Search

Aims: Patients surviving an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are at risk of developing symptomatic heart failure (HF) or premature death. We hypothesized that sacubitril/valsartan, effective in the treatment of chronic HF, prevents development of HF and reduces cardiovascular death following high-risk AMI compared to a proven angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor. This paper describes the study design and baseline characteristics of patients enrolled in the Prospective ARNI vs. ACE inhibitor trial to DetermIne Superiority in reducing heart failure Events after Myocardial Infarction (PARADISE-MI) trial.Methods and Results: PARADISE-MI, a multinational (41 countries), double-blind, active-controlled trial, randomized patients within 0.5-7 days of presentation with index AMI to sacubitril/valsartan or ramipril. Transient pulmonary congestion and/or left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40% and at least one additional factor augmenting risk of HF or death (age ≥70 years, estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 , diabetes, prior myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, LVEF <30%, Killip class ≥III, ST-elevation myocardial infarction without reperfusion) were required for inclusion. PARADISE-MI was event-driven targeting 708 primary endpoints (cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization or outpatient development of HF). Randomization of 5669 patients occurred 4.3 ± 1.8 days from presentation with index AMI. The mean age was 64 ± 12 years, 24% were women. The majority (76%) qualified with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; acute percutaneous coronary intervention was performed in 88% and thrombolysis in 6%. LVEF was 37 ± 9% and 58% were in Killip class ≥II.Conclusions: Baseline therapies in PARADISE-MI reflect advances in contemporary evidence-based care. With enrollment complete PARADISE-MI is poised to determine whether sacubitril/valsartan is more effective than a proven ACE inhibitor in preventing development of HF and cardiovascular death following AMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Frailty, characterized by loss of homeostatic reserves and increased vulnerability to physiological decompensation, results from an aggregation of insults across multiple organ systems. Frailty can be quantified by counting the number of 'health deficits' across a range of domains. We assessed the frequency of, and outcomes related to, frailty in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).Methods and Results: Using a cumulative deficits approach, we constructed a 42-item frailty index (FI) and applied it to identify frail patients enrolled in two HFrEF trials (PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE). In keeping with previous studies, patients with FI ≤0.210 were classified as non-frail and those with higher scores were divided into two categories using score increments of 0.100. Clinical outcomes were examined, adjusting for prognostic variables. Among 13 625 participants, mean (± standard deviation) FI was 0.250 (0.10) and 8383 patients (63%) were frail (FI >0.210). The frailest patients were older and had more symptoms and signs of heart failure. Women were frailer than men. All outcomes were worse in the frailest, with high rates of all-cause death or all-cause hospitalization: 40.7 (39.1-42.4) vs. 22.1 (21.2-23.0) per 100 person-years in the non-frail; adjusted hazard ratio 1.63 (1.53-1.75) (P < 0.001). The rate of all-cause hospitalizations, taking account of recurrences, was 61.5 (59.8-63.1) vs. 31.2 (30.3-32.2) per 100 person-years (incidence rate ratio 1.76; 1.62-1.90; P < 0.001).Conclusion: Frailty is highly prevalent in HFrEF and associated with greater deterioration in quality of life and higher risk of hospitalization and death. Strategies to prevent and treat frailty are needed in HFrEF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The prevalence of liver function abnormalities is common in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We assessed the impact of liver function on prognosis and the effect of sacubitril/valsartan on measures of liver function in patients with HFrEF.Methods and Results: The PARADIGM-HF trial was a randomized, double-blind, active treatment-controlled trial. We included 8232 HFrEF patients with available measures of liver function, including transaminases, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and bilirubin; the primary endpoint was a composite of HF hospitalization and cardiovascular (CV) death. At screening, 11.6% of study patients had total bilirubin above the upper limit of normal (20.5 μmol/L) and 9.2% had ALP above the upper limit of normal (123 IU/L). Although ALP and albumin were associated with an increased risk of outcomes, among conventional test of liver function, total bilirubin was the strongest predictor for the primary endpoint [hazard ratio (HR) 1.10; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.15; P < 0.001], HF hospitalization (HR 1.14; 95% CI 1.07-1.22; P < 0.001); CV death (HR 1.07; 95% CI 1.00-1.14; P = 0.040), and all-cause death (HR 1.08; 95% CI 1.02-1.14; P = 0.009). All conventional measures of liver function were significantly improved in the sacubitril/valsartan group compared with the enalapril group after randomization (between-group reduction: total bilirubin 2.4%, 95% CI 0.7-4.2%, P = 0.007; aspartate aminotransferase 7.9%, 95% CI 6.7-9.0%, P < 0.001; alanine aminotransferase 7.7%; 95% CI 6.2-9.3%, P < 0.001; ALP 5.4%, 95% CI 4.4-6.4%, P < 0.001).Conclusion: Total bilirubin was a significant and independent predictor of CV death or HF hospitalization and all-cause mortality in patients with HFrEF enrolled in PARADIGM-HF. Sacubitril/valsartan improved measures of liver function compared with enalapril. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Chronic hyperglycaemia, assessed by elevated glycated haemoglobin (A1C), is a known risk factor for heart failure (HF) and cardiovascular (CV) death among subjects with diabetes. Whether this risk varies with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is unknown. This study evaluated whether A1C influences a composite outcome of either HF hospitalization or CV death differently along the spectrum of LVEF.Methods and Results: We assessed the relationships of baseline A1C and LVEF with a composite outcome of either CV death or HF hospitalization in the 4091 patients with type 2 diabetes and a recent acute coronary syndrome enrolled in the ELIXA trial who had available LVEF. We assessed for interaction between A1C and LVEF as continuous variables with respect to this outcome. During a median follow-up of 25.7 months, 343 patients (8.4%) had HF hospitalization or died of CV causes. In a multivariable model, A1C and LVEF were each associated with an increased risk of HF hospitalization or CV death [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.21 per 1% higher A1C, and adjusted HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.27-1.51 per 10% lower in LVEF]. Both A1C and LVEF were independently and incrementally associated with risk without evidence of interaction (P for interaction = 0.31). Patients with A1C ≥ 8% and LVEF <40% were at threefold higher risk than those with A1C < 7% and LVEF ≥50% (adjusted HR 3.18, 95% CI 2.03-4.98, P < 0.001).Conclusion: In a contemporary cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes and acute coronary syndrome, baseline chronic hyperglycaemia was associated with an increased risk of HF hospitalization or CV death independently of LVEF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To develop a risk model for sudden cardiac death (SCD) in high-risk acute myocardial infarction (AMI) survivors.Methods and Results: Data from the Effect of Carvedilol on Outcome After Myocardial Infarction in Patients With Left Ventricular Dysfunction trial (CAPRICORN) and the Valsartan in Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial (VALIANT) were used to create a SCD risk model (with non-SCD as a competing risk) in 13 202 patients. The risk model was validated in the Eplerenone Post-AMI Heart Failure Efficacy and Survival Study (EPHESUS). The rate of SCD was 3.3 (95% confidence interval 3.0-3.5) per 100 person-years over a median follow-up of 2.0 years. Independent predictors of SCD included age > 70 years; heart rate ≥ 70 bpm; smoking; Killip class III/IV; left ventricular ejection fraction ≤30%; atrial fibrillation; history of prior myocardial infarction, heart failure or diabetes; estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 ; and no coronary reperfusion or revascularisation therapy for index AMI. The model was well calibrated and showed good discrimination (C-statistic = 0.72), including in the early period after AMI. The observed 2-year event rates increased steeply with each quintile of risk score (1.9%, 3.6%, 6.2%, 9.0%, 13.4%, respectively).Conclusion: An easy to use SCD risk score developed from routinely collected clinical variables in patients with heart failure, left ventricular systolic dysfunction or both, early after AMI was superior to left ventricular ejection fraction. This score might be useful in identifying patients for future trials testing treatments to prevent SCD early after AMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To investigate the relationship between heart rate and outcomes in heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients in sinus rhythm (SR) and atrial fibrillation (AF) adjusting for natriuretic peptide concentration, a powerful prognosticator.Methods and Results: Of 13 562 patients from two large HFrEF trials, 10 113 (74.6%) were in SR and 3449 (25.4%) in AF. The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization. Heart rate was analysed as a categorical (tertiles, T1-3) and continuous variable (per 10 bpm), separately in patients in SR and AF. Outcomes were adjusted for prognostic variables, including N-terminal prohormone of B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and also examined using change from baseline heart rate to 1 year (≤ -10 bpm, ≥ +10 bpm, < ±10 bpm). SR patients with a higher heart rate had worse symptoms and quality of life, more often had diabetes and higher NT-proBNP concentrations. They had higher risk of the primary endpoint [T3 vs. T1 adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.35-1.66; P < 0.001; per 10 bpm: 1.12, 95% CI 1.09-1.16; P < 0.001]. In SR, heart rate was associated with a relatively higher risk of pump failure than sudden death (adjusted HR per 10 bpm 1.17, 95% CI 1.09-1.26; P < 0.001 vs. 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.13; P = 0.011). Heart rate was not predictive of any outcome in AF.Conclusions: In HFrEF, an elevated heart rate was an independent predictor of adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients in SR, even after adjustment for NT-proBNP. There was no relationship between heart rate and outcomes in AF.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers NCT01035255 and NCT00853658. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) is associated with adverse prognosis in cardiovascular (CV) and non-CV diseases. We evaluated the association of GDF-15 with CV and non-CV outcomes in the PARADIGM-HF trial.Methods and Results: In 1935 patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in PARADIGM-HF, median GDF-15 values were elevated and similar in sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril patients (1626 ng/L and 1690 ng/L, respectively). Diabetes, age, creatinine, high-sensitive troponin T, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and New York Heart Association class III/IV were most strongly associated with elevated GDF-15 values (all P < 0.001) (adjusted R2 = 0.3857). Baseline GDF-15 and changes in GDF-15 at both 1 month and 8 months (log-transformed) were associated with subsequent mortality and CV events. Each 20% increment in baseline GDF-15 value was associated with a higher risk of mortality [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.18, P < 0.001], the combined endpoint of CV death or hospitalization for heart failure (adjusted HR 1.09, 95% CI 1.05-1.14, P < 0.001) and heart failure death (adjusted HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.05-1.28, P < 0.001). Changes in GDF-15 were not influenced by assigned therapy (all P-values ≥ 0.1).Conclusion: In patients with ambulatory HFrEF, GDF-15 is not modified by sacubitril/valsartan and is strongly associated with mortality and CV outcomes, suggesting that GDF-15 is a marker of poor outcomes in these patients.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01035255. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The role of microvascular complications in the risk conferred by diabetes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is unknown.Methods and Results: We studied 2707 HFrEF patients in the Beta-blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial (BEST), stratified into three groups: no diabetes and diabetes without or with microvascular complications (neuropathy, nephropathy, or retinopathy). The risks of the composite of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization, and all-cause death, were studied using Cox regression analyses adjusted for other prognostic variables. Overall, 964 (36%) patients had diabetes, of which 313 (32%) had microvascular complications. Patients with microvascular complications had more severe symptoms (New York Heart Association class IV 12% vs. 9% diabetes with no complications and 7% no diabetes), and worse quality of life (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure median score 60 vs. 54 and 51 points). In patients with diabetes and complications, the rate of the composite outcome was 50 per 100 person-years of follow-up (compared with 34 and 29 in those with diabetes and no microvascular complications and participants without diabetes, respectively). Compared to patients without diabetes, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for the composite outcome was 1.44 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22-1.70] and 1.18 (95% CI 1.03-1.35) for patients with diabetes with and without complications, respectively. The risk of all-cause mortality was similarly elevated: adjusted HR 1.42 (95% CI 1.16-1.74) and 1.20 (95% CI 1.01-1.42), respectively.Conclusion: In HFrEF, diabetes with microvascular complications is associated with worse symptoms and outcomes than diabetes without microvascular complications. Prevention of microvascular complications has the potential to improve HFrEF outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

Objective: Plasma concentrations of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and troponin are often measured for diagnostic purposes when patients are admitted with heart failure, but their prognostic value when measured soon after admission is uncertain. We aimed to investigate the added prognostic value of admission measurements of BNP and troponins in patients with acute heart failure.Methods and Results: Multivariable prognostic models for death or any worsening heart failure (WHF) or rehospitalization for WHF by 30 days, 30-day death or rehospitalization for WHF, and 90-day mortality were constructed using baseline data from the Value of Endothelin Receptor Inhibition with Tezosentan in Acute heart failure Studies (VERITAS) including BNP and troponin I. Of 1347 patients, the median (interquartile range) value of BNP was 422 (156-945) pg/mL and 855 (63%) had measurable troponin I. By 30 days, 432 patients had died or experienced WHF. Clinical variables had only moderate predictive performance that was not substantially improved by BNP or troponin I (c-indices 0.6528 and 0.6595, respectively). By 30 days, 150 patients died or were rehospitalized for WHF. The c-index using clinical variables (0.6855) was not improved by adding biomarkers. By 90 days, 135 patients had died. The c-index for mortality was somewhat better than for composite outcomes (0.7394) but improved little with biomarkers (0.7461).Conclusion: Routine clinical data recorded at the time of admission in patients with acute heart failure are poor at predicting recurrent admissions but somewhat better at predicting mortality. Neither BNP nor troponin measured at admission improved predictions; measurement closer to discharge, or of other novel biomarkers, might perform differently. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Although hypokalaemia is common among patients with heart failure (HF), the prognostic significance of baseline hypokalaemia and hypokalaemia during follow-up in HF patients receiving a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) remains uncertain.Methods and Results: Results of the EMPHASIS-HF trial in patients (n = 2737) with HF and reduced EF with mild symptoms, randomized to eplerenone or placebo, were analysed with regard to the presence or occurrence of hypokalaemia (serum K+ <4.0 mmol/L) and the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for HF (primary endpoint). Median follow-up was 21 months. Baseline hypokalaemia and hypokalaemia during follow-up were common occurrences (19.6% and 40.6%, respectively). Hypokalaemia during follow-up was associated with worse outcomes in multivariable analyses [hazard ratio (HR) 1.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.52, P = 0.01] without evidence of interaction with eplerenone. In contrast, baseline hypokalaemia was associated with outcomes in the placebo group (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.05-1.79, P = 0.02) but not in the eplerenone group (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.62-1.23, P = 0.44; P for interaction = 0.04). Concurrently, eplerenone was found to be more protective in patients with baseline hypokalaemia vs. patients without baseline hypokalaemia compared with placebo (HR 0.44, 95% 0.30-0.64, P < 0.0001 vs. 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.83, P = 0.0001; P for interaction = 0.04). In patients without baseline hypokalaemia, eplerenone use decreased the rate of hypokalaemia during follow-up (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.59-0.80, P < 0.001). A potassium level >4.0 mmol/L at 1 month after randomization mediated 26.0% (0.6-51.4%) of the eplerenone treatment effect (P = 0.04).Conclusion: In HF patients receiving optimal therapy but not treated with eplerenone, baseline hypokalaemia was associated with worse outcomes. Conversely, hypokalaemia amplified the treatment effect of eplerenone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The TRUE-AHF is a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial which is evaluating the effects of a 48-h infusion of ularitide (15 ng/kg/min) on the short- and long-term clinical course of patients with acute heart failure. Noteworthy features of the study include the early enrolment of patients following their initial clinical presentation (within 12 h), and entry blood pressure criteria and thresholds for the adjustment of drug infusion rates, which aim to minimize the risk of hypotension. The trial has two primary endpoints: (i) cardiovascular mortality during long-term follow-up; and (ii) the clinical course of patients during their index hospitalization. Cardiovascular mortality is evaluated in this event-driven trial by following all randomized patients for the occurrence of death until the end of the entire study without truncation at an arbitrarily determined early time point. The clinical course during the index hospitalization is evaluated using the hierarchical clinical composite endpoint, which combines information regarding changes in symptoms and the occurrence of in-hospital worsening heart failure events and death into a single ranked metric that captures interval clinical events and minimizes the likelihood of missing data and confounding due to intensification of background therapy. The design of the TRUE-AHF trial capitalizes on lessons learned from earlier trials and aims to evaluate definitively the potential benefit of ularitide in patients with acute heart failure.Trial Registration: NCT01661634. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Inhibition of neprilysin, an enzyme degrading natriuretic and other vasoactive peptides, is beneficial in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), as shown in PARADIGM-HF which compared the angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan with enalapril. As neprilysin is also one of many enzymes clearing amyloid-β peptides from the brain, there is a theoretical concern about the long-term effects of sacubitril/valsartan on cognition. Therefore, we have examined dementia-related adverse effects (AEs) in PARADIGM-HF and placed these findings in the context of other recently conducted HFrEF trials.Methods and Results: In PARADIGM-HF, patients with symptomatic HFrEF were randomized to sacubitril/valsartan 97/103 mg b.i.d. or enalapril 10 mg b.i.d. in a 1:1 ratio. We systematically searched AE reports, coded using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA), using Standardized MedDRA Queries (SMQs) with 'broad' and 'narrow' preferred terms related to dementia. In PARADIGM-HF, 8399 patients aged 18-96 years were randomized and followed for a median of 2.25 years (up to 4.3 years). The narrow SMQ search identified 27 dementia-related AEs: 15 (0.36%) on enalapril and 12 (0.29%) on sacubitril/valsartan [hazard ratio (HR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33-1.59]. The broad search identified 97 (2.30%) and 104 (2.48%) AEs (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.75-1.37), respectively. The rates of dementia-related AEs in both treatment groups in PARADIGM-HF were similar to those in three other recent trials in HFrEF.Conclusion: We found no evidence that sacubitril/valsartan, compared with enalapril, increased dementia-related AEs, although longer follow-up may be necessary to detect such a signal and more sensitive tools are needed to detect lesser degrees of cognitive impairment. Further studies to address this question are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: In this analysis, we utilized data from PARADIGM-HF to test the hypothesis that participants who exhibited any dose reduction during the trial would have similar benefits from lower doses of sacubitril/valsartan relative to lower doses of enalapril.Methods and Results: In a post-hoc analysis from PARADIGM-HF, we characterized patients by whether they received the maximal dose (200 mg sacubitril/valsartan or 10 mg enalapril twice daily) throughout the trial or had any dose reduction to lower doses (100/50/0 mg sacubitril/valsartan or 5/2.5/0 mg enalapril twice daily). The treatment effect for the primary outcome was estimated, stratified by dose level using time-updated Cox regression models. In the two treatment arms, participants with a dose reduction (43% of those randomized to enalapril and 42% of those randomized to sacubitril/valsartan) had similar baseline characteristics and similar baseline predictors of the need for dose reduction. In a time-updated analysis, any dose reduction was associated with a higher subsequent risk of the primary event [hazard ratio (HR) 2.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2-2.7]. However, the treatment benefit of sacubitril/valsartan over enalapril following a dose reduction was similar (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.70-0.93, P < 0.001) to that observed in patients who had not experienced any dose reduction (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.88, P < 0.001).Conclusions: In PARADIGM-HF, study medication dose reduction identified patients at higher risk of a major cardiovascular event. The magnitude of benefit for patients on lower doses of sacubitril/valsartan relative to those on lower doses of enalapril was similar to that of patients who remained on target doses of both drugs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The combined neprilysin/renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan reduced cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization, cardiovascular death, and all-cause mortality in a large outcomes trial. While sacubitril/valsartan is the only currently available drug in its class, there are two prior clinical trials in heart failure with omapatrilat, another combined neprilysin/RAS inhibitor. Using all available evidence can inform clinicians and policy-makers.Methods and Results: We performed a meta-analysis using data from three trials in heart failure with reduced EF that compared combined neprilysin/RAS inhibition with RAS inhibition alone and reported clinical outcomes: IMPRESS (n = 573), OVERTURE (n = 5770), and PARADIGM-HF (n = 8399). We assessed the pooled hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause death or heart failure hospitalization, and for all-cause mortality in random-effects models, comparing combined neprilysin/RAS inhibition with ACE inhibition alone. The composite outcome of death or heart failure hospitalization was reduced numerically in patients receiving combined neprilysin/RAS inhibition in all three trials, with a pooled HR of 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.97, P = 0.013. For the endpoint of all-cause mortality, the pooled HR was 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.98, P = 0.021. Combined neprilysin/RAS inhibition compared with ACE inhibition was associated with more hypotension, but less renal dysfunction and hyperkalaemia in all three trials.Conclusions: Pooled estimates from three trials with two separate drugs of combined neprilysin/RAS inhibition support the use of combined neprilysin/RAS inhibition in heart failure with reduced EF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To assess the tolerability of initiating/uptitrating sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) from 50 to 200 mg twice daily (target dose) over 3 and 6 weeks in heart failure (HF) patients (ejection fraction ≤35%).Methods and Results: A 5-day open-label run-in (sacubitril/valsartan 50 mg twice daily) preceded an 11-week, double-blind, randomization period [100 mg twice daily for 2 weeks followed by 200 mg twice daily ('condensed' regimen) vs. 50 mg twice daily for 2 weeks, 100 mg twice daily for 3 weeks, followed by 200 mg twice daily ('conservative' regimen)]. Patients were stratified by pre-study dose of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin-receptor blocker (ACEI/ARB; low-dose stratum included ACEI/ARB-naïve patients). Of 540 patients entering run-in, 498 (92%) were randomized and 429 (86.1% of randomized) completed the study. Pre-defined tolerability criteria were hypotension, renal dysfunction and hyperkalaemia; and adjudicated angioedema, which occurred in ('condensed' vs. 'conservative') 9.7% vs. 8.4% (P = 0.570), 7.3% vs. 7.6% (P = 0.990), 7.7% vs. 4.4% (P = 0.114), and 0.0% vs. 0.8% of patients, respectively. Corresponding proportions for pre-defined systolic blood pressure <95 mmHg, serum potassium >5.5 mmol/L, and serum creatinine >3.0 mg/dL were 8.9% vs. 5.2% (P = 0.102), 7.3% vs. 4.0% (P = 0.097), and 0.4% vs. 0%, respectively. In total, 378 (76%) patients achieved and maintained sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg twice daily without dose interruption/down-titration over 12 weeks (77.8% vs. 84.3% for 'condensed' vs. 'conservative'; P = 0.078). Rates by ACEI/ARB pre-study dose stratification were 82.6% vs. 83.8% (P = 0.783) for high-dose/'condensed' vs. high-dose/'conservative' and 84.9% vs. 73.6% (P = 0.030) for low-dose/'conservative' vs. low-dose/'condensed'.Conclusions: Initiation/uptitration of sacubitril/valsartan from 50 to 200 mg twice daily over 3 or 6 weeks had a tolerability profile in line with other HF treatments. More gradual initiation/uptitration maximized attainment of target dose in the low-dose ACEI/ARB group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: We aimed to study the relationships of loop diuretic dose with renal function and clinical outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure (HF).Methods and Results: Loop diuretic dose at baseline was recorded in patients included in the Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure (CORONA). The relationship to change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) over time and to the first occurrence of the composite outcome of cardiovascular (CV) death or hospitalization owing to HF was examined in propensity score matched cohorts. Of the 5011 patients, 2550, 745, and 449 were receiving >80 mg (high), 41-80 mg (medium) and ≤40 mg (low) of loop diuretics in furosemide equivalent daily dosages, respectively, which were used to assemble 229, 385, and 1045 pairs of propensity-matched high, medium, and low dose cohorts. Compared with matched no loop diuretic groups, eGFR declined 0.3 ± 0.2, 0.3 ± 0.3 and 1.2 ± 0.5 mL/min/1.73 m(2) /year in the low-, medium-, and high-dose groups, respectively. Compared with matched no loop diuretic groups, hazard ratios (HR) (95% confidence intervals) for outcome associated with low-, medium- and high-dose groups were 1.71 (1.41-2.06), 1.99 (1.50-2.64), and 2.94 (1.95-4.41), respectively. Higher loop diuretic dose was particularly associated with increased risk for hospitalization owing to HF: HR 4.80 (2.75-8.37), P < 0.001.Conclusions: The use of loop diuretics was associated with a slightly greater rate of decline in eGFR, which did not vary significantly by diuretic dose.Loop diuretic dose was associated with higher risks of (CV) mortality and predominantly hospitalization owing to HF, which appeared to be higher among those receiving higher daily doses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To investigate the relationship between heart rate and survival in patients with heart failure (HF) and coexisting atrial fibrillation (AF).Methods and Results: Patients with AF included in the Meta-analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) meta-analysis were the main focus of this analysis (3259 patients from 17 studies). The outcome was all-cause mortality at 3 years. Heart rate was analysed as a categorical (tertiles; T1 ≤77 b.p.m., T2 78-98 b.p.m., T3 ≥98 b.p.m.) and continuous variable. Cox proportional hazard models were used to compare the risk of all-cause death between tertiles of baseline heart rate. Patients in the highest tertile were more often female, less likely to have an ischaemic aetiology or diabetes, had a lower ejection fraction but higher blood pressure and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class. Higher heart rate was associated with higher mortality in patients with sinus rhythm (SR) but not in those in AF. In patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF) and AF, death rates per 100 patient years were lowest in the highest heart rate tertile (T1 18.9 vs. T3 15.9) but this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.10). In patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF), death rates per 100 patient years were highest in the highest heart rate tertile (T1 14.6 vs. T3 16.0, P = 0.014). However, after adjustment for other important prognostic variables, higher heart rate was no longer associated with higher mortality in HF-PEF (or HF-REF).Conclusions: In this meta-analysis of patients with HF, heart rate does not have the same prognostic significance in patients in AF as it does in those in SR, irrespective of ejection fraction or treatment with beta-blocker. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The use of an erythropoesis-stimulating agent, darbepoetin alfa (DA), to treat anaemia in patients with diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease was associated with a heightened risk of stroke and neutral efficacy in the Trial to Reduce Cardiovascular Events with Aranesp Therapy (TREAT), despite epidemiological data suggesting the contrary. However, this association has not been evaluated in another randomized, placebo-controlled trial.Methods and Results: Reduction of Events by Darbepoetin Alfa in Heart Failure (RED-HF) was a randomized placebo-controlled trial of DA in 2278 patients with systolic heart failure and anaemia, enrolled from 2006 to 2012 and followed for a median of 28 months. Within RED-HF, 816 patients had diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 20-60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) ] and met inclusion criteria for TREAT. TREAT-like RED-HF patient data were analysed alone and combined at the patient level with the 4038 TREAT patients. In RED-HF, the annualized event rate of stroke was 2.3 in patients on DA and 1.1 in patients randomized to placebo (P = 0.051). Analysis of the combined group (n = 4854) confirmed a nearly two-fold increase in stroke risk [hazard ratio (HR) 1.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.43-2.63] and an overall neutral effect on mortality (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89-1.12) of raising haemoglobin with DA.Conclusion: The placebo-controlled cohort of heart failure patients with anaemia, diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease from RED-HF provides confirmation of the increased stroke risk associated with DA use identified in TREAT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and Methods: To: (i) describe the baseline characteristics of patients in ATMOSPHERE and the changes in the planned analysis of ATMOSPHERE resulting from the mandated discontinuation of study treatment in patients with diabetes; (ii) compare the baseline characteristics of patients in ATMOSPHERE with those in the Prospective comparison of Angiotensin Receptor neprilysin inhibitors with Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure trial (PARADIGM-HF); and (iii) compare the characteristics of patients with and without diabetes at baseline in ATMOSPHERE.Results: A total of 7063 patients were randomized into ATMOSPHERE April 2009-April 2014 at 755 sites in 43 countries. Their average age was 63 years and 78% were men. ATMOSPHERE patients were generally similar to those in PARADIGM-HF although fewer had diabetes, renal dysfunction, and were treated with a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. In ATMOSPHERE, patients with diabetes differed in numerous ways from those without. Patients with diabetes were older and had worse heart failure status but a similar left ventricular ejection fraction (mean 28%); they had a higher body mass index and more co-morbidity, especially hypertension and coronary heart disease. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate was slightly lower in those with diabetes compared with those without.Conclusion: ATMOSPHERE will determine whether patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (particularly those without diabetes) benefit from the addition of a direct renin inhibitor to standard background therapy, including an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, beta-blocker, and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. ATMOSPHERE will also determine whether aliskiren alone is superior to, or at least non-inferior to, enalapril. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The prognostic impact of heart failure relative to that of 'high-profile' disease states such as cancer, within the whole population, is unknown.Methods: All patients with a first admission to any Scottish hospital in 1991 for heart failure, myocardial infarction or the four most common types of cancer specific to men and women were identified. Five-year survival rates and associated loss of expected life-years were then compared.Results: In 1991, 16224 men had an initial hospitalisation for heart failure (n=3241), myocardial infarction (n=6932) or cancer of the lung, large bowel, prostate or bladder (n=6051). Similarly, 14842 women were admitted for heart failure (n=3606), myocardial infarction (n=4916), or cancer of the breast, lung, large bowel or ovary (n=6320). With the exception of lung cancer, heart failure was associated with the poorest 5-year survival rate (approximately 25% for both sexes). On an adjusted basis, heart failure was associated with worse long-term survival than bowel cancer in men (adjusted odds ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82-0.97; P<0.01) and breast cancer in women (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.55-0.64; P<0.001). The overall population rate of expected life-years lost due to heart failure in men was 6.7 years/1000 and for women 5.1 years/1000.Conclusion: With the notable exception of lung cancer, heart failure is as 'malignant' as many common types of cancer and is associated with a comparable number of expected life-years lost. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]