Search

Aims: Patients with transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTR‐CM) present with diverse left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). This study assessed tafamidis efficacy by baseline LVEF in the phase 3 Tafamidis in Transthyretin Cardiomyopathy Clinical Trial (ATTR‐ACT) and its long‐term extension (LTE) study. Methods and results: Patients were randomized to 30 months of tafamidis or placebo treatment in ATTR‐ACT. On completion, patients could join an LTE study to receive tafamidis. All‐cause mortality (death, heart transplant, or cardiac mechanical assist device implantation) from baseline to the end of follow‐up was assessed in patients continuously treated with tafamidis (80 mg meglumine or 61 mg free acid) or delayed tafamidis treatment (placebo in ATTR‐ACT; tafamidis in the LTE study) according to baseline LVEF (<50% or ≥50%). Supportive outcomes were evaluated over a shorter follow‐up. Patients with baseline LVEF <50% (n = 177: 88 tafamidis‐ and 89 placebo‐treated) had signs of more severe heart failure, a higher proportion were Black, and had variant ATTR‐CM than those with LVEF ≥50% (n = 171: 85 tafamidis‐ and 86 placebo‐treated). At the end of follow‐up (median 60–64 months), all‐cause mortality was numerically higher in patients with baseline LVEF <50%; however, consistent with supportive findings, continuous tafamidis treatment was associated with a 47% reduction in mortality risk compared with delayed tafamidis treatment in patients with LVEF <50% and ≥50% (hazard ratio 0.53 [95% confidence interval 0.367–0.758]; p < 0.001, and 0.53 [0.344–0.818]; p < 0.01, respectively). Conclusions: Early initiation of tafamidis is associated with reduced mortality in patients with ATTR‐CM, irrespective of initial LVEF value. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01994889, NCT02791230. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To assess the cost‐effectiveness of dapagliflozin in addition to usual care, compared with usual care alone, in a large population of patients with heart failure (HF), spanning the full range of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Methods and results: Patient‐level data were pooled from HF trials (DAPA‐HF, DELIVER) to generate a population including HF with reduced, mildly reduced and preserved LVEF, to increase statistical power and enable exploration of interactions among LVEF, renal function and N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide levels, as they are relevant determinants of health status in this population. Survival and HF recurrent event risk equations were derived and applied to a lifetime horizon Markov model with health states defined by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score quartiles; costs and utilities were in the UK setting. The base case incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £6470 per quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) gained, well below the UK willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) threshold of £20 000/QALY gained. In interaction sensitivity analyses, the highest ICER was observed for elderly patients with preserved LVEF (£16 624/QALY gained), and ranged to a region of dominance (increased QALYs, decreased costs) for patients with poorer renal function and reduced/mildly reduced LVEF. Results across the patient characteristic interaction plane were mostly between £5000 and £10 000/QALY gained. Conclusions: Dapagliflozin plus usual care, versus usual care alone, yielded results well below the WTP threshold for the UK across a heterogeneous population of patients with HF including the full spectrum of LVEF, and is likely a cost‐effective intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: We investigated titration patterns of angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and beta‐blockers, quality of life (QoL) over 6 months, and associated 1 year outcome [all‐cause mortality/heart failure (HF) hospitalization] in a real‐world population with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods and results: Participants with HFrEF (left ventricular ejection fraction <40%) from a prospective multi‐centre study were examined for use and dose [relative to guideline‐recommended maintenance dose (GRD)] of ACEis/ARBs and beta‐blockers at baseline and 6 months. 'Stay low' was defined as <50% GRD at both time points, 'stay high' as ≥50% GRD, and 'up‐titrate' and 'down‐titrate' as dose trajectories. Among 1110 patients (mean age 63 ± 13 years, 16% women, 26% New York Heart Association Class III/IV), 714 (64%) were multi‐ethnic Asians from Singapore and 396 were from New Zealand (mainly European ethnicity). Baseline use of either ACEis/ARBs or beta‐blockers was high (87%). Loop diuretic was prescribed in >80% of patients, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist in about half of patients, and statins in >90% of patients. At baseline, only 11% and 9% received 100% GRD for each drug class, respectively, with about half (47%) achieving ≥50% GRD for ACEis/ARBs or beta‐blockers. At 6 months, a large majority remained in the 'stay low' category, one third remained in 'stay high', whereas 10–16% up‐titrated and 4–6% down‐titrated. Patients with lower (vs. higher) N‐terminal pro‐beta‐type natriuretic peptide levels were more likely to be up‐titrated or be in 'stay high' for ACEis/ARBs and beta‐blockers (P = 0.002). Ischaemic aetiology, prior HF hospitalization, and enrolment in Singapore (vs. New Zealand) were independently associated with higher odds of 'staying low' (all P < 0.005) for prescribed doses of ACEis/ARBs and beta‐blockers. Adjusted for inverse probability weighting, ≥100% GRD for ACEis/ARBs [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.42; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24–0.73] and ≥50% GRD for beta‐blockers (HR = 0.58; 95% CI 0.37–0.90) (vs. Nil) were associated with lower hazards for 1 year composite outcome. Country of enrolment did not modify the associations of dose categories with 1 year composite outcome. Higher medication doses were associated with greater improvements in QoL. Conclusions: Although HF medication use at baseline was high, most patients did not have these medications up‐titrated over 6 months. Multiple clinical factors were associated with changes in medication dosages. Further research is urgently needed to investigate the causes of lack of up‐titration of HF therapy (and its frequency), which could inform strategies for timely up‐titration of HF therapy based on clinical and biochemical parameters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Guideline‐directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is recommended in clinical guidelines, but elderly patients have not fully received GDMT in the clinical situation. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical characteristics of patients who have not received GDMT and the association between implementation of GDMT at discharge and physical frailty in patients with HFrEF who were hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). Methods and results: This study was a cross‐sectional study with a retrospective analysis of the Kochi YOSACOI study, a prospective multicentre observational study that enrolled 1061 patients hospitalized for ADHF from May 2017 to December 2019 in Japan. Of 339 patients (32.0%) with HFrEF, 268 patients who were assessed for physical frailty by the Japanese version of the Cardiovascular Health Study criteria were divided into two groups: those with GDMT (135 patients, 50.4%) and those without GDMT (133 patients, 49.6%). GDMT was defined as the prescription of a combination of renin‐angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors (angiotensin‐converting inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers) and beta‐blockers. The median age of patients with HFrEF was 76 years (interquartile range, 67–83 years). Patients without GDMT were older than patients with GDMT (73 years vs. 78 years, P < 0.001). Patients without GDMT tended to have more prior HF admission than did patients with GDMT (P = 0.004), and patients without GDMT had lower levels of estimated glomerular filtration rate (P < 0.001) than those in patients with GDMT. Physical frailty was observed in 54.1% of the patients without GDMT and in 38.5% of the patients with GDMT (P = 0.014). Patients without GDMT had a higher rate of cognitive impairment than that in patients with GDMT (P = 0.009). RAS inhibitors only, beta‐blockers only, and both RAS inhibitors and beta‐blockers were less frequently prescribed in patients with physical frailty than in patients with physical non‐frailty (52.0% vs. 86.7%, P < 0.05; 70.1% vs. 100.0%, P < 0.05; 42.5% vs. 86.7%, P < 0.01, respectively). In logistic regression analysis, compared with physical non‐frailty, physical frailty was significantly associated with no implementation of GDMT (odds ratio: 6.900, 95% confidence interval: 1.420–33.600; P = 0.017), independent of older age and severe renal dysfunction. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that physical frailty is one of the factors that may withhold GDMT in patients with HFrEF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: This study aimed to determine the impact of heart failure (HF) on clinical outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods and results: We analysed data from Polish participants of the EURObservational Research Programme‐AF General Long‐Term Registry. The primary endpoint was all‐cause death, and the secondary endpoints included hospital readmissions, cardiovascular (CV) interventions, thromboembolic and haemorrhagic events, rhythm control interventions, and other CV or non‐CV diseases development during one‐year follow up. Overall, 688 patients with available data on HF were included into analysis; 51% (n = 351) had HF; of these 48% (n = 168) had reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), 22% (n = 77) mid‐range EF (HFmrEF), and 30% (n = 106) preserved EF (HFpEF). Compared with patients without HF, those with HF had higher mortality rate (aHR 5.61; 95% CI 1.94–16.22, P < 0.01). Patients with HF (vs. without HF) had more often CV interventions (10% vs. 5.4%, P = 0.046) and events (14% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.02), and had less often atrial arrhythmia‐related hospital admissions (6.8% vs. 15%, P < 0.01). Over follow‐up, patients with HFmrEF and HFpEF had similar mortality rate versus HFrEF (aHR 0.45, 95% CI 0.13–1.57, P = 0.45 for HFmrEF and aHR 0.54, 95% CI 0.20–1.48, P = 0.54 for HFpEF). Mortality rate was similar among rhythm versus rate control group (aHR 0.34; 95% CI 0.10–1.16; P = 0.34). Conclusions: AF patients with HF have greater mortality rate and more CV interventions/events. No statistically significant difference in long‐term outcomes between patients with HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF highlights the need to develop therapeutic strategies targeting functional status and survival for patients with HF and AF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: A waiting period of more than 3 months is recommended for patients before undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). However, due to an anticipated high mortality rate, early implementation of CRT might be beneficial for some patients. We aimed to evaluate the rate and the probability of left ventricular (LV) function improvement and their predictors in patients with heart failure (HF) with indications for CRT. Methods and results: From March 2011 to February 2014, a total of 5625 hospitalized patients for acute HF were consecutively enrolled in 10 tertiary hospitals. Among them, we analysed 1792 patients (mean age 63.96 ± 15.42 years, female 63.1%) with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 35% at the baseline echocardiography and divided them into three groups: 144 with left bundle branch block (LBBB), 136 with wide QRS complexes without LBBB, and 1512 not having these findings (control). We compared and analysed these three groups for improvement of LV function at follow‐up echocardiography. In patients who met CRT indications (patients with LBBB or wide QRS complexes without LBBB), logistic regression was performed to identify risk factors for no improvement of LV. No improvement of LV was defined as LVEF ≤ 35% at follow‐up echocardiography or the composite adverse outcomes: death, heart transplantation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or use of a ventricular assist device before follow‐up echocardiography. A classification tree was established using the binary recursive partitioning method to predict the outcome of patients who met CRT indications. In a median follow‐up of 11 months, LVEF improvement was observed in 24.3%, 15.4%, and 40.5% of patients with LBBB, wide QRS complexes without LBBB, and control, respectively. Patients meeting CRT indications had higher 3 month mortality rates than the control (24.6% vs. 17.7%, P = 0.002). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that large LV end‐systolic dimension [odds ratio (OR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05–1.15, P < 0.001], low LVEF (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87–0.98, P = 0.006), diabetes requiring insulin (OR 6.49, 95% CI 2.53–19.33, P < 0.001), and suboptimal medical therapy (OR 6.85, 95% CI 3.21–15.87, P < 0.001) were significant factors predictive of no improvement. A decision tree analysis was consistent with these results. Conclusions: Patients with CRT indications had higher mortality during their follow‐up compared with control. LV function improvement was rare in this population, especially when they had some risk factors. These results suggest that the uniform waiting period before CRT implantation could be reconsidered and individualized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Heart failure (HF) is a proinflammatory disease often associated with the onset of iron deficiency (ID). ID alters mitochondrial function, reducing the generation of cellular energy in skeletal muscle and cardiomyocytes. This study aimed to analyse the response of patients with HF to intravenous iron administration according to the type of HF: preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) or reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods and results: We conducted a retrospective, single‐centre study of 565 consecutive outpatients diagnosed with HF, recruited over 5 years, who were given intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) for the treatment of ID [defined as ferritin < 100 μg/L or ferritin 100–300 μg/L with transferrin saturation (TSAT) < 20%]. Clinical, laboratory, and echocardiographic parameters were analysed before and after administration. After FCM administration, overall ferritin, TSAT, and haemoglobin levels increased up to 5‐fold, 1.6‐fold, and 1.1‐fold, respectively, relative to baseline values in HF patients with reduced and preserved ejection fraction (P < 0.0001), with a greater increase in ferritin and TSAT in HFpEF patients. The left ventricular ejection fraction of the overall series improved by 8 percentage points in both types of HF (from 40% to 48%, P < 0.0001). The percentage of patients with normalization of right ventricular function increased by 6.9 points (from 74.1% to 81%) in HFpEF patients and by 6.4 points (from 53% to 59.4%) in the HFrEF subgroup (P < 0.0001). New York Heart Association functional status slightly improved, from a median of 2.4 (interquartile range, IQR: 2–2.7) to 1.9 (IQR: 1.5–2.5; P < 0.0001) after FCM in both types of HF. No changes were noted in plasma levels of liver enzymes, creatinine, or natriuretic peptide (P > 0.05). Conclusions: Intravenous iron administration appeared to improve ejection fraction and cardiac functional status in outpatients with ID and HF with both preserved and reduced ejection fraction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To phenotype mechanistic differences between heart failure with reduced (HFrEF) and preserved (HFpEF) ejection fraction, a closed‐loop model of the cardiovascular system coupled with patient‐specific transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and right heart catheterization (RHC) data was used to identify key parameters representing haemodynamics. Thirty‐one patient records (10 HFrEF, 21 HFpEF) were obtained from the Cardiovascular Health Improvement Project database at the University of Michigan. Model simulations were tuned to match RHC and TTE pressure, volume, and cardiac output measurements in each patient. The underlying physiological model parameters were plotted against model‐based norms and compared between HFrEF and HFpEF. Our results confirm the main mechanistic parameter driving HFrEF is reduced left ventricular (LV) contractility, whereas HFpEF exhibits a heterogeneous phenotype. Conducting principal component analysis, k‐means clustering, and hierarchical clustering on the optimized parameters reveal (i) a group of HFrEF‐like HFpEF patients (HFpEF1), (ii) a classic HFpEF group (HFpEF2), and (iii) a group of HFpEF patients that do not consistently cluster (NCC). These subgroups cannot be distinguished from the clinical data alone. Increased LV active contractility (p<0.001) and LV passive stiffness (p<0.001) at rest are observed when comparing HFpEF2 to HFpEF1. Analysing the clinical data of each subgroup reveals that elevated systolic and diastolic LV volumes seen in both HFrEF and HFpEF1 may be used as a biomarker to identify HFrEF‐like HFpEF patients. These results suggest that modelling of the cardiovascular system and optimizing to standard clinical data can designate subgroups of HFpEF as separate phenotypes, possibly elucidating patient‐specific treatment strategies. Key points: Analysis of data from right heart catheterization (RHC) and transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) of heart failure (HF) patients using a closed‐loop model of the cardiovascular system identifies key parameters representing haemodynamic cardiovascular function in patients with heart failure with reduced and preserved ejection fraction (HFrEF and HFpEF).Analysing optimized parameters representing cardiovascular function using machine learning shows mechanistic differences between HFpEF groups that are not seen analysing clinical data alone.HFpEF groups presented here can be subdivided into three subgroups: HFpEF1 described as 'HFrEF‐like HFpEF', HFpEF2 as 'classic HFpEF', and a third group of HFpEF patients that do not consistently cluster.Focusing purely on cardiac function consistently captures the underlying dysfunction in HFrEF, whereas HFpEF is better characterized by dysfunction in the entire cardiovascular system.Our methodology reveals that elevated left ventricular systolic and diastolic volumes are potential biomarkers for identifying HFrEF‐like HFpEF patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

摘要 SGLT‐2抑制剂(SGLT‐2i)对心力衰竭患者的心血管有益已为人所知。SGLT‐2i在射血分数降低或保持不变的心力衰竭患者中是否具有类似的心血管效应尚不清楚。这项meta分析显示，SGLT‐2i与心力衰竭的类型无关，具有相似的心血管益处。未来的试验将证实或驳斥SGLT‐2i对射血分数保持不变的心力衰竭患者的心血管效应。 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Congestive heart failure (CHF) and impaired renal function are two often co‐existing medical conditions and associated with adverse cardiovascular outcome. The aim of the current study was to assess renal and intraglomerular haemodynamics by constant infusion input clearance technique in subjects with CHF. Methods and results: The group of subjects with CHF consisted of 27 individuals with HFpEF and 27 individuals with HFrEF and were compared with 31 healthy controls. Subjects underwent renal clearance examination to measure glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and renal blood and plasma flow (RBF and RPF) and to calculate intraglomerular haemodynamics such as resistances of the afferent (RA) and efferent arterioles (RE) as well as intraglomerular pressure (Pglom). Measured GFR was lower in CHF subjects (68.1 ± 10.1 mL/min/1.73 m2) compared with controls (83.6 ± 13.4 mL/min/1.73 m2, Padj < 0.001) as was Pglom (Padj < 0.001). Total renal vascular resistance (RVR) was higher in CHF subjects (87.3 ± 20.1 vs. 73.8 ± 17.1 dyn × s/cm5, Padj < 0.001) mediated by an increased resistance at the afferent site (3201 ± 1084 vs. 2181 ± 796 dyn × s/cm5, Padj < 0.001). Comparing HFpEF and HFrEF subjects, RA was higher in HFrEF subjects. The severity of CHF assessed by NT‐proBNP revealed an inverse association with renal perfusion (RPF r = −0.421, P = 0.002, RBF r = −0.414, P = 0.002) and a positive relation with RVR (r = 0.346, P = 0.012) at the post‐glomerular site (RE: r = 0.318, P = 0.022). Conclusions: Renal function assessed by measured GFR is reduced and renal vascular resistance at the preglomerular, afferent site is increased in HFpEF and, to greater extent, in HFrEF. Our data indicate a close cardiorenal interaction in CHF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Non‐invasive telemonitoring (TM) in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) may be useful in the early diagnosis of HF decompensation, allowing therapeutic optimization and avoiding re‐hospitalization. We describe a TM programme in this population and evaluate its effectiveness during a 12 month period. Methods and results: We conducted a single‐centre study of patients discharged from hospital after decompensated HF, allocated into three groups: prospective TM programme, prospective HF protocol follow‐up programme (PFP) with no TM facilities, and retrospective propensity‐matched usual care (UC). TM effectiveness was assessed by all‐cause hospitalizations and mortality; HF‐related hospitalization (HFH), days lost to unplanned hospital admissions/death, functional capacity and quality of life (New York Heart Association, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, 6 min walk test, and plasma N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide) were also evaluated. A total of 125 patients were included [65.9 ± 11.9 years, 32% female, left ventricular ejection fraction 27% (21–32)]. TM was similar to PFP regarding effectiveness; TM reduced all‐cause hospitalization and mortality (HR 0.27; 95% CI 0.11–0.71; P < 0.01) and HFH (HR 0.29; 95% CI 0.10–0.89; P < 0.05) as compared with UC. TM reduced the average number of days lost due to unplanned hospital admissions or all‐cause death as compared with PFP (5.6 vs. 12.4 days, P < 0.05) and UC (5.6 vs. 48.8 days, P < 0.01). Impact on quality of life was similar between TM and PFP (P = 0.36). Conclusions: In patients with HFrEF and recent HF hospitalization, non‐invasive TM reduced 12 month all‐cause hospitalization/mortality and HFH as compared with usual care. TM also reduced the number of days lost due to unplanned hospital admission/death as compared with either an optimized protocol‐based follow‐up programme or usual care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cushing syndrome is a rare cause of dilated cardiomyopathy and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Cases describing this association are scarce. We describe a patient presenting with acute heart failure, new cardiomyopathy, refractory hypokalaemia, severe hyperglycaemia, and uncontrolled hypertension who was found to have hypercortisolism secondary to an ectopic adrenocorticotropic hormone‐secreting primary lung neoplasm. This case highlights the effects of hypercortisolism on the myocardium. The finding of a non‐dilated cardiomyopathy in this case is unique because the majority of previously reported Cushing syndrome cardiomyopathy cases have described left ventricular dilatation or significant left ventricular hypertrophy. In addition, small‐cell lung cancer with adrenocorticotropic hormone production causing Cushing syndrome cardiomyopathy is rare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What is known and objective: The real‐life prognostic impact on long‐term survival of continuous or discontinuous adherence to ESC guideline‐recommended drugs in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients has rarely been investigated. Here, we present the long‐term association of longitudinal prescription of guideline‐recommended drugs with 3‐year all‐cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality in HFrEF patients. Methods: We used data from the EPICAL2 cohort study of 624 hospitalized HFrEF patients. Using the sequence analysis, we classified patients into five groups of long‐term adherence according to the continuity/discontinuity of their prescription adherence to guidelines over a 3‐year follow‐up, as follow: 316 (50.6%) patients in the sustained adherence group, 163 (26.1%) in the sustained non‐adherence group, 79 (12.6%) in the adherence to non‐adherence group, 43 (6.9%) in the non‐adherence to adherence group and 23 (3.7%) in the multiple switches group. The associations between all‐cause mortality and CV mortality and the adherence groups were determined by Cox and Fine‐Gray models, respectively. To account for immortal time bias, we performed a landmark analysis at 24 months. Patients who died, prior to the landmark time, were excluded from this analysis and long‐term adherence groups were redefined. Results and discussion: After adjustment for confounding factors, as compared to the sustained non‐adherence group, the sustained adherence group showed lower all‐cause and CV mortality (hazard ratio HR = 0.37 [0.25‐0.56] and sub‐distribution hazard ratio SHR = 0.33 [0.20‐0.56]). Both clinical outcomes were also significantly improved in the adherence to non‐adherence group (HR = 0.25 [0.13‐0.45] and SHR = 0.20 [0.10‐0.41]), the non‐adherence to adherence (HR = 0.24 [0.11‐0.55] and SHR = 0.11 [0.04‐0.30]), and for the multiple switches group (HR = 0.13 [0.07‐0.51] and SHR = 0.12 [0.08‐0.43]). Results from landmark analysis were comparable to the main results. What is new and conclusion: As in all observational studies, our results may be affected by residual confounding related to unmeasured confounders, although we attempted to adjust for many confounders. Even a discontinuous prescription of the recommended drugs over time was associated with better long‐term outcomes. In other words, whatever the time of HFrEF evolution, prescribing recommended drugs at some point was always better than never prescribing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) and β-blockers are guideline-recommended first-line therapies in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Previous studies showed that individual drug classes were under-dosed in many parts of Europe and Asia. In this study, we investigated the association of combined up-titration of ACEi/ARBs and β-blockers with all-cause mortality and its combination with hospitalization for HF.Methods and Results: A total of 6787 HFrEF patients (mean age 62.6 ± 13.2 years, 77.7% men, mean left ventricular ejection fraction 27.7 ± 7.2%) were enrolled in the prospective multinational European (BIOSTAT-CHF; n = 2100) and Asian (ASIAN-HF; n = 4687) studies. Outcomes were analysed according to achieved percentage of guideline-recommended target doses (GRTD) of combination ACEi/ARB and β-blocker therapy, adjusted for indication bias. Only 14% (n = 981) patients achieved ≥50% GRTD for both ACEi/ARB and β-blocker. The best outcomes were observed in patients who achieved 100% GRTD of both ACEi/ARB and β-blocker [hazard ratio (HR) 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26-0.39 vs. none]. Lower dose of combined therapy was associated with better outcomes than 100% GRTD of either monotherapy. Up-titrating β-blockers was associated with a consistent and greater reduction in hazards of all-cause mortality (HR for 100% GRTD: 0.40, 95% CI 0.25-0.63) than corresponding ACEi/ARB up-titration (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.53-1.07).Conclusion: This study shows that best outcomes were observed in patients attaining GRTD for both ACEi/ARB and β-blockers, unfortunately this was rarely achieved. Achieving >50% GRTD of both drug classes was associated with better outcome than target dose of monotherapy. Up-titrating β-blockers to target dose was associated with greater mortality reduction than up-titrating ACEi/ARB. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Sacubitril/valsartan is safe when initiated during hospitalization in a clinical trial setting. Its safety in real‐life population is not stablished. We compared the initiation of sacubitril/valsartan during hospitalization in a non‐selected population, in the PIONEER‐HF trial, and in non‐selected outpatients. Methods and results: Multicentre registry included 527 patients: 100 were started on sacubitril/valsartan during hospitalization (19.0%) and 427 as outpatients (81.0%). Compared with those in the pivotal trial, inpatients in our cohort were older (71 ± 12 vs. 61 ± 14 years; P < 0.001); had more frequently Functional Class II (41 [41.0%] vs. 100 [22.7%]; P < 0.001), higher levels of N‐terminal pro‐B type natriuretic peptide (4044 [1630–8680] vs. 2013 [1002–4132] pg/mL; P < 0.001), better glomerular filtration rate (63.5 [51.0–80.0] vs. 58.4 [47.5–71.5] mL/min; P = 0.01), and higher systolic blood pressure (121 [110–136] vs. 118 [110–133] mmHg; P = 0.03); and received angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers more frequently (92 [92.0%] vs. 208 [52.7%]; P < 0.001). Compared with non‐selected outpatients, inpatients were older (71 ± 12 vs. 68 ± 12 years, P = 0.02), had more frequent Functional Class III–IV (58 [58.0%] vs. 129 [30.3%], P < 0.001), had higher levels of N‐terminal pro‐B type natriuretic peptide (4044 [1630–8680] vs. 2182 [1134–4172]; P < 0.001), and were receiving angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers target dose less frequently (55 [55.0%] vs. 335 [78.5%]; P < 0.001). They also started sacubitril/valsartan with a low dose (50 mg/12 h) more frequently (80 [80.0%] vs. 209 [48.8%], P < 0.001). The initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in outpatients was an independent predictor of high‐dose use (OR 3.1; 95% confidence interval 1.7–5.6, P < 0.001). The follow‐up time in both cohorts, including all patients enrolled, was similar (7.0 ± 0.1 vs. 7.2 ± 2.6 months, P = 0.72). All‐cause admissions during follow‐up were more frequent in inpatients (30 [30.0%] vs. 68 outpatients [15.9%], P = 0.001), with no relevant differences in all‐cause mortality. There was no significant difference in sacubitril/valsartan withdrawal rate (17 inpatients [17.0%] vs. 49 outpatients [11.5%], P = 0.13). The incidence of adverse effects was also similar: hypotension (16 inpatients [16.0%] vs. 71 outpatients [16.7%], P = 0.88), worsening renal function (7 inpatients [7.0%] vs. 29 outpatients [6.8%], P = 0.94), and hyperkalaemia (1 inpatient [1.0%] vs. 21 outpatients [4.9%], P = 0.09). We did not register any case of angioedema. Conclusions: It is safe to initiate sacubitril/valsartan during hospitalization in daily clinical practice. Inpatients have a higher risk profile and receive low starting doses more frequently than outpatients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Drugs that inhibit the sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) have been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalizations for heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes. In populations that largely did not have heart failure at the time of enrolment, empagliflozin, canagliflozin and dapagliflozin decreased the risk of serious new-onset heart failure events by ≈30%. In addition, in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial, empagliflozin reduced the risk of both pump failure and sudden deaths, the two most common modes of death among patients with heart failure. In none of the three trials could the benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors on heart failure be explained by the actions of these drugs as diuretics or anti-hyperglycaemic agents. These observations raise the possibility that SGLT2 inhibitors could reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with established heart failure, including those without diabetes. The EMPEROR-Reduced trial is enrolling ≈3600 patients with heart failure and a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (≤ 40%), half of whom are expected not to have diabetes. Patients are being randomized to placebo or empagliflozin 10 mg daily, which is added to all appropriate treatment with inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin system and neprilysin, beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. The primary endpoint is the time-to-first event analysis of the combined risk of cardiovascular death and hospitalization for heart failure, but the trial will also evaluate the effects of empagliflozin on renal function, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and recurrent hospitalization events. By adjusting eligibility based on natriuretic peptide levels to the baseline ejection fraction, the trial will preferentially enrol high-risk patients. A large proportion of the participants is expected to have an ejection fraction < 30%, and the estimated annual event rate is expected to be at least 15%. The EMPEROR-Reduced trial is well-positioned to determine if the addition of empagliflozin can add meaningfully to current approaches that have established benefits in the treatment of chronic heart failure with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multiple drug classes have shown incremental benefits in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Most of these trials were designed to achieve specific doses of the investigational agent. Clinical practice guidelines recommend using the same target dosing of therapies, as tolerated. However, with the increasing number of available therapies, clinicians face the challenge of simultaneously using several drugs, achieving target doses, and managing side effects that are often overlapping. Blood pressure, renal function, hyperkalaemia, and other factors may impede achieving target doses of all medications, leaving clinicians with dilemmas as to how to sequence and dose these various classes of drugs. The guideline-directed eligibility for certain drugs and devices requires stability on maximally tolerated doses of background therapies. However, significant variability exists in dosing achieved in clinical practice. We discuss the existing background data regarding the doses of heart failure medications in clinical trials and in practice, and provide recommendations on how to navigate this complex therapeutic decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The landmark STICH trial found that surgical revascularization compared to medical therapy alone improved survival in patients with heart failure (HF) of ischaemic aetiology and an ejection fraction (EF) ≤ 35%. However, the interaction between the burden of medical co-morbidities and the benefit from surgical revascularization has not been previously described in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy.Methods and Results: The STICH trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00023595) enrolled patients ≥ 18 years of age with coronary artery disease amenable to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and an EF ≤ 35%. Eligible participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive medical therapy (MED) (n = 602) or MED/CABG (n = 610). A modified Charlson co-morbidity index (CCI) based on the availability of data and study definitions was calculated by summing the weighted points for all co-morbid conditions. Patients were divided into mild/moderate (CCI 1-4) and severe (CCI ≥ 5) co-morbidity. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association between CCI and outcomes and the interaction between severity of co-morbidity and treatment effect. The study population included 349 patients (29%) with a mild/moderate CCI score and 863 patients (71%) with a severe CCI score. Patients with a severe CCI score had greater functional limitations based on 6-min walk test and impairments in health-related quality of life as assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire. A total of 161 patients (Kaplan-Meier rate = 50%) with a mild/moderate CCI score and 579 patients (Kaplan-Meier rate = 69%) with a severe CCI score died over a median follow-up of 9.8 years. After adjusting for baseline confounders, patients with a severe CCI score were at higher risk for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.19-1.74; P < 0.001). There was no interaction between CCI score and treatment effect on survival (P = 0.756).Conclusions: More than 70% of patients had a severe burden of medical co-morbidities at baseline, which was independently associated with increased risk of death. There was not a differential benefit of surgical revascularization with respect to survival based on severity of co-morbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The extent to which sex, racial, and ethnic groups receive advanced heart therapies equitably is unclear. We estimated the population rate of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) and heart transplant (HT) use among (non-Hispanic) White, Hispanic, and (non-Hispanic) Black men and women who have heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)., Methods and Results: We used a retrospective cohort design combining counts of LVAD and HT procedures from 19 state inpatient discharge databases from 2010 to 2018 with counts of adults with HFrEF. Our primary outcome measures were the number of LVAD and HT procedures per 1000 adults with HFrEF. The main exposures were sex, race, ethnicity, and age. We used Poisson regression models to estimate procedure rates adjusted for differences in age, sex, race, and ethnicity. In 2018, the estimated population of adults aged 35 to 84 years with HFrEF was 69 736, of whom 44% were women. Among men, the LVAD rate was 45.6, and the HT rate was 26.9. Relative to men, LVAD and HT rates were 72% and 62% lower among women ( P <0.001). Relative to White men, LVAD and HT rates were 25% and 46% lower ( P <0.001) among Black men. Among Hispanic men and women and Black women, LVAD and HT rates were similar ( P >0.05) or higher ( P <0.01) than among their White counterparts., Conclusions: Among adults with HFrEF, the use of LVAD and HT is lower among women and Black men. Health systems and policymakers should identify and ameliorate sources of sex and racial inequities.

Although traditional renin-angiotensin system antagonists including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers have revolutionized the treatment of cardiovascular disease (CVD), the pivotal PARADIGM-HF trial demonstrated that sacubitril/valsartan, an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), was superior to an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. However, despite international regulatory approval and strong recommendations in the guidelines, uptake of sacubitril/valsartan has been disappointing. Sacubitril/valsartan is now the focus of a large programme of clinical trials testing the hypothesis that ARNIs may supplant conventional renin-angiotensin system inhibitors across the spectrum of CVD, including hypertension, secondary prevention after myocardial infarction, and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. This review summarizes the existing evidence, knowledge gaps, and future directions of ARNIs in CVD based on discussions between clinical trialists, industry representatives, and regulatory authorities at the 2016 Global CardioVascular Clinical Trialists Forum in Washington, D.C. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Guideline-recommended therapies that improve prognosis remain underused in clinical practice. Physical frailty may lead to underprescription of life-saving therapy. We aimed to investigate the association between physical frailty and the use of evidence-based pharmacological therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and the impact of this on prognosis. METHODS AND RESULTS The FLAGSHIP (Multicentre Prospective Cohort Study to Develop Frailty-Based Prognostic Criteria for Heart Failure Patients) included patients hospitalized for acute heart failure, and data on physical frailty were collected prospectively. We analyzed 1041 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (aged 70 years; 73% male) and divided them by physical frailty categories using grip strength, walking speed, Self-Efficacy for Walking-7 score, and Performance Measures for Activities of Daily Living-8 score: categories I (n=371; least frail), II (n=275), III (n=224), and IV (n=171). Overall prescription rates of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, β-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists were 69.7%, 87.8%, and 51.9%, respectively. The proportion of patients receiving all 3 drugs decreased as physical frailty increased (in category I patients, 40.2%; IV patients, 23.4%; P for trend<0.001). In adjusted analyses, the severity of physical frailty was an independent predictor for nonuse of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (odds ratio [OR], 1.23 [95% CI, 1.05-1.43] per 1 category increase) and β-blockers (OR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.06-1.64]), but not mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (OR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.84-1.12]). Patients receiving 0 to 1 drug had a higher risk of the composite outcome of all-cause death or heart failure rehospitalization than those treated with 3 drugs in physical frailty categories I and II (hazard ratio [HR], 1.80 [95% CI, 1.08-2.98]) and III and IV (HR, 1.53 [95% CI, 1.01-2.32]) in the multivariate Cox proportional hazard model. CONCLUSIONS Prescription of guideline-recommended therapy decreased as severity of physical frailty increased in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Underprescription of guideline-recommended therapy may contribute to the poor prognosis associated with physical frailty.

Background Arterial stiffness and earlier wave reflections can increase afterload and impair cardiovascular function. Most prior studies have been performed in patients with preserved left ventricular function. We describe novel measures of pulsatile arterial hemodynamics and their association with clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Methods and Results Participants with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (n=137, median age 56 years, 49% women, 58% Black) and age-matched healthy controls (n=124) underwent measurements of large artery stiffness and pulsatile arterial hemodynamics. Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity and augmentation index were assessed using radial applanation tonometry. Pressure-flow analyses derived reflected wave transit time, the systolic pressure-time integral imposed by proximal aortic characteristic impedance, and the pressure-time integral from wave reflection (wasted pressure effort). Cox proportional hazards models defined associations between hemodynamic measures and (1) all-cause death and (2) a combined end point of left ventricular assist device implant, heart transplant, and death, at 2 years adjusted for race, BNP (B-type natriuretic peptide), and the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure Risk Score. Compared with controls, participants with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction exhibited similar carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (6.8±1.6 versus 7.0±1.6 m/s, P =0.40) but higher augmentation index normalized to a heart rate of 75 bpm (13±2% versus 22±2%, P <0.001). Shorter reflected wave transit time (ie, earlier wave reflection arrival to the proximal aorta) was associated with an increased risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.67 [95% CI 1.03-1.63]) and the combined end point of death/left ventricular assist device/heart transplant (aHR, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.06-2.44]) at 2 years. Wasted pressure effort/proximal aortic characteristic impedance, representing the proportion of systolic load from wave reflection versus aortic root characteristic impedance, was univariately associated with death (hazard ratio (HR), 1.44 [95% CI, 1.05-1.97]) and with death/left ventricular assist device/heart transplant on univariate (HR, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.07-1.88]) and multivariable (aHR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.02-1.93]) analysis. Conclusions Increased left ventricular systolic load from premature wave reflections is associated with adverse clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Aims Heart failure ( HF) and dementia frequently coexist, but little is known about their types, relationships to each other and prognosis. The aims were to (i) describe patients with HF and dementia, assess (ii) the proportion of specific dementia disorders in types of HF based on ejection fraction and (iii) the prognostic role of types of HF and dementia disorders. Methods and results The Swedish Heart Failure Registry ( RiksSvikt) and The Swedish Dementia Registry ( SveDem) were record-linked. Associations between dementia disorders and HF types were assessed with multinomial logistic regression and survival was investigated with Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox regression. We studied 775 patients found in both registries (55% men, mean age 82 years). Ejection fraction was preserved in 38% of patients, reduced in 34%, and missing in 28%. The proportions of dementia disorders were similar across HF types. Vascular dementia was the most common dementia disorder (36%), followed by other dementias (28%), mixed dementia (20%), and Alzheimer disease (16%). Over a mean follow-up of 1.5 years, 76% of patients survived 1 year. We observed no significant differences in survival with regard to HF type ( P = 0.2) or dementia disorder ( P = 0.5). After adjustment for baseline covariates, neither HF types nor dementia disorders were independently associated with survival. Conclusions Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction was the most common HF type and vascular dementia was the most common dementia disorder. The proportions of dementia disorders were similar across HF types. Neither HF types nor specific dementia disorders were associated with survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Outcomes and treatment effects of therapy may vary according to the cause of heart failure (HF). Methods and Results In this post hoc analysis of the EMPEROR-Reduced (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction) trial, the effect of empagliflozin on cardiovascular and renal outcomes was assessed according to the cause of HF. The cause of HF was investigator reported and stratified as ischemic or nonischemic. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs. Of the 3730 patients enrolled, 1929 (51.7%) had ischemic cause. In the placebo arm, patients with ischemic cause of HF did not have a significantly higher risk of cardiovascular mortality (HR, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.90-1.63]) and hospitalization for HF (HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.72-1.12]) compared with nonischemic cause. Empagliflozin compared with placebo significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for HF in patients with ischemic and nonischemic cause (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68-0.99] for ischemic and HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.55-0.82] for nonischemic cause; P interaction=0.15). The benefit of empagliflozin on HF hospitalization, the renal composite end point, estimated glomerular filtration slope changes, and health status scores were also consistent in both groups without treatment by cause modification. Conclusions Empagliflozin offers cardiovascular and renal benefits in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction regardless of the cause of HF. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03057977.

Aims The clinical outcomes for patients with worsening chronic heart failure ( WCHF) remain exceedingly poor despite contemporary evidence-based therapies, and effective therapies are urgently needed. Accumulating evidence supports augmentation of cyclic guanosine monophosphate ( cGMP) signalling as a potential therapeutic strategy for HF with reduced or preserved ejection fraction ( HFrEF and HFpEF, respectively). Direct soluble guanylate cyclase ( sGC) stimulators target reduced cGMP generation due to insufficient sGC stimulation and represent a promising method for cGMP enhancement. Methods The phase II SOluble guanylate Cyclase stimulatoR in heArT failurE Study ( SOCRATES) programme consists of two randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicentre studies, SOCRATES-REDUCED (in patients with LVEF <45%) and SOCRATES-PRESERVED (in those with LVEF ≥45%), that will explore the pharmacodynamic effects, safety and tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of four dose regimens of the once-daily oral sGC stimulator vericiguat ( BAY 1021189) over 12 weeks compared with placebo. These studies will enrol patients stabilized during hospitalization for HF at the time of discharge or within 4 weeks thereafter. The primary endpoint in SOCRATES-REDUCED is change in NT-proBNP at 12 weeks. The primary endpoints in SOCRATES-PRESERVED are change in NT-proBNP and left atrial volume at 12 weeks. Perspectives SOCRATES will be the first programme to enrol specifically both inpatients and outpatients with WCHF and patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction. Results will inform the benefits of pursuing subsequent event-driven clinical outcome trials with sGC stimulators in this patient population. Trial registration NCT01951625 (SOCRATES-REDUCED) and NCT01951638 (SOCRATES-PRESERVED) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Post-discharge morbidity and mortality for acute heart failure (AHF) patients remains high. Although the adverse effects of neurohormonal activation are well known in chronic HF, the prognostic significance of serum aldosterone in patients hospitalized for AHF has not been well studied. Methods and results A secondary analysis was carried out of the placebo arm (n = 1850) from the EVEREST trial which had aldosterone measured at baseline. All patients were hospitalized for worsening HF and had an LVEF <40%. The median follow-up was 9.9 months. The association between serum aldosterone levels at baseline and the independently adjudicated outcomes [all-cause mortality (ACM) and the combined outcome of cardiovascular mortality (CVM) and HF re-hospitalization] were explored with multivariable Cox models. Median aldosterone levels increased during the hospital stay from 11 ng/dL at baseline to 15 ng/dL at discharge (P < 0.001) and remained increased after discharge (16 ng/dL at 24 weeks, P < 0.001). After adjusting for potential confounders, higher baseline aldosterone levels were associated with an increased risk for ACM and CVM or HF re-hospitalization [hazard ratio (HR) 1.49, 95% confidence intrerval (CI) 1.11–1.99; and HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.11–1.78, respectively, in the highest quartile when compared with the lowest]. Conclusion In patients with LVEF <40% hospitalized for AHF and receiving standard therapy, serum aldosterone levels correlated with worse post-discharge outcomes. Aldosterone levels increase during AHF hospitalization and remain increased long after discharge. These results suggest that further modulation of the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system in patients admitted with worsening HF might favourably improve post-discharge outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims To compare quality of life (QoL) in heart failure (HF) patients with preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF) and HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF) in a well-defined HF population. Methods and results Patients with HF-PEF [left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥40%] were matched by age and gender to patients with HF-REF (LVEF <40%). In the current study, we only included HF patients with a B-type natriuretic peptide level (BNP) >100 pg/mL. Quality of life was assessed by Cantril's Ladder of Life, RAND-36, and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure questionnaire, and impairment of QoL was adjusted for by BNP as a marker for severity of HF. We examined a total of 290 HF patients, of whom 145 had HF-PEF (41% female; age 72 ± 10; LVEF 51 ± 8%) and 145 had HF-REF (41% female; age 73 ± 10, LVEF 26 ± 7%). All HF patients reported markedly low scores of QoL, both on the general and disease-specific QoL questionnaires. Quality of life between patients with HF-PEF and HF-REF did not differ significantly. When adjusting the QoL scores for BNP, an association between QoL and LVEF was not found, i.e. patients with HF-PEF and HF-REF with similar BNP levels had the same impairment in QoL. Conclusion Quality of life is similarly impaired in patients with HF-PEF as in HF-REF. These findings further support the need for more pharmacological and non-pharmacological studies in patients with HF-PEF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Sacubitril/valsartan, a first-in-class angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor, received US Food and Drug Administration approval in 2015 for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Our objective was to describe the sacubitril/valsartan initiation rate, associated characteristics, and 6-month follow-up dosing among veterans with HFrEF who are renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi) naïve. Methods and Results Retrospective cohort study of veterans with HFrEF who are RAASi naïve defined as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40%; ≥1 in/outpatient heart failure visit, first RAASi (sacubitril/valsartan, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor [ACEI]), or angiotensin-II receptor blocker [ARB]) fill from July 2015 to June 2019. Characteristics associated with sacubitril/valsartan initiation were identified using Poisson regression models. From July 2015 to June 2019, we identified 3458 sacubitril/valsartan and 29 367 ACEI or ARB initiators among veterans with HFrEF who are RAASi naïve. Sacubitril/valsartan initiation increased from 0% to 26.5%. Sacubitril/valsartan (versus ACEI or ARB) initiators were less likely to have histories of stroke, myocardial infarction, or hypertension and more likely to be older and have diabetes mellitus and lower LVEF. At 6-month follow-up, the prevalence of ≥50% target daily dose for sacubitril/valsartan, ACEI, and ARB initiators was 23.5%, 43.2%, and 47.1%, respectively. Conclusions Sacubitril/valsartan initiation for HFrEF in the Veterans Administration increased in the 4 years immediately following Food and Drug Administration approval. Sacubitril/valsartan (versus ACEI or ARB) initiators had fewer baseline cardiovascular comorbidities and the lowest proportion on ≥50% target daily dose at 6-month follow-up. Identifying the reasons for lower follow-up dosing of sacubitril/valsartan could support guideline recommendations and quality improvement strategies for patients with HFrEF.

Background Sacubitril/Valsartan has been highly efficacious in randomized trials of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, the effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan in older patients hospitalized for HFrEF in real-world US practice is unclear. Methods and Results This study included Medicare beneficiaries age ≥65 years who were hospitalized for HFrEF ≤40% in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry between October 2015 and December 2018, and eligible for sacubitril/valsartan. Associations between discharge prescription of sacubitril/valsartan and clinical outcomes were assessed after inverse probability of treatment weighting and adjustment for other HFrEF medications. Overall, 1551 (10.9%) patients were discharged on sacubitril/valsartan. Of those not prescribed sacubitril/valsartan, 7857 (62.0%) were prescribed an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker. Over 12-month follow-up, compared with a discharge prescription of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker, sacubitril/valsartan was independently associated with lower all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.94; P =0.004) but not all-cause hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.89-1.07; P =0.55) or heart failure hospitalization (adjusted HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.91-1.18; P =0.59). Patients prescribed sacubitril/valsartan versus those without a prescription had lower risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60-0.79; P <0.001), all-cause hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82-0.98; P =0.02), but not heart failure hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.82-1.08; P =0.40). Conclusions Among patients hospitalized for HFrEF, prescription of sacubitril/valsartan at discharge was independently associated with reduced postdischarge mortality compared with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker, and reduced mortality and all-cause hospitalization compared with no sacubitril/valsartan. These findings support the use of sacubitril/valsartan to improve postdischarge outcomes among older patients hospitalized for HFrEF in routine US clinical practice.