortality details were collected., Results: Mean age of the subjects (n = 5590) was 59.1 ± 11.8 years with 83.0% males. Mean LVEF was 30.0 ± 6.6%. Coronary artery disease (CAD) was the dominant cause of HF, accounting for 77.8% of the total population. Most patients received guideline-directed medical therapy with a beta blocker being prescribed to 81.8% subjects. The one-year all-cause mortality was 17.6%. On multivariate analysis, age, usage of loop diuretics and ivabradine, and serum creatinine were independently associated with one-year mortality, whereas rheumatic etiology had an inverse association., Conclusions: This represents the largest single-center data of HF patients reported so far and the largest study describing clinical outcomes from HF patients in India. Our patients were younger, had high proportion of CAD, and there was higher usage of beta-blockers. Despite this, the one-year mortality was substantial. Given the enormous magnitude of HF burden in India and the paucity of information on this subject, these findings should be of help in identifying key problem areas and potential solutions for management of HF in India., (Copyright © 2019 Cardiological Society of India. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)