Search

With the current landscape of approved therapies for heart failure (HF), there is a need to determine the role of a standard background therapy against which novel therapies are studied. The Heart Failure Collaboratory convened a multistakeholder group of clinical investigators, clinicians, patients, government representatives including U.S. Food and Drug Administration and National Institutes of Health participants, payers, and industry in March 2021 to discuss whether standardization of background drug therapy is necessary in clinical trials in patients with HF. The current paper summarizes the discussion and provides potential conceptual approaches, with a focus on therapies indicated for HF with reduced ejection fraction.

ObjectivesThis study sought to determine clinician and scientist involvement in heart failure (HF) clinical research and to describe the challenges of conducting clinical trials in the United States.BackgroundImprovements in the current capability, potential, and deficiencies of the HF clinical research infrastructure in the United States are needed in order to enhance efficiency and impact.MethodsThe Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA) distributed an electronic survey regarding HF clinical trial activity for the purpose of understanding the barriers that exist to conducting high-quality HF clinical research.ResultsOverall, 1,794 HFSA members were queried, and 434 members (24%) completed surveys, whereas a total of 7,589 individuals with interest in HF were queried, and 615 completed surveys. Of the respondents, 410 (67%) were actively engaged in HF research and 120 (20%) were interested in research. Most respondents, 270, were physicians (44%); 311 of the total (76% of the total and 80% of physicians) practiced in academic institutions; 333 respondents (81%) had served as principal investigators and 73 (18%) as site coordinators. Respondents active in clinical research usually participated in 1 to 5 trials and enrolled 1 to 20 patients annually. Institutional review board (IRB) approval typically required 3 months, and contract completion required 3 to 6 months per site. The greatest barriers to research were insufficient site budgets, delay in contracting, inability to find participants meeting trial entry criteria, and unavailability of qualified study coordinators.ConclusionsMany U.S. clinical research sites are constrained by budgetary, staffing, and contractual issues. The HFSA Research Network seeks to unify interested sites and deconstruct barriers to permit high-value HF research.

With few notable exceptions, drug development for heart failure (HF) has become progressively more challenging, and there remain no definitively proven therapies for patients with acute HF or HF with preserved ejection fraction. Inspection of temporal trends suggests an increasing rate of disagreement between early-phase and phase III trial end points. Preliminary results from phase II HF trials are frequently promising, but increasingly followed by disappointing phase III results. Given this potential disconnect, it is reasonable to carefully re-evaluate the purpose, design, and execution of phase II HF trials, with particular attention directed toward the surrogate end points commonly used by these studies. In this review, we offer a critical reappraisal of the role of phase II HF trials and surrogate end points, highlighting challenges in their use and interpretation, lessons learned from past experiences, and specific strengths and weaknesses of various surrogate outcomes. We conclude by proposing a series of approaches that should be considered for the goal of optimizing the efficiency of HF drug development. This review is based on discussions between scientists, clinical trialists, industry and government sponsors, and regulators that took place at the Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists Forum in Washington, DC, on December 2, 2016.

The increasing burden and the continued suboptimal outcomes for patients with heart failure underlines the importance of continued research to develop novel therapeutics for this disorder. This can only be accomplished with successful translation of basic science discoveries into direct human application through effective clinical trial design and execution that results in a substantially improved clinical course and outcomes. In this respect, phase II clinical trials play a pivotal role in determining which of the multitude of potential basic science discoveries should move to the large and expansive registration trials in humans. A critical examination of the phase II trials in heart failure reveals multiple shortcomings in their concept, design, execution, and interpretation. To further a dialogue on the challenges and potential for improvement and the role of phase II trials in patients with heart failure, the Food and Drug Administration facilitated a meeting on October 17, 2016, represented by clinicians, researchers, industry members, and regulators. This document summarizes the discussion from this meeting and provides key recommendations for future directions.

Consider the choice of outcome for overall treatment benefit in a clinical trial which measures the first time to each of several clinical events. We describe several new variants of the win ratio that incorporate the time spent in each clinical state over the common follow‐up, where clinical state means the worst clinical event that has occurred by that time. One version allows restriction so that death during follow‐up is most important, while time spent in other clinical states is still accounted for. Three other variants are described; one is based on the average pairwise win time, one creates a continuous outcome for each participant based on expected win times against a reference distribution and another that uses the estimated distributions of clinical state to compare the treatment arms. Finally, a combination testing approach is described to give robust power for detecting treatment benefit across a broad range of alternatives. These new methods are designed to be closer to the overall treatment benefit/harm from a patient's perspective, compared to the ordinary win ratio. The new methods are compared to the composite event approach and the ordinary win ratio. Simulations show that when overall treatment benefit on death is substantial, the variants based on either the participants' expected win times (EWTs) against a reference distribution or estimated clinical state distributions have substantially higher power than either the pairwise comparison or composite event methods. The methods are illustrated by re‐analysis of the trial heart failure: a controlled trial investigating outcomes of exercise training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: In heart failure (HF) trials, there has been an emphasis on utilizing more patient-centered outcomes, including quality of life (QoL) and days alive and out of hospital. We aimed to explore the impact of QoL adjusted days alive and out of hospital as an outcome in 2 HF clinical trials. METHODS: Using data from 2 trials in HF (Guiding Evidence Based Therapy Using Biomarker Intensified Treatment in Heart Failure [GUIDE-IT] and Study of Dietary Intervention under 100 mmol in Heart Failure [SODIUM-HF]), we determined treatment differences using percentage days alive and out of hospital (%DAOH) adjusted for QoL at 18 months as the primary outcome. For each participant, %DAOH was calculated as a ratio between days alive and out of hospital/total followup. Using a regression model, %DAOH was subsequently adjusted for QoL measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score. RESULTS: In the GUIDE-IT trial, 847 participants had a median baseline Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score of 59.0 (interquartile range, 40.8--74.3), which did not change over 18 months. %DAOH was 90.76%±22.09% in the biomarker-guided arm and 88.56%±25.27% in the usual care arm. No significant difference in QoL adjusted %DAOH was observed (1.09% [95% CI, -1.57% to 3.97%]). In the SODIUM-HF trial, 796 participants had a median baseline Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score of 69.8 (interquartile range, 49.3--84.3), which did not change over 18 months. %DAOH was 95.69%±16.31% in the low-sodium arm and 95.95%±14.76% in the usual care arm. No significant difference was observed (1.91% [95% CI, -0.85% to 4.77%]). CONCLUSIONS: In 2 large HF clinical trials, adjusting %DAOH for QoL was feasible and may provide complementary information on treatment effects in clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundPoor diuretic response in acute heart failure is related to poor clinical outcome. The underlying mechanisms and pathophysiology behind diuretic resistance are incompletely understood. We evaluated a combined approach using clinical characteristics and biomarkers to predict diuretic response in acute heart failure (AHF).Methods and resultsWe investigated explanatory and predictive models for diuretic response--weight loss at day 4 per 40 mg of furosemide--in 974 patients with AHF included in the PROTECT trial. Biomarkers, addressing multiple pathophysiological pathways, were determined at baseline and after 24 h. An explanatory baseline biomarker model of a poor diuretic response included low potassium, chloride, hemoglobin, myeloperoxidase, and high blood urea nitrogen, albumin, triglycerides, ST2 and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (r(2) = 0.086). Diuretic response after 24 h (early diuretic response) was a strong predictor of diuretic response (β = 0.467, P < 0.001; r(2) = 0.523). Addition of diuretic response after 24 h to biomarkers and clinical characteristics significantly improved the predictive model (r(2) = 0.586, P < 0.001).ConclusionsBiomarkers indicate that diuretic unresponsiveness is associated with an atherosclerotic profile with abnormal renal function and electrolytes. However, predicting diuretic response is difficult and biomarkers have limited additive value. Patients at risk of poor diuretic response can be identified by measuring early diuretic response after 24 h.

Background: Whether differences in circulating long chain acylcarnitines (LCAC) are seen in heart failure (HF) patients with and without diabetes mellitus (DM), and whether these biomarkers report on exercise capacity and clinical outcomes, remains unknown. The objective of the current study was to use metabolomic profiling to identify biomarkers that report on exercise capacity, clinical outcomes, and differential response to exercise in HF patients with and without DM. Methods: Targeted mass spectrometry was used to quantify metabolites in plasma from participants in the heart failure: a controlled trial investigating outcomes of exercise training (HF-ACTION) trial. Principal components analysis was used to identify 12 uncorrelated factors. The association between metabolite factors, diabetes status, exercise capacity, and time to the primary clinical outcome of all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization was assessed. Results: A total of 664 participants were included: 359 (54%) with DM. LCAC factor levels were associated with baseline exercise capacity as measured by peak oxygen consumption (beta 0.86, p = 2 × 10−7, and were differentially associated in participants with and without DM (beta 1.58, p = 8 × 10−8 vs. 0.67, p = 9 × 10−4, respectively; p value for interaction = 0.012). LCAC levels changed to a lesser extent in participants with DM after exercise (mean ∆ 0.09, p = 0.24) than in those without DM (mean ∆ 0.16, p = 0.08). In univariate and multivariate modeling, LCAC factor levels were associated with time to the primary outcome (multivariate HR 0.80, p = 2.74 × 10−8), and were more strongly linked to outcomes in diabetic participants (HR 0.64, p = 3.21 × 10−9 v. HR 0.90, p = 0.104, p value for interaction = 0.001). When analysis was performed at the level of individual metabolites, C16, C16:1, C18, and C18:1 had the greatest associations with both exercise capacity and outcomes, with higher levels associated with worse outcomes. Similar associations with time to the primary clinical outcome were not found in a control group of patients without HF from the CATHeterization GENetics (CATHGEN) study. Conclusions: LCAC biomarkers are associated with exercise status and clinical outcomes differentially in HF patients with and without DM. Impaired fatty acid substrate utilization and mitochondrial dysfunction both at the level of the skeletal muscle and the myocardium may explain the decreased exercise capacity, attenuated response to exercise training, and poor clinical outcomes seen in patients with HF and DM. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00047437. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Non-cardiac comorbidities are highly prevalent in patients with heart failure (HF). Our objective was to define the association between non-cardiac comorbidity burden and clinical outcomes, costs of care, and length of stay within a large randomized trial of acute HF patients.Methods and Results: Patients with complete medical history for the following comorbidities were included: diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic liver disease, history of cancer within the last 5 years, chronic renal disease (baseline serum creatinine >3.0 mg/mL), current smoking, alcohol abuse, depression, anaemia, peripheral arterial disease, and cerebrovascular disease. Patients were classified by overall burden of non-cardiac comorbidities (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4+). Hierarchical generalized linear models were used to assess associations between comorbidity burden and 30-day all-cause death or HF hospitalization and 180-day all-cause death in addition to costs of care and length of stay. A total of 6945 patients were included in the final analysis. Mean comorbidity number was 2.2 (± 1.34). Patients with 4+ comorbidities had higher rates of 30-day all-cause death/HF hospitalization as compared with patients with no comorbidities [odds ratio (OR) 3.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.61-6.84; P < 0.01]. Similar results were seen with respect to 180-day death (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.33-3.43; P < 0.01). Higher comorbidity burden was associated with higher 180-day costs of care and length of stay.Conclusions: Higher comorbidity burden is associated with poor clinical outcomes, higher costs of care, and extended length of stay. Further studies are needed to define the impact of comorbidity management programmes on outcomes for HF patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: The natriuretic peptides are biochemical markers of heart failure (HF) severity and predictors of adverse outcomes. Smaller studies have evaluated adjusting HF therapy based on natriuretic peptide levels ("guided therapy") with inconsistent results.Objective: To determine whether an amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP)-guided treatment strategy improves clinical outcomes vs usual care in high-risk patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).Design, Settings, and Participants: The Guiding Evidence Based Therapy Using Biomarker Intensified Treatment in Heart Failure (GUIDE-IT) study was a randomized multicenter clinical trial conducted between January 16, 2013, and September 20, 2016, at 45 clinical sites in the United States and Canada. This study planned to randomize 1100 patients with HFrEF (ejection fraction ≤40%), elevated natriuretic peptide levels within the prior 30 days, and a history of a prior HF event (HF hospitalization or equivalent) to either an NT-proBNP-guided strategy or usual care.Interventions: Patients were randomized to either an NT-proBNP-guided strategy or usual care. Patients randomized to the guided strategy (n = 446) had HF therapy titrated with the goal of achieving a target NT-proBNP of less than 1000 pg/mL. Patients randomized to usual care (n = 448) had HF care in accordance with published guidelines, with emphasis on titration of proven neurohormonal therapies for HF. Serial measurement of NT-proBNP testing was discouraged in the usual care group.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the composite of time-to-first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality. Prespecified secondary end points included all-cause mortality, total hospitalizations for HF, days alive and not hospitalized for cardiovascular reasons, the individual components on the primary end point, and adverse events.Results: The data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping the study for futility when 894 (median age, 63 years; 286 [32%] women) of the planned 1100 patients had been enrolled with follow-up for a median of 15 months. The primary end point occurred in 164 patients (37%) in the biomarker-guided group and 164 patients (37%) in the usual care group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.79-1.22; P = .88). Cardiovascular mortality was 12% (n = 53) in the biomarker-guided group and 13% (n = 57) in the usual care group (HR, 0.94; 95% CI; 0.65-1.37; P = .75). None of the secondary end points nor the decreases in the NT-proBNP levels achieved differed significantly between groups.Conclusions and Relevance: In high-risk patients with HFrEF, a strategy of NT-proBNP-guided therapy was not more effective than a usual care strategy in improving outcomes.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01685840. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mhj.2003.158 Byline: Manuela Zampino, Christopher M. O'Connor, Wendy A. Gattis, Kirkwood F. Adams, Mihai Gheorghiade Abstract: Am Heart J 2003;145:S62-6. Author Affiliation: Durham and Chapel Hill, NC, and Chicago, Ill From.sup.aNorthwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill,.sup.bDuke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, and.sup.cUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC Article Note: (footnote) [star] Reprint requests: Mihai Gheorghiade, MD, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Galter 10-240, 201 E Huron St, Chicago, IL 60611., [star][star] E-mail: m-gheorghiade@northwestern.edu, a 0002-8703/2003/$30.00 + 0

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mhj.2003.156 Byline: Christopher M. O'Connor, Wendy A. Gattis, Kirkwood F. Adams, Monica R. Shah, Aline Frey, Mihai Gheorghiade Abstract: Am Heart J 2003;145:S58-9. Author Affiliation: Durham and Chapel Hill, NC, Basel, Switzerland, and Chicago, Ill From.sup.aDuke University Medical Center and Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC,.sup.bUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC,.sup.cActelion Ltd, Basel, Switzerland, and.sup.dNorthwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill Article Note: (footnote) [star] Reprint requests: Christopher M. O'Connor, MD, Duke Clinical Research Institute, 2400 N Pratt St, 0311 Terrace Level, Durham, NC 27705., [star][star] E-mail: oconn002@mc.duke.edu, a 0002-8703/2003/$30.00 + 0

Aims: It is unclear whether distinct pathophysiological processes are present among patients with acute heart failure (AHF), with and without diabetes. Network analysis of biomarkers may identify correlative associations that reflect different pathophysiological pathways.Methods and Results: We analysed a panel of 48 circulating biomarkers measured within 24 h of admission for AHF in a subset of patients enrolled in the PROTECT trial. In patients with and without diabetes, we performed a network analysis to identify correlations between measured biomarkers. Compared with patients without diabetes (n = 1111), those with diabetes (n = 922) had a higher prevalence of ischaemic heart disease and traditional coronary risk factors. After multivariable adjustment, patients with and without diabetes had significantly different levels of biomarkers across a spectrum of pathophysiological domains, including inflammation (TNFR-1a, periostin), cardiomyocyte stretch (BNP), angiogenesis (VEGFR, angiogenin), and renal function (NGAL, KIM-1) (adjusted P-value <0.05). Among patients with diabetes, network analysis revealed that periostin strongly clustered with C-reactive protein and interleukin-6. Furthermore, renal markers (creatinine and NGAL) closely associated with potassium and glucose. These findings were not seen among patients without diabetes.Conclusion: Patients with AHF and diabetes, compared with those without diabetes, have distinct biomarker profiles. Network analysis suggests that cardiac remodelling, inflammation, and fibrosis are closely associated with each other in patients with diabetes. Furthermore, potassium levels may be sensitive to changes in renal function as reflected by the strong renal-potassium-glucose correlation. These findings were not seen among patients without diabetes and may suggest distinct pathophysiological processes among AHF patients with diabetes. [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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Heart failure (HF) can be associated with a higher resting heart rate (HR), and an elevated HR is associated with adverse long-term events. However, the mechanistic and causal role of HR in HF is unclear. This study aimed to investigate changes in HR during hospitalization, and the association between discharge HR and clinical outcomes as well as an interaction with beta-blocker therapy in patients with acute decompensated HF (ADHF).Methods and Results: We studied 2906 patients with an LVEF ≤35%, without AF, who were enrolled in the ASCEND-HF trial. A total of 2492 (85.8%) patients had a HR ≥70 b.p.m. at baseline and 1580 (54.4%) patients were on beta-blocker treatment. Although HR was gradually reduced from baseline to discharge (85.5 ± 15.9 b.p.m. at baseline, 81.7 ± 14.1 b.p.m. at 24 h from treatment initiation, and 79.1 ± 12.2 b.p.m. at discharge), 80.2% of the patients still had a HR ≥70 b.p.m. at discharge. Patients with a HR ≥70 b.p.m. at discharge had significantly lower survival rates than those with a HR <70 b.p.m. (adjusted hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.04, P = 0.002). Moreover, HR at discharge had a curvilinear association with mortality, and had no significant interaction effect with beta-blocker therapy at discharge (P = 0.82).Conclusions: Despite current beta-blocker therapy, many patients with hospitalized ADHF with reduced LVEF have relatively high discharge HR, and discharge HR is associated with higher mortality. Further studies are warranted to determine the optimal strategy for HR control to improve outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ARB Global Outcomes in HF with Preserved Ejection Fraction). It further discusses comparing sacubitril-valsartan with valsartan alone in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; benefit with sacubitril-valsartan in the cohort of patients with mildly reduced ejection fraction; and interpreting the findings of the PARAGON-HF trial.

Background: Many observational studies that predict patient outcomes have examined the use of myocardial perfusion imaging results. However, a referral pattern for radionuclide testing could bias these analyses and should be determined. These patients may also differ with regard to the extent of coronary artery disease (CAD). All of these differences must be incorporated into proper outcomes examinations. We sought to identify the nuclear perfusion imaging referral pattern for patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and significant CAD.Methods and Results: Patients with LV dysfunction and CAD (n = 2951) meeting our inclusion criteria were compared by receipt or absence of radionuclide perfusion testing within 6 months before or after angiography. Pearson chi2 and Kruskal-Wallis analyses were used to examine differences in baseline characteristics and catheterization results, whereas logistic regression modeling was applied to predict nuclear imaging referral before and after catheterization. Precatheterization nuclear cohort patients were more likely to be minority patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.34; P =.0083) with previous cardiac revascularization (OR, 2.27; P =.0001), Charlson comorbidity index greater than 1 (OR, 1.146; P =.0091), and heart failure symptoms (OR, 1.62; P =.0001) than those without imaging. They were less likely to have a myocardial infarction (OR, 0.464; P =.0001). After catheterization, the nuclear patients were more likely to have had congestive heart failure (OR, 1.452; P =.0019), a myocardial infarction (OR, 1.353; P =.0371), an ejection fraction lower than 30% (OR, 1.058; P =.0002), and prior revascularization (OR, 1.880; P =.0001). In addition, they had fewer diseased vessels (OR, 0.731; P =.0001).Conclusions: Bias exists in nuclear referral for patients with LV dysfunction and significant CAD and must be considered when interpreting observational studies on this topic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Episodes of acute heart failure (AHF) unfavourably affect multiple organs, which may have an adverse impact on the outcomes. We investigated the prevalence and clinical consequences of abnormal liver function tests (LFTs) in AHF patients enrolled in the PROTECT study.Methods and Results: The LFTs comprised serial assessment of aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and albumin at baseline and during follow-up (daily until discharge, on days 7 and 14). The prevalence of abnormal LFTs (above upper limit of normal for AST and ALT or below lower limit of normal for albumin) was: at baseline AST 20%, ALT 12%, albumin 40%; and at day 14: AST 15%, ALT 9%, albumin 26%. Abnormal LFTs at baseline were associated with a higher risk of in-hospital death with odds ratios [95% confidence interval (CI)] of 3.5 (1.7-7.3) for AST, 3.9 (1.8-8.4) for ALT, and 2.8 (1.3-5.9) for albumin (all P < 0.01). Abnormal baseline and discharge LFTs had an unfavourable impact on 180-day mortality with hazard ratios (95% CI) for baseline AST, ALT, and albumin of 1.3 (1.0-1.7), 1.1 (1.0-1.2), 1.4 (1.1-1.8), respectively, and 1.5 (1.1-2.0), 1.5 (1.0-2.2), and 1.6 (1.2-2.1), for discharge AST, ALT, albumin, respectively (all P < 0.05). Analysis of LFTs trajectories (calculated as changes in LFTs over time) revealed that increasing AST and ALT on day 3 as well as decreasing albumin on day 4 were independent prognosticators of 180-day outcome (all P < 0.05).Conclusions: Abnormal LFTs are frequent in AHF at baseline and during hospital stay and predict worse outcomes. Whether this association is causal and what are the underlying mechanisms involved require further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: It remains unclear if early administration of i.v. nesiritide in patients hospitalized with acute heart failure (AHF) is associated with improved clinical outcomes. Methods and results: We analysed data from 7007 patients enrolled in ASCEND-HF to examine the associations between time to treatment with study medication (nesiritide or placebo) and clinical endpoints: (i) moderate to marked dyspnoea relief on a 7-point Likert scale at 6 h; (ii) 30-day all-cause mortality or re-hospitalization; and (iii) 30-day all-cause mortality. The median time to study drug administration was 16.7 h (25th, 75th percentiles=6.5, 23.1), with significant regional variation (e.g. median of 13.0 h in Asia-Pacific vs. 18.4 h in North America). After risk adjustment, each hour delay in study medication after the first 10 h from initial hospital presentation was associated with modestly reduced odds of dyspnoea relief [(adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98-0.99; P < 0.0001]. Every hour delay in study medication was associated with modestly higher all-cause mortality or re-hospitalization (unadjusted OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.01-1.02; P < 0.001) due to pre-randomization therapies and known predictors of 30-day outcomes (adjusted P = 0.12). There was no significant association between time to study drug and all-cause mortality (P >0.08). Conclusion: In a large international AHF trial, time to treatment with study medication varied markedly across regions. Earlier administration of study medication was associated with modestly better dyspnoea relief, but not 30-day clinical outcomes. The association between timing of treatment with study medication and study endpoints may have implications for the interpretation of AHF studies and future trial design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: It remains unclear if early administration of i.v. nesiritide in patients hospitalized with acute heart failure (AHF) is associated with improved clinical outcomes.Methods and Results: We analysed data from 7007 patients enrolled in ASCEND-HF to examine the associations between time to treatment with study medication (nesiritide or placebo) and clinical endpoints: (i) moderate to marked dyspnoea relief on a 7-point Likert scale at 6 h; (ii) 30-day all-cause mortality or re-hospitalization; and (iii) 30-day all-cause mortality. The median time to study drug administration was 16.7 h (25th, 75th percentiles = 6.5, 23.1), with significant regional variation (e.g. median of 13.0 h in Asia-Pacific vs. 18.4 h in North America). After risk adjustment, each hour delay in study medication after the first 10 h from initial hospital presentation was associated with modestly reduced odds of dyspnoea relief [(adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98-0.99; P < 0.0001]. Every hour delay in study medication was associated with modestly higher all-cause mortality or re-hospitalization (unadjusted OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.01-1.02; P < 0.001) due to pre-randomization therapies and known predictors of 30-day outcomes (adjusted P = 0.12). There was no significant association between time to study drug and all-cause mortality (P > 0.08).Conclusion: In a large international AHF trial, time to treatment with study medication varied markedly across regions. Earlier administration of study medication was associated with modestly better dyspnoea relief, but not 30-day clinical outcomes. The association between timing of treatment with study medication and study endpoints may have implications for the interpretation of AHF studies and future trial design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: A longitudinal and comprehensive analysis of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) was performed during hospitalization for heart failure (HF) or soon after discharge.Methods and Results: A post-hoc analysis was performed of the ASCEND-HF trial. The EuroQOL five dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) was administered to study participants at baseline, 24 h, discharge/day 10, and day 30. EQ-5D includes functional dimensions mapped to corresponding utility scores (i.e. 0 = death and 1 = perfect health), and a visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 0 (i.e. 'worst imaginable health state') to 100 (i.e. 'best imaginable health state'). The association between baseline and discharge EQ-5D measurements and subsequent clinical outcomes including death and rehospitalization were assessed using multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression. A total of 6943 patients (97%) had complete EQ-5D data at baseline. Mapped utility and VAS scores (mean ± SD) increased over time, respectively, from 0.56 ± 0.23 and 45 ± 22 at baseline to 0.67 ± 0.26 and 58 ± 22 at 24 h and to 0.79 ± 0.20 and 68 ± 22 at discharge, and remained stable at day 30. Lower mapped utility scores at baseline [odds ratio (OR) per 0.1 decrease in utility score 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00-1.06] and discharge (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05-1.15) and VAS scores at baseline (OR per 10 point decrease 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.09) were significantly associated with increased risk of 30-day all-cause death or HF rehospitalization.Conclusions: Patients hospitalized for HF had severely impaired health status at baseline and, although this improved substantially during admission, health status remained abnormal at discharge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The clinical value of single biomarkers at single time-points to predict outcomes in patients with acute heart failure (AHF) is limited. We performed a multimarker, multi-time-point analysis of biomarkers for the prediction of post-discharge clinical outcomes in high-risk AHF patients.Methods and Results: A set of 48 circulating biomarkers were measured in the PROTECT trial which enrolled 2033 patients with AHF. Associations between baseline levels of biomarkers and outcomes (30-day all-cause mortality, 30-day death or rehospitalization for renal/cardiovascular causes and 180-day all-cause mortality) were evaluated. Prognostic accuracies of baseline, days 2 or 3, 7, and 14 biomarker measurements were estimated and compared utilizing a time-dependent area under the curve (AUC) analysis. Forty-four biomarkers were significantly associated with outcomes, but 42 had limited prognostic value (C-index < 0.70). However, multimarker models combining best-performing biomarkers from different clusters had a much stronger prognostic value. Combining blood urea nitrogen (BUN), chloride, interleukin (IL)-6, cTnI, sST-2 and VEGFR-1 into a clinical model yielded a 11% increase in C-index to 0.84 and 0.78 for 30-day and 180-day all-cause mortality, respectively, and cNRI of 0.86 95% CI [0.55-1.11] and 0.76 95% CI [0.57-0.87]. Prognostic gain was modest for the 30-day death/rehospitalization for cardiovascular or renal causes endpoint. Comparative time-dependent AUC analysis indicated that late measurements provided superior accuracy for the prediction of all-cause mortality over 180 days, with few exceptions including BUN and galectin-3. However, the predictive value of most biomarkers showed a diminishing pattern over time irrespective of moment of measurement.Conclusions: Multimarker models significantly improve risk prediction. Subsequent measurements, beyond admission, are needed for majority of biomarkers to maximize prognostic value over time, particularly in the long term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality but the relationship between LVEF and outcomes is unclear. We explored the association between LVEF and 30 and 180 day mortality in 7007 ADHF patients enrolled in the Acute Studies of Nesiritide in Decompensated Heart Failure (ASCEND-HF) trial. Methods and results We explored the association between LVEF and 30 and 180 day mortality in 7007 ADHF patients enrolled in the Acute Studies of Nesiritide in Decompensated Heart Failure (ASCEND-HF) trial. LVEF was analysed both as a continuous variable and according to three categories: < 40% (LowEF), 40-50% [intermediate EF (IntEF)], and > 50% [preserved ejection fraction (PresEF)]. Of the patients in the trial, 4474 (78.7%) had LowEF, 674 (11.9%) had IntEF, and 539 (9.5%) had PresEF. The unadjusted 30 and 180 day mortality was similar for LowEF (3.7%, 12.3%), IntEF (3.4%, 13.1%), and PresEF (4.3%, 14.1%), respectively ( P > 0.05). After multivariable adjustment, the hazard ratio (HR) for 180 day mortality remained similar for the LowEF [HR 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-1.24; P = 0.77] and IntEF (0.91, 95% CI 0.66-1.3; P = 0.58) compared to PresEF patients. By contrast, when LVEF was evaluated as a continuous measure, it exhibited a U-shaped pattern with mortality. After matching for age and sex, the mortality risk attributed to LVEF was attenuated, as the LVEF increased as a continuous variable over 35%. However, in patients with EF < 35%, the mortality risk continue to increase as the LVEF declined. Conclusions Among patients with ADHF, the unadjusted mortality rates are similar across LVEF strata. However, after accounting for key patient variables, the mortality risk increases as EF falls below 35%. These data will be useful in planning future studies of ADHF. Clinical Trial Registration identifier: NCT00475852 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The complexity of standard medical treatment for heart failure is growing, and such therapy typically involves 5 or more different medications. Given these pressures, there is increasing interest in harnessing cardiovascular biomarkers for clinical application to more effectively guide diagnosis, risk stratification, and therapy. It may be possible to realize an era of personalized medicine for heart failure treatment in which therapy is optimized and costs are controlled. The direct mechanistic coupling of biologic processes and therapies achieved in cancer treatment remains elusive in heart failure. Recent clinical trials and meta-analyses of biomarkers in heart failure have produced conflicting evidence. In this article, which comprises a summary of discussions from the Global Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists Forum held in Paris, France, we offer a brief overview of the background and rationale for biomarker testing in heart failure, describe opportunities and challenges from a regulatory perspective, and summarize current positions from government agencies in the United States and European Union. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The prevalence of heart failure (HF) increases with age. While clinical trials suggest that contemporary evidence-based HF therapies have reduced morbidity and mortality, these trials largely excluded the elderly. Questions remain regarding the clinical characteristics of elderly HF patients and the impact of contemporary therapies on their outcomes. This review presents the epidemiology of HF in the elderly and summarizes the data on the pathophysiology of the ageing heart. The clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes of elderly HF patients are explored. Finally, the main gaps regarding HF therapies in the elderly and the opportunities for future trials are highlighted. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article describes a study that examined the effects of 6 weeks of escitalopram treatment versus placebo on mental stress-induced myocardial ischemia (MSIMI) and other psychological stress-related biophysiological and emotional parameters. It also states that as part of the study, a randomized clinical trial of patients with clinically stable coronary heart disease and laboratory-diagnosed MSIMI was conducted and also states that patients treated with escitalopram, compared with placebo, resulted in a lower rate of MSIMI. It also states that no statistically significant difference was in exercise-induced ischemia.

Aims To examine the characteristics associated with early dyspnoea relief during acute heart failure (HF) hospitalization, and its association with 30-day outcomes. Methods and results ASCEND-HF was a randomized trial of nesiritide vs. placebo in 7141 patients hospitalized with acute HF in which dyspnoea relief at 6 h was measured on a 7-point Likert scale. Patients were classified as having early dyspnoea relief if they experienced moderate or marked dyspnoea improvement at 6 h. We analysed the clinical characteristics, geographical variation, and outcomes (mortality, mortality/HF hospitalization, and mortality/hospitalization at 30 days) associated with early dyspnoea relief. Early dyspnoea relief occurred in 2984 patients (43%). In multivariable analyses, predictors of dyspnoea relief included older age and oedema on chest radiograph; higher systolic blood pressure, respiratory rate, and natriuretic peptide level; and lower serum blood urea nitrogen (BUN), sodium, and haemoglobin (model mean C index = 0.590). Dyspnoea relief varied markedly across countries, with patients enrolled from Central Europe having the lowest risk-adjusted likelihood of improvement. Early dyspnoea relief was associated with lower risk-adjusted 30-day mortality/HF hospitalization [hazard ratio (HR) 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68–0.96] and mortality/hospitalization (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.74–0.99), but similar mortality. Conclusion Clinical characteristics such as respiratory rate, pulmonary oedema, renal function, and natriuretic peptide levels are associated with early dyspnoea relief, and moderate or marked improvement in dyspnoea was associated with a lower risk for 30-day outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article presents a study which was conducted to determine the effect of the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor sildenafil as compared with clinical status and placebo on exercise capacity in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF). The study was carried out to check if phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor enhances cardiovascular function. The study employed double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial in which 216 outpatients were enrolled. The result revealed that administration of sildenfil drug for 24 weeks did not result in improvement in exercise capacity or clinical status.

Aims Beta-blockers reduce morbidity and mortality in chronic heart failure (HF) patients with reduced ejection fraction. However, there is heterogeneity in the response to these drugs, perhaps due to genetic variations in the β1-adrenergic receptor (ADRβ1). We examined whether the Arg389Gly polymorphism in ADRβ1 interacts with the dose requirements of beta-blockers in patients with systolic HF. Methods and results HF-ACTION was a randomized, multicentre trial of ambulatory HF patients with systolic dysfunction who were randomized to exercise training or usual care. A subset of patients provided DNA. The relationships among beta-blocker dose, ADRβ1–389 genotype, and outcomes were assessed using the Cox proportional hazards regression model. The interaction between beta-blocker dose and the ADRβ1–389 genotype was tested. DNA information was available for 957 patients. The alleles did not deviate from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium. Patients with the ADRβ1–389 Arg/Arg genotype receiving low-dose beta-blockers had a two-fold increase in the risk of death compared with those receiving a high dose (hazard ratio 2.09; P = 0.015); this was not conferred in Gly carriers. There was also an interaction between improvements in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score and beta-blocker dose by genotype, suggesting that higher doses of beta-blockade might be needed to achieve benefit in Arg/Arg genotype patients. Conclusion There was a gene–dose interaction with the ADRβ1–389 Arg/Arg vs. Gly carrier genotype and beta-blocker dose, suggesting that patients with the Arg/Arg genotype might require a higher dose of beta-blockade to achieve a treatment response similar to that of Gly carriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims This report describes the baseline characteristics of patients in the Reduction of Events with Darbepoetin alfa in Heart Failure trial (RED-HF) which is testing the hypothesis that anaemia correction with darbepoetin alfa will reduce the composite endpoint of death from any cause or hospital admission for worsening heart failure, and improve other outcomes. Methods and results Key demographic, clinical, and laboratory findings, along with baseline treatment, are reported and compared with those of patients in other recent clinical trials in heart failure. Compared with other recent trials, RED-HF enrolled more elderly [mean age 70 (SD 11.4) years], female (41%), and black (9%) patients. RED-HF patients more often had diabetes (46%) and renal impairment (72% had an estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2). Patients in RED-HF had heart failure of longer duration [5.3 (5.4) years], worse NYHA class (35% II, 63% III, and 2% IV), and more signs of congestion. Mean EF was 30% (6.8%). RED-HF patients were well treated at randomization, and pharmacological therapy at baseline was broadly similar to that of other recent trials, taking account of study-specific inclusion/exclusion criteria. Median (interquartile range) haemoglobin at baseline was 112 (106–117) g/L. Conclusion The anaemic patients enrolled in RED-HF were older, moderately to markedly symptomatic, and had extensive co-morbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Data on the prognosis of heart failure (HF) patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) have been conflicting. We describe the clinical characteristics and mode-specific outcomes of HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF) and documented CAD in a large randomized trial. Methods and results EVEREST was a prospective, randomized trial of vasopressin-2 receptor blockade, in addition to standard therapy, in 4133 patients hospitalized with worsening HF and reduced EF. Patients were classified as having CAD based on patient-reported myocardial infarction (MI) or coronary revascularization. We analysed the characteristics and outcomes [all-cause mortality and cardiovascular (CV) mortality/HF hospitalization] of patients with and without documented CAD. All events were centrally adjudicated. Documented CAD was present in 2353 patients (57%). Patients with CAD were older and had more co-morbidities compared with those without CAD. Patients with CAD were more likely to receive a beta-blocker, but less likely to receive an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or aldosterone antagonist (P < 0.01). After risk adjustment, patients with documented CAD had similar mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97–1.30], but were at an increased risk for CV mortality/HF hospitalization (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.12–1.41) due to an increased risk for HF hospitalization (HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.10–1.44). Patients with CAD had increased HF- and MI-related events, but similar rates of sudden cardiac death. Conclusion Documented CAD in patients hospitalized for worsening HF with reduced EF was associated with a higher burden of co-morbidities, lower use of HF therapies (except beta-blockers), and increased HF hospitalization, while all-cause mortality was similar. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article discusses the health condition known as acute heart failure. It explores the nature of the condition by characterizing its clinical features, practice patterns as well as in-hospital results of acute heart failure patients. According to the authors, in-hospital mortality was higher compared with patients who usually participate in randomized clinical trials.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the mode of death and hospitalizations in advanced heart failure (HF) patients with renal dysfunction and to examine the rate of concordance between events reported by the clinical events committee and site investigators (using case report forms) in the Second Follow-Up Serial Infusions of Nesiritide (FUSION II) trial. Little is known about the cause of death and hospitalization in patients with advanced HF. FUSION II was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating outpatient nesiritide infusions versus placebo, with 911 patients with advanced HF (New York Heart Association class III or IV) and renal dysfunction enrolled. There were 151 deaths and 1,041 hospitalizations at 24 weeks. The clinical events committee classified events as cardiac, renal, cardiorenal, other or noncardiovascular, or unknown. Kappa statistics and McNemar tests were used to assess agreement (overall and by individual modes of death and hospitalization indications). In conclusion, the most common cause of death or hospitalization was cardiac related, with 70% of deaths and 60% of hospitalizations due to cardiac causes. There was 74% agreement (26% disagreement) on cardiac cause of death (κ = 0.40, McNemar p = 0.001) and 75% agreement (25% disagreement) between the investigators and the clinical events committee on cardiac classification for hospitalization (κ = 0.49, McNemar p <0.0001). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We sought to describe the United States and the rest of the world (ROW) outcomes from the major β-blocker heart failure (HF) trials. Background: HF trials have demonstrated differences in outcomes by geographic region. Methods: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies that evaluated β-blockers in HF patients, had a primary endpoint of mortality, and enrolled U.S. patients were included. Relative risk (RR) was calculated for patients enrolled in the United States and ROW. Meta-analysis of the combined mortality rates was performed using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel statistic, stratified by study. Results: A total of 8,988 patients were enrolled in the MERIT-HF (Metoprolol Controlled-Release Randomized Intervention Trial in Heart Failure), COPERNICUS (Carvedilol Prospective Randomized Cumulative Survival trial), and BEST (β-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial) combined; 4,198 (46.7%) were from the United States. In the U.S. cohort, the RR reduction for each β-blocker was of smaller magnitude than in the overall cohort and no longer significant, whereas in the ROW subgroup, the mortality benefit for β-blockade persisted. In the pooled analysis (n = 11,635), the RR of death was reduced by 23% (p < 0.001) with β-blockade compared with placebo. In contrast, the mortality reduction associated with β-blockade in the U.S. cohort was small and not statistically significant (RR: 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82 to 1.02, p = 0.11). The survival benefit persisted in the ROW cohort (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.72, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Among patients enrolled in the United States, β-blockade was associated with a lower magnitude of survival benefit, whereas the ROW response was similar to the total study population. This geographic difference in treatment response may be a reflection of population differences, genetics, cultural or social differences in disease management, or low power and statistical chance. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

With the emergence of large multicenter trials over the past 20 years, the numbers of investigators involved and publications resulting from each study have grown exponentially. An efficient, fair, and effective way to establish authorship on study-related manuscripts could diminish conflict among the investigators and help ensure robust and timely dissemination of study results. This article describes a process developed by the investigators in the HF-ACTION (Heart Failure: A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise Training) trial (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00047437) to establish authorship of the manuscripts describing the baseline characteristics, study design, and trial outcomes in an equitable and transparent manner based on objective, quantifiable contributions to the study as a whole. The HF-ACTION investigators developed a scoring system that assigned points to investigators by using the criteria established for enrollment, adherence to the exercise program, data completion, committee service, and other trial efforts. The scoring system has been successfully implemented for baseline manuscripts and has allowed many investigators to participate in the HF-ACTION publication process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The rationale and design of the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure trial is described. Before the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure trial, less than 1000 patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy had been studied in randomized comparisons of medical therapy versus coronary artery bypass grafting. Trial data reflect how these therapies were delivered more than 20 years ago and do not indicate the relative benefits of medical therapy versus coronary artery bypass grafting in contemporary practice. Methods: Randomization of consenting patients with heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction of 0.35 or less, and coronary artery disease is based on whether patients are judged by attending physicians to be candidates only for coronary artery bypass grafting or can be treated with medical therapy without coronary artery bypass grafting. Patients eligible for surgical ventricular reconstruction because of significant anterior wall akinesis or dyskinesis but ineligible for medical therapy are randomly assigned to coronary artery bypass grafting with or without surgical ventricular reconstruction. Patients eligible for medical therapy are randomly assigned between medical therapy only and medical therapy with coronary artery bypass grafting. Patients eligible for all 3 are randomly assigned evenly to medical therapy only, medical therapy and coronary artery bypass grafting, or medical therapy and coronary artery bypass grafting and surgical ventricular reconstruction. Major substudies will examine quality of life, cost-effectiveness, changes in left ventricular volumes, effect of myocardial viability, selected biomarkers, and selected polymorphisms on treatment differences. Results: Enrollment is now complete in both STICH hypotheses. Follow-up will continue until sufficient end points are available to address both hypotheses with at least 90% power. The primary outcome of hypothesis 2 is expected to be reported in 2009. The primary outcome of hypothesis 1 is expected to be reported in 2011. Conclusions: The Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure trial is a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute–funded multicenter international randomized trial addressing 2 specific primary hypotheses: (1) coronary artery bypass grafting with intensive medical therapy improves long-term survival compared with survival with medical therapy alone, and (2) in patients with anterior left ventricular dysfunction, surgical ventricular reconstruction to a more normal left ventricular size plus coronary artery bypass grafting improves survival free of subsequent hospitalization for cardiac cause when compared with that with coronary artery bypass grafting alone. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Acute decompensated heart failure represents a heterogeneous group of disorders that typically present as dyspnea, edema and fatigue. Despite the high prevalence of this condition and its associated major morbidity and mortality, diagnosis can be difficult, and optimal treatment remains poorly defined. Identification of the acute triggers for the decompensation as well as noninvasive characterization of cardiac filling pressures and output is central to management. Diuretics, vasodilators, continuous positive airway pressure and inotropes can be used to alleviate symptoms. However, few agents currently available for the treatment of acute decompensated heart failure have been definitively shown in large prospective randomized clinical trials to provide meaningful improvements in intermediate-term clinical outcomes. Multiple novel therapies are being developed, but previous treatment failures indicate that progress in the management of acute decompensated heart failure is likely to be slow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although there are limited clinical data to support the use of exercise training as a means to reduce mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure, current guidelines state that exercise is beneficial. Trial Design: The objective of this trial is to determine whether exercise training reduces all-cause mortality or all-cause hospitalization for patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and heart failure symptoms. After undergoing baseline assessments to determine whether they can safely exercise, patients are randomized to either usual care or exercise training. Patients in the exercise training arm attend 36 supervised facility-based exercise training sessions. Exercise modalities are cycling or walking. After completing 18 sessions, patients initiate home-based exercise and then transition to solely home-based exercise after completing all 36 sessions. Patients return for facility-based training every 3 months to reinforce their exercise training program. Patients are followed for up to 4 years. Physiologic, quality-of-life, and economic end points that characterize the effect of exercise training in this patient population will be measured at baseline and at intervals throughout the trial. Blood samples will be collected to examine biomarkers such as brain natriuretic peptide, tumor necrosis factor, and C-reactive protein. Conclusions: Because of its relatively low cost, high availability, and ease of use, exercise training is an intervention that could be accessible to most patients with heart failure. The HF-ACTION trial is designed to definitively assess the effect of exercise training on the clinically relevant end points of mortality, hospitalization, and quality of life in patients with heart failure. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The magnitude of benefit on mortality of combined angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) and β-blocker (BB) therapy for heart failure cannot be reliably assessed from prospective randomized trials of individual drugs with intent-to-treat analysis. The placebo arm of the Valsartan Heart Failure Trial (Val-HeFT) included patients who remained on background therapy with ACEIs, BBs, neither, or both. The outcomes in these four subgroups should provide a better guide to mortality benefit. Overall mortality (mean follow-up, 23 months) was 31.6% in those receiving neither neurohormonal blocker, 29% and 39% lower in those on ACEIs or BBs, respectively, and 62% lower (11.9% mortality) in those receiving both drugs. In the neither neurohormonal inhibitor group, 48% of the heart failure-related deaths were adjudicated as sudden, whereas in the group receiving ACEIs and BBs, 79% of the deaths were sudden, and pump failure mortality was only 1% per year. The combination of ACEIs and BBs exerts a greater mortality reduction than suggested from clinical trials and reduces pump failure mortality to 1% per year. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of this report is to present a model of physicians in full-time clinical practice participating as investigators in multicenter clinical trials, sponsored by a pharmaceutical or medical device company. Methods: This gas-exchange substudy was conducted as a pilot study to establish the feasibility of the 10-member EXERcise testing group of the Duke University Cooperative Cardiovascular Society (EXERDUCCS) consortium to perform a complex multicenter trial using cardiopulmonary exercise testing. An active interchange of information was established involving the principal investigator for the substudy, a dedicated full-time project coordinator, a medical director of the overall EXERDUCCS network site, the project coordinator for the sponsor, and all the participating EXERDUCCS investigators and coordinators. Results: The sponsor set as a goal of enrollment of 6 subjects per site, and 8 of the 10 sites met this goal. As a result of the successful enrollment and completion of the study and substudy by the EXERDUCCS sites, the sponsor subsequently increased the payment stipends to the sites to compensate for the extra work and expense incurred. Conclusions: This cooperative experience accomplished several goals: (1) it allowed a complex clinical trial to be successfully completed in a time frame which would not have been possible using only single unconnected sites; (2) it educated the physician-investigators (and their personnel) in exercise cardiopulmonary; and (3) it prepared the sites for future clinical trials involving this methodology. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Context Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) have been limited by small sample size. Some nonrandomized studies suggest that PAC use is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Objective To estimate the impact of the PAC device in critically ill patients. Data Sources MEDLINE (1985-2005), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry (1988-2005), the National Institutes of Health ClinicalTrials.gov database, and the US Food and Drug Administration Web site for RCTs in which patients were randomly assigned to PAC or no PAC were searched. Results from the ESCAPE trial of patients with severe heart failure were also included. Search terms included pulmonary artery catheter, right heart catheter, catheter, and Swan-Ganz. Study Selection Eligible studies included patients who were undergoing surgery, in the intensive care unit (ICU), admitted with advanced heart failure, or diagnosed with acute respiratory distress syndrome and/or sepsis; and studies that reported death and the number of days hospitalized or the number of days in the ICU as outcome measures. Data Extraction Information on eligibility criteria, baseline characteristics, interventions, outcomes, and methodological quality was extracted by 2 reviewers. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Data Synthesis In 13 RCTs, 5051 patients were randomized. Hemodynamic goals and treatment strategies varied among trials. A random-effects model was used to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) for death, number of days hospitalized, and use of inotropes and intravenous vasodilators. The combined OR for mortality was 1.04 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-1.20; P = .59). The difference in the mean number of days hospitalized for PAC minus the mean for no PAC was 0.11 (95% CI, -0.51 to 0.74; P = .73). Use of the PAC was associated with a higher use of inotropes (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.19-2.12; P = .002) and intravenous vasodilators (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.75-3.15; P<.001). Conclusions In critically ill patients, use of the PAC neither increased overall mortality or days in hospital nor conferred benefit. Despite almost 20 years of RCTs, a clear strategy leading to improved survival with the PAC has not been devised. The neutrality of the PAC for clinical outcomes may result from the absence of effective evidence-based treatments to use in combination with PAC information across the spectrum of critically ill patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In a platelet/endothelial biomarker substudy of the Sertraline Anti- Depressant Heart Attack Randomized Trial (SADHART), the authors sought to determine whether plasma levels of sertraline and its primary metabolite N-desmethylsertraline affect the release of platelet/endothelial biomarkers. Method: Fifty-five acute coronary syndrome patients with depression were randomly assigned to receive sertraline (N= 23) or placebo (N=32). Twenty-six serial plasma samples collected at week 6 (N= 12) and week 16 (N=14) were analyzed. Platelet factor 4 (PF4), ²-thromboglobulin (13-TG), platelet/eridothelial cell adhesion molecule 1 (PECAM-1), P-selectin, thromboxane B2 (TxB2), prostacyclin (6-keto- PGF1±), vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (VCAM-1), and E-selectin were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Concentrations of sertraline and N-des- methylsertraline were determined by liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection in autologous samples. Results: Strong, mostly time-dependent negative correlations were found for the plasma levels of sertraline and N-des- methylsertraline with PF4 (week 6: r=-0.69 and -0.33, respectively; week 16: r-0.63 for both), ²-TG (week 6: r=-0.43 and -0.29; week 16: r=-0,66 and -0.57), PECAM-1 (week 6: r=-0.82 and -0.49; week 16: r= -0.60 for both), P-selectin (week 6: r=-0.82 and -0.49; week 16: r=-0.73 and -0.43), and TxB2 (week 6: r=-0.66 and -0.59; and week 16: r=-0.64 and -0.41), Regression analysis revealed some borderline correlations for endothelial markers such as 6- keto- PGF1± and E-selectin and a positive correlation for VCAM-1. Conclusions: This is the first documented evidence that plasma release of platelet/endothelial biomarkers is directly related to the levels of sertraline and N- desmethylsertraline in acute coronary syndrome patients receiving SSRI treatment for depression. The clinical significance of these findings should be assessed in the setting of a randomized clinical trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Multicenter Automatic Defibrillator Implantation Trial (MADIT)-II demonstrated that implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) save lives when used in patients with a history of myocardial infarction (MI) and an ejection fraction of 0.3 or less.Objective: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of implanting ICDs in patients who met MADIT-II eligibility criteria and were enrolled in the Duke Cardiovascular Database between 1 January 1986 and 31 December 2001.Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis.Data Sources: Published literature, databases owned by Duke University Medical Center, and Medicare data.Target Population: Adults with a history of MI and an ejection fraction of 0.3 or less.Time Horizon: Lifetime.Perspective: Societal.Interventions: ICD therapy versus conventional medical therapy.Outcomes Measures: Cost per life-year gained and incremental cost-effectiveness.Results: Compared with conventional medical therapy, ICDs are projected to result in an increase of 1.80 discounted years in life expectancy and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 50,500 dollars per life-year gained. Cost-effectiveness varied dramatically with changes in time horizon: The cost-effectiveness ratio increased to 67,800 dollars per life-year gained, 79,900 dollars per life-year gained, 100,000 dollars per life-year gained, 167,900 dollars per life-year gained, and 367,200 dollars per life-year gained for 15-year, 12-year, 9-year, 6-year, and 3-year time horizons, respectively. Changing the frequency of follow-up visits, complication rates, and battery replacements had less of an effect on the cost-effectiveness ratios than reducing the cost of ICD placement and leads.Limitations: The study was limited by the completeness of the data, referral bias, difference in medical therapy between the Duke cohort and the MADIT-II cohort, and not addressing potential upgrades to biventricular devices.Conclusions: The economic expense of defibrillator implantation in all patients who meet MADIT-II eligibility criteria is substantial. However, in the range of survival benefit observed in MADIT-II, ICD therapy for these patients is economically attractive by conventional standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The medical community has turned to disease management (DM) to bridge the gap between proven therapies and clinical practice for patients with heart failure (HF). The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of DM programs in reducing hospitalization and mortality in patients with HF on the basis of the results of existing trials. Methods We compared the published results from 19 randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating HF DM programs. A random effects model was used to combine the hazards ratio for all-cause hospitalization across the studies evaluating specific types of HF DM programs. Results We identified 19 relevant studies, with 5752 enrolled patients, which assessed the benefits of HF DM programs. The overall effect was a significant decrease in all-cause hospitalization for patients with HF. There was significant heterogeneity in the results ( P < .0001). Conclusions The results of this analysis indicate that HF DM is an intervention that could significantly decrease hospitalization for patients with HF. However, due to differences in the types of strategies and the variety of health care settings in which they were evaluated, further studies of HF DM programs with multiple participating centers are required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]