Search

Aims: Current heart failure (HF) guidelines recommend to prescribe four drug classes in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). A clear challenge exists to adequately implement guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) regarding the sequencing of drugs and timely reaching target dose. It is largely unknown how the paradigm shift from a serial and sequential approach for drug therapy to early parallel application of the four drug classes will be executed in daily clinical practice, as well as the reason clinicians may not adhere to new guidelines. We present the design and rationale for the real-world TITRATE-HF study, which aims to assess sequencing strategies for GDMT initiation, dose titration patterns (order and speed), intolerance for GDMT, barriers for implementation, and long-term outcomes in patients with de novo, chronic, and worsening HF. Methods and results: A total of 4000 patients with HFrEF, HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction, and HF with improved ejection fraction will be enrolled in >40 Dutch centres with a follow-up of at least 3 years. Data collection will include demographics, physical examination and vital parameters, electrocardiogram, laboratory measurements, echocardiogram, medication, and quality of life. Detailed information on titration steps will be collected for the four GDMT drug classes. Information will include date, primary reason for change, and potential intolerances. The primary clinical endpoints are HF-related hospitalizations, HF-related urgent visits with a need for intravenous diuretics, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular mortality. Conclusions: TITRATE-HF is a real-world multicentre longitudinal registry that will provide unique information on contemporary GDMT implementation, sequencing strategies (order and speed), and prognosis in de novo, worsening, and chronic HF patients.

Introduction:This study aimed to evaluate the use and dose of loop diuretics (LDs) across the entire ejection fraction (EF) spectrum in a large, € real-world' cohort of chronic heart failure (HF) patients. Methods:A total of 10 366 patients with chronic HF from 34 Dutch outpatient HF clinics were analysed regarding diuretic use and diuretic dose. Data regarding daily diuretic dose were stratified by furosemide dose equivalent (FDE)>80 mg or ≤80 mg. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the association between diuretic dose and clinical features. Results:In this cohort, 8512 (82.1%) patients used diuretics, of which 8179 (96.1%) used LDs. LD use was highest among HF with reduced EF (HFrEF) patients (81.1%) followed by HF with mild-reduced EF (76.1%) and HF with preserved ejection fraction EF (73.8%, p<0.001). Among all LDs users, the median FDE was 40 mg (IQR: 40-80). The results of the multivariable analysis showed that New York Heart Association classes III and IV and diabetes mellitus were one of the strongest determinants of an FDE >80 mg, across all HF categories. Renal impairment was associated with a higher FDE across the entire EF spectrum. Conclusion: In this large registry of real-world HF patients, LD use was highest among HFrEF patients. Advanced symptoms, diabetes mellitus and worse renal function were significantly associated with a higher diuretic dose regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction.

Review Purpose: This systematic review aims to summarise clustering studies in heart failure (HF) and guide future clinical trial design and implementation in routine clinical practice. Findings: 34 studies were identified (n = 19 in HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)). There was significant heterogeneity invariables and techniques used. However, 149/165 described clusters could be assigned to one of nine phenotypes: 1) young, low comorbidity burden; 2) metabolic; 3) cardio-renal; 4) atrial fibrillation (AF); 5) elderly female AF; 6) hypertensive-comorbidity; 7) ischaemic-male; 8) valvular disease; and 9) devices. There was room for improvement on important methodological topics for all clustering studies such as external validation and transparency of the modelling process.Summary:The large overlap between the phenotypes of the clustering studies shows that clustering is a robust approach for discovering clinically distinct phenotypes. However, future studies should invest in a phenotype model that can be implemented in routine clinical practice and future clinical trial design. Graphical Abstract: HF = heart failure, EF = ejection fraction, HFpEF = heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, HFrEF = heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, CKD = chronic kidney disease, AF = atrial fibrillation, IHD = ischaemic heart disease, CAD = coronary artery disease, ICD = implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, CRT = cardiac resynchronization therapy, NT-proBNP = N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide, BMI = Body Mass Index, COPD = Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. [Figure not available: see fulltext.]

Background: Research on the use of home telemonitoring data and adherence to it can provide new insights into telemonitoring for the daily management of patients with heart failure (HF). Objective: We described the use of a telemonitoring platform—including remote patient monitoring of blood pressure, pulse, and weight—and the use of the electronic personal health record. Patient characteristics were assessed in both adherent and nonadherent patients to weight transmissions. Methods: We used the data of the e-Vita HF study, a 3-arm parallel randomized trial performed in stable patients with HF managed in outpatient clinics in the Netherlands. In this study, data were analyzed from the participants in the intervention arm (ie, e-Vita HF platform). Adherence to weight transmissions was defined as transmitting weight ≥3 times per week for at least 42 weeks during a year. Results: Data from 150 patients (mean age 67, SD 11 years; n=37, 25% female; n=123, 82% self-assessed New York Heart Association class I-II) were analyzed. One-year adherence to weight transmissions was 74% (n=111). Patients adherent to weight transmissions were less often hospitalized for HF in the 6 months before enrollment in the study compared to those who were nonadherent (n=9, 8% vs n=9, 23%; P=.02). The percentage of patients visiting the personal health record dropped steadily over time (n=140, 93% vs n=59, 39% at one year). With univariable analyses, there was no significant correlation between patient characteristics and adherence to weight transmissions. Conclusions: Adherence to remote patient monitoring was high among stable patients with HF and best for weighing; however, adherence decreased over time. Clinical and demographic variables seem not related to adherence to transmitting weight. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01755988; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01755988, Funding agencies: University College London (UCL) Hospitals National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre, the foundation “Care Within Reach” (in Dutch: Stichting Zorg Binnen Bereik).

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) trials have stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria, but limited data exist regarding generalizability of trials. We compared patient characteristics and outcomes between patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in trials and observational registries. METHODS AND RESULTS: Individual patient data for 16 922 patients from five randomized clinical trials and 46 914 patients from two HF registries were included. The registry patients were categorized into trial-eligible and non-eligible groups using the most commonly used inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total of 26 104 (56%) registry patients fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Unadjusted all-cause mortality rates at 1 year were lowest in the trial population (7%), followed by trial-eligible patients (12%) and trial-non-eligible registry patients (26%). After adjustment for age and sex, all-cause mortality rates were similar between trial participants and trial-eligible registry patients [standardized mortality ratio (SMR) 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-1.03] but cardiovascular mortality was higher in trial participants (SMR 1.19; 1.12-1.27). After full case-mix adjustment, the SMR for cardiovascular mortality remained higher in the trials at 1.28 (1.20-1.37) compared to RCT-eligible registry patients. CONCLUSION: In contemporary HF registries, over half of HFrEF patients would have been eligible for trial enrolment. Crude clinical event rates were lower in the trials, but, after adjustment for case-mix, trial participants had similar rates of survival as registries. Despite this, they had about 30% higher cardiovascular mortality rates. Age and sex were the main drivers of differences in clinical outcomes between HF trials and observational HF registries.

Aims: Although diabetes mellitus (DM) is a common co-morbidity in chronic heart failure (HF) patients, European data on concurrent HF and DM treatment are lacking. Therefore, we have studied the HF treatment of patients with and without DM. Additionally, with the recent breakthrough of sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in the field of HF, we studied the potential impact of this new drug in a large cohort of HF patients. Methods and results: A total of 7488 patients with chronic HF with a left ventricular ejection fraction <50% from 34 Dutch outpatient HF clinics between 2013 and 2016 were analysed on diabetic status and background HF therapy. Average age of the total population was 72.8 years (±11.7 years), and 64% of the patients were male. Diabetes was present in 29% of the patients (N = 2174). Diabetics had a worse renal function (mean estimated glomerular filtration rate 56 vs. 61 mL/min/1.73 m2, P < 0.001). Renin–angiotensin system inhibitors were less often prescribed in diabetics compared with non-diabetics (79% vs. 82%, P = 0.001), while no significant differences regarding other guideline-recommended HF drugs were found. Target doses of beta-blockers (23% vs. 16%, P < 0.001), renin–angiotensin system inhibitors (47% vs. 43%, P = 0.009), and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (57% vs. 51%, P = 0.005) were more often prescribed in diabetics than non-diabetics. Based on the latest trials on SGLT2 inhibitors, 31–64% of all HF patients would fulfil the eligibility or enrichment criteria (with vs. without N-terminal prohormone BNP criterion). Conclusions: In this large real-world HF registry, a high prevalence of DM was observed and diabetics more often received guideline-recommended target doses. Based on current evidence, the majority of patients would fulfil the enrichment criteria of SGLT2 trials in HF and the impact of this new drug class will be large.

Aims We aimed to derive and validate clinically useful clusters of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF; left ventricular ejection fraction >= 50%). Methods and results We derived a cluster model from 6909 HFpEF patients from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF) and externally validated this in 2153 patients from the Chronic Heart Failure ESC-guideline based Cardiology practice Quality project (CHECK-HF) registry. In SwedeHF, the median age was 80 [interquartile range 72-86] years, 52% of patients were female and most frequent comorbidities were hypertension (82%), atrial fibrillation (68%), and ischaemic heart disease (48%). Latent class analysis identified five distinct clusters: cluster 1 (10% of patients) were young patients with a low comorbidity burden and the highest proportion of implantable devices; cluster 2 (30%) patients had atrial fibrillation, hypertension without diabetes; cluster 3 (25%) patients were the oldest with many cardiovascular comorbidities and hypertension; cluster 4 (15%) patients had obesity, diabetes and hypertension; and cluster 5 (20%) patients were older with ischaemic heart disease, hypertension and renal failure and were most frequently prescribed diuretics. The clusters were reproduced in the CHECK-HF cohort. Patients in cluster 1 had the best prognosis, while patients in clusters 3 and 5 had the worst age- and sex-adjusted prognosis. Conclusions Five distinct clusters of HFpEF patients were identified that differed in clinical characteristics, heart failure drug therapy and prognosis. These results confirm the heterogeneity of HFpEF and form a basis for tailoring trial design to individualized drug therapy in HFpEF patients., Funding Agencies|Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare; Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions; Swedish Society of Cardiology; Swedish Heart-Lung FoundationSwedish Heart-Lung Foundation; Servier, the NetherlandsNetherlands Government; EU/EFPIA Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking BigData@Heart grant [116074]; Swedish Research CouncilSwedish Research CouncilEuropean Commission [2013-23897-104604-23, 523-2014-2336]; Swedish Heart Lung FoundationSwedish Heart-Lung Foundation [20150557, 20170841]; Stockholm County CouncilStockholm County Council [20140220, 20170112]; UCL Hospitals NIHR Biomedical Research Centre; Dutch Heart Foundation, as part of Facts and Figures