Search

Chronic heart failure (HF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) commonly coexist, and patients with both diseases fare worse than those with either disease alone. Several factors may contribute to worse outcomes, including an increased burden of care related to greater disease complexity, an overlap of symptoms resulting in misapplication of therapy, and the adverse effects of treatment for one disease on the symptoms and outcomes related to the other. For example, there are conflicting data about the cardiovascular risks of bronchodilators in HF patients who may experience worse outcomes with inhaled beta-2 agonists via arrhythmogenesis, ischemia, and/or attenuation of beta-blocker benefits. In contrast, the long-acting anticholinergic class of bronchodilators has a more reassuring safety profile. Anticholinergic bronchodilators may be the preferred first-line agents for COPD patients with comorbid HF, yet data supporting these recommendations are limited. Therapeutic trials in COPD patients have generally excluded patients with significant HF and vice-versa. This paper reviews bronchodilator therapy in HF and proposes a randomized trial designed to enroll patients with significant COPD and HF to determine the risks and/or benefits of adding a long-acting beta-2 agonist to patients currently taking a long-acting anticholinergic agent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of quadruple therapy as a "one-size-fit-all" approach is effective among all eligible patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, with consistent and significant clinical benefits including reduced mortality across various subgroups. However, with exception of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, the consistency of benefit with therapies does not extend to patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. The clinical benefits of other promising medical therapies, such as angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, have been demonstrated only in certain phenotypes of the highly heterogenous heart failure with preserved ejection fraction population. This variability can confuse frontline practicing cardiologists, potentially leading to the under-implementation of these medications. Therefore, we propose a simple approach: "targeted" combination therapy. This strategy aims to optimize evidence-based medications in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction by tailoring treatments to specific subgroups within the heart failure with preserved ejection fraction population where significant benefits are most evident., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Aims: In the VICTORIA (Vericiguat Global Study in Subjects with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction) trial, the soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator vericiguat reduced the risk of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) or cardiovascular death in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with recent worsening HF. The effect of vericiguat in patients with HFrEF without recent worsening HF remains unknown. The VICTOR (Vericiguat Global Study in Participants with Chronic Heart Failure) trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of vericiguat in patients with ejection fraction ≤40% without recent worsening HF on a background of current foundational HFrEF therapy., Methods: The primary endpoint for VICTOR is time to first event for the composite of HHF or cardiovascular death. The trial will also assess the effect of vericiguat on time to cardiovascular death, time to HHF, total HHF, and all-cause death. As an event-driven trial, at least 1080 primary events are expected, but follow-up will continue until the targeted number of at least 590 cardiovascular deaths has been reached. Approximately 6000 participants will be randomized to vericiguat or placebo., Conclusion: VICTOR is the first large event-driven HFrEF trial performed in the contemporary era of quadruple foundational guideline-directed medical therapy, in a compensated ambulatory HF population. VICTOR will add important information to the evidence of the effects of vericiguat across the spectrum of patients with HFrEF., (© 2024 Bayer AG, Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC and The Author(s). European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Purpose: The worldwide prevalence of Chagas Cardiomyopathy (CCM) as well as the trends in the prevalence of CCM over time have not been well characterized., Methods: An analysis of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) data from 1990 to 2019 was conducted to assess the burden of CCM. This study focused on determining the prevalence of CCM, along with its age-standardized prevalence rate (ASR) per 1,00,000 people, considering various patient demographics and geographical regions as defined in the GBD. Additionally, the study examined the temporal trends over this 30-year period by calculating the estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) in CCM prevalence for the global population and specific subgroups., Results: Worldwide, the GBD reported 220,166 individuals with CCM in 1990 and 2,83,236 individuals in 2019, with a decline in the ASR from 5.23 (3.34-7.47) to 3.42 (2.2-4.91) per 1,00,000 individuals during that period. In 2019, the prevalence was highest in individuals over age 70 and in males compared to females. Among available geographic classifications in 2019, Latin American regions had the highest rates (ASR of 39.49-61.15/1,00,000), while high income North American and Western European regions had the lowest rates (ASRs of 0.67 and 0.34/1,00,000, respectively). Between 1990 and 2019, the worldwide prevalence of CCM per 1,00,000 decreased (EAPC of -0.35, -0.37 to -0.32), with similar trends among most regions and subgroups., Conclusion: This analysis of the GBD data reveals both global and country-specific patterns in the prevalence and trends of CCM. Notably, CCM shows the highest prevalence in Latin American countries, although it's also significantly present in regions beyond Latin America. Notably, the global age-standardized rate of CCM is on the decline, suggesting improvements in healthcare strategies or lifestyle changes across the world., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aims: The VICTORIA trial demonstrated a significant reduction in the primary composite outcome of heart failure (HF) hospitalization or cardiovascular death with vericiguat relative to placebo in high-risk HF. This study aimed to contextualize treatment effects of vericiguat in populations with varying risk profiles simulated from the PARADIGM-HF and DAPA-HF trials., Methods: Subgroups of VICTORIA participants (n = 5050) were generated to simulate PARADIGM-HF and DAPA-HF trial populations. The PARADIGM-HF-eligible population excluded participants not meeting left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and minimal dose criteria and those with high predicted probability of run-in failure. The DAPA-HF-eligible population excluded those not meeting LVEF and eGFR criteria or with recent (<30 days) HF hospitalization. The time-to-first-event analysis was performed using an unadjusted Cox proportional hazards model., Results: A total of 1982 (39.2%) and 2543 (50.4%) VICTORIA participants were respectively deemed eligible for PARADIGM-HF and DAPA-HF. Vericiguat was associated with numerically larger reductions in the primary outcome of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death in populations simulated from PARADIGM-HF [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72-0.99] and DAPA-HF (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71-0.94) compared with the overall VICTORIA trial (HR 0.90). Significant reduction in HF hospitalization with vericiguat was also observed in the DAPA-HF-eligible population (HR 0.83, 95%CI 0.73-0.95) and with a nominal reduction in the PARADIGM-HF-eligible population (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74-1.01)., Conclusions: A trend towards enhanced efficacy of vericiguat in populations simulated from PARADIGM-HF and DAPA-HF was observed. These findings support further exploration of vericiguat in lower-risk HF populations as is being investigated in the ongoing VICTOR (a study of vericiguat in participants with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction) trial., (© 2024 The Author(s). ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Mechanisms of benefit with SGLT2is (sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors) in heart failure (HF) remain incompletely characterized. Dapagliflozin alters ketone and fatty acid metabolism in HF with reduced ejection fraction though similar effects have not been observed in HF with preserved ejection fraction. We explore whether metabolic effects of SGLT2is vary across the left ventricular ejection fraction spectrum and their relationship with cardiometabolic end points in 2 randomized trials of dapagliflozin in HF., Methods: Metabolomic profiling of 61 metabolites was performed in 527 participants from DEFINE-HF (Dapagliflozin Effects on Biomarkers, Symptoms and Functional Status in Patients With HF With Reduced Ejection Fraction) and PRESERVED-HF (Dapagliflozin in PRESERVED Ejection Fraction HF; 12-week, placebo-controlled trials of dapagliflozin in HF with reduced ejection fraction and HF with preserved ejection fraction, respectively). Linear regression was used to assess changes in principal components analysis-defined metabolite factors with treatment from baseline to 12 weeks, as well as the relationship between changes in metabolite clusters and HF-related end points., Results: The mean age was 66±11 years, 43% were female, and 33% were self-identified as Black. Two principal components analysis-derived metabolite factors (which were comprised of ketone and short-/medium-chain acylcarnitines) increased with dapagliflozin compared with placebo. Ketosis (defined as 3-hydroxybutyrate >500 μM) was achieved in 4.5% with dapagliflozin versus 1.2% with placebo ( P =0.03). There were no appreciable treatment effects on amino acids, including branched-chain amino acids. Increases in several acylcarnitines were consistent across LVEF ( P interaction >0.10), whereas the ketogenic effect diminished at higher LVEF ( P interaction =0.01 for 3-hydroxybutyrate). Increases in metabolites reflecting mitochondrial dysfunction (particularly long-chain acylcarnitines) and aromatic amino acids and decreases in branched-chain amino acids were associated with worse HF-related outcomes in the overall cohort, with consistency across treatment and LVEF., Conclusions: SGLT2is demonstrate common (fatty acid) and distinct (ketogenic) metabolic signatures across the LVEF spectrum. Changes in key pathways related to fatty acid and amino acid metabolism are associated with HF-related end points and may serve as therapeutic targets across HF subtypes., Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifiers: NCT03030235 and NCT02653482.

Background: Given the increasing interest in dietary interventions to improve cardiovascular health, this trial assessed the impact of fortified eggs (FE) versus non-egg supplemented diet and time-restricted eating (TRE) versus usual care diet on cardiovascular biomarkers., Methods: The study was a unblinded, 2-by-2 factorial design, which randomized patients, with either a prior cardiovascular event or two cardiovascular risk factors, to FE or a non-egg supplemented diet and TRE or usual care diet. Patients randomized to FE were instructed to consume at least 12 FE/week (with eggs provided); those on a non-egg supplemented diet restricted egg consumption to <2 eggs/week. TRE participants were instructed to consume all calories within an 8-hour window daily and fasted for the remaining 16 hours. Patients randomized to usual diet were advised to maintain current dietary habits. Follow-up was performed in-person at 1 and 4 months, and telephone calls at 2 and 3 months. Co-primary endpoints were 4-month LDL- and HDL-cholesterol. Secondary endpoints included additional lipids, cardiometabolic- and inflammatory biomarkers and micronutrient levels at 4-months., Results: Overall, 140 patients were randomized with median (25 th , 75 th percentiles) age 66 (58, 73) years; 72 (51%) women, 38 (27%) Black, and 33 (24%) with diabetes mellitus. The difference in least squares (LS) means from baseline to 4-months for HDL and LDL levels revealed no significant clinical difference between FE vs. non-egg supplemented diet (HDL: -0.64 mg/dL [95% CI: -3.86, 2.58]; LDL: -3.14 mg/dL [-10.81, 4.52]) and TRE vs. usual care diet (HDL: 1.51 mg/dL [-1.65, 4.68]; LDL 1.17 mg/dL [-6.36, 8.70]). Pre-specified subgroups revealed a non-significant HDL increase and LDL decrease with FE in patients ≥65 years., Conclusions: These data did not demonstrate clinically relevant differences in changes in LDL and HDL levels over 4 months with FE and TRE compared with non-egg supplemented diet and usual care diet, respectively, providing evidence that adverse short-term lipid and biomarker changes did not occur with FE consumption., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04673721., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest NN received speaker fees from AstraZeneca and Bayer. RJM received research support from Eggland's Best to his institution to support the trial. NJP received research support from Alnylam, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eggland's Best, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Merck. Consultation/Advisory Panels for Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, CRISPR Therapeutics, Eli Lilly, Esperion, AstraZeneca, Merck, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk. Executive Committee member for trials sponsored by Novo Nordisk and by Amgen. DSMB for trials sponsored by J+J and Novartis. Medical advisory board for Miga Health. DH, KM, BTS and MW are employees of Eggland's Best, LLC, Malvern, PA, USA. JH has no disclosures, (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and cardiovascular mortality in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, previous studies suggest the effects on heart failure outcomes vary according to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We aimed to evaluate the effects of exenatide on cardiovascular events according to LVEF in people with T2D., Methods and Results: Post-hoc analysis of the Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) trial evaluating the effects of once-weekly exenatide (EQW) versus placebo on cardiovascular outcomes according to baseline LVEF (<40% or ≥40%). Outcomes were also evaluated according to New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and obesity. The main outcome was hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). A treatment-by-LVEF interaction was used. In EXSCEL (n = 14 752), 4749 participants had LVEF available at baseline; 455 (10%) with LVEF <40%, 4294 (90%) with LVEF ≥40%. LVEF modified the EQW effect on hHF: hazard ratio (HR) = 1.52 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95-2.43) in participants with LVEF < 40% and HR = 0.74 (95% CI = 0.55-1.01) in those with LVEF ≥ 40% (p-interaction = 0.012). No significant treatment-by-LVEF interactions (p-interaction >0.10) were observed for MACE, cardiovascular death or all-cause mortality. The risk of HHF was also modified by baseline NYHA class (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.65-1.27 for NYHA class I/II; HR 1.84, 95% CI 0.95-3.59 for NYHA class III/IV; p-interaction = 0.062), mostly driven by the LVEF <40% subgroup. Obesity did not modify the effects of EQW on HHF., Conclusions: The EQW effect on HHF was influenced by LVEF, with a potentially decreased risk in participants with LVEF ≥40% and increased risk in those with LVEF <40%. The risk of HHF was particularly high in participants with LVEF <40% and NYHA class III/IV. LVEF did not modify the effect of EQW on atherosclerotic outcomes., (© 2024 European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: The TRANSFORM-HF trial found no difference in clinical outcomes between torsemide versus furosemide after hospitalization for heart failure. This analysis aimed to assess the impact of diuretic dosing on the primary and secondary clinical outcomes., Methods and Results: This post-hoc analysis of TRANSFORM-HF categorized patients into three groups by discharge diuretic dose: (1) ≤40 mg, (2) >40-80 mg, and (3) >80 mg of furosemide equivalents. The associations between discharge dose and 12-month clinical events, and change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS), were assessed. Overall, 2379 patients were included, aged 65 years (interquartile range 56-75), 883 (37.1%) women, and 812 (34.2%) Black. Furosemide had adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) for all-cause mortality of 1.21 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91-1.59) for discharge dose group 2 and 1.40 (95% CI 1.04-1.88) for group 3, compared with group 1. For torsemide, aHRs were 1.74 (95% CI 1.32-2.30) for group 2 and 1.58 (95% CI 1.14-2.19) for group 3. No evidence of heterogeneity for the association between increased mortality and higher dose was found by loop diuretic type (p interaction  = 0.17). Higher doses of furosemide and torsemide were associated with increased risk of all-cause hospitalization and the composite of all-cause mortality and hospitalization, without evidence of heterogeneity by loop diuretic type (p interaction > 0.2). Changes in KCCQ-CSS from baseline at 12 months was similar across dose groups for both drugs., Conclusion: Following hospitalization for heart failure, higher loop diuretic dosing was independently associated with worse clinical and patient-reported outcomes. The correlation between higher loop diuretic dose and outcomes was consistent, regardless of loop diuretic used., (© 2024 European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists are a viable option for the prevention of Alzheimer's disease (AD) but the mechanisms of this potential disease modifying action are unclear. We investigated the effects of once-weekly exenatide (EQW) on AD associated proteomic clusters., Methods: The Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering study compared the cardiovascular effects of EQW 2 mg with placebo in 13,752 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. 4,979 proteins were measured (Somascan V0.4) on baseline and 1-year plasma samples of 3,973 participants. C-reactive protein (CRP), ficolin-2 (FCN2), plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1), soluble vascular cell adhesion protein 1 (sVCAM1) and 4 protein clusters were tested in multivariable mixed models., Results: EQW affected FCN2 (Cohen's d -0.019), PAI-1 (Cohen's d -0.033), sVCAM-1 (Cohen's d 0.035) and a cytokine-cytokine cluster (Cohen's d 0.037) significantly compared with placebo. These effects were sustained in individuals over the age of 65 but not in those under 65., Conclusions: EQW treatment was associated with significant change in inflammatory proteins associated with AD., Trial Registration: EXSCEL is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01144338 on 10th of June 2010., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Hyperkalemia (HK) is associated with suboptimal renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitor and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) use in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)., Objectives: This study sought to assess characteristics and RAS inhibitor/MRA use in patients receiving patiromer during the DIAMOND (Patiromer for the Management of Hyperkalemia in Subjects Receiving RAASi Medications for the Treatment of Heart Failure) run-in phase., Methods: Patients with HFrEF and HK or past HK entered a run-in phase of ≤12 weeks with patiromer-facilitated RAS inhibitor/MRA optimization to achieve ≥50% recommended RAS inhibitor dose, 50 mg/d MRA, and normokalemia. Patients achieving these criteria (randomized group) were compared with the run-in failure group (patients not meeting the randomization criteria)., Results: Of 1,038 patients completing the run-in, 878 (84.6%) were randomized and 160 (15.4%) were run-in failures. Overall, 422 (40.7%) had HK entering run-in with a similar frequency in the randomized and run-in failure groups (40.3% vs 42.5%; P = 0.605). From start to the end of run-in, in the randomized group, an increase was observed in target RAS inhibitor and MRA use in patients with HK (RAS inhibitor: 76.8% to 98.6%; MRA: 35.9% to 98.6%) and past HK (RAS inhibitor: 60.5% to 98.1%; MRA: 15.6% to 98.7%). Despite not meeting the randomization criteria, an increase after run-in was observed in the run-in failure group in target RAS inhibitor (52.5% to 70.6%) and MRA use (15.0% to 48.1%). This increase was observed in patients with HK (RAS inhibitor: 51.5% to 64.7%; MRA: 19.1% to 39.7%) and past HK (RAS inhibitor: 53.3% to 75.0%; MRA: 12.0% to 54.3%)., Conclusions: In patients with HFrEF and HK or past HK receiving suboptimal RAS inhibitor/MRA therapy, RAS inhibitor/MRA optimization increased during patiromer-facilitated run-in., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Study funding was provided by Vifor (International) AG. Dr Pitt has received consulting fees, payment or honoraria, support for attending meetings and/or travel, and stock or stock option from Vifor. Dr Anker has recevied grants from Abbott Vascular and Vifor; has received ad hoc consultancy/advisory board participation from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bioventrix, Brahms, Cordio, CVRx, Edwards, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Reparion, Sanofi, and Vectorious; has performed trial/registry steering committee work or consulting for Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiac Dimensions, Cardior, Impulse Dynamics, Occlutech, Servier, V-Wave, and Vifor Int; and has received fees for advisory board work from Abbott Vascular. Dr Lund has received grants or contracts from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Novartis, and Vifor Pharma; has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lexicon, MedScope, Merck, Pharmacosmos, Myokardia, Sanofi, Servier, and Vifor Pharma; has received payment or honoraria from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Medscope, Novartis, and Radcliffe; and has been a board member/fellow of ESC Heart Failure Association (HFA), ESC, and Swedish Society of Cardiology, HF Working Group; and has stock or stock options in AnaCardio. Dr Coats has received consulting fees from Actimed, Cardiac Dimensions, Corvia, CVRx, Enopace, ESN Cleer, Faraday, Impulse Dynamics, and Respicardia; has received payment or honoraria from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Edwards, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Novartis, Servier, Vifor, and Viatris; and has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from Impulse Dynamics. Dr Filippatos has been a committee member in trials for the European Commission; has received payment or honoraria from Bayer and Boehringer Ingelheim; has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from Bayer; has a leadership or fiduciary role from European Academy, Heart Failure Association, and JACC Heart Failure; and has received lecture fees, advisory or committee membership in trials from Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardior, Impulse Dynamics, Medtronic, Novartis, Servier, and Vifor. Dr Rossignol has been a DIAMOND Steering Committee member and has received honoraria from Vifor; has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, CinCor, Idorsia, KBP, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Servier, and Vifor; has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Vifor; is cofounder of CardioRenal; has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from Bayer, Idorsia, and Sequana medical; and has stock in Cardiorenal and stock options in G3P. Dr Weir has served on the DIAMOND Steering Committee and has received personal fees from CSL Vifor, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Johnson & Johnson, and Care DX. Dr Kosiborod has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Pfizer; has served as a consultant/advisory board member for 35Pharma, Alnylam, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Dexcom, Eli Lilly, Esperion Therapeutics, Imbria Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Merck (Diabetes and Cardiovascular), Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Pfizer, Sanofi, scPharmaceuticals, Structure Therapeutics, Vifor Pharma, and Youngene Therapeutics; has received research support from AstraZeneca; has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novo Nordisk; has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, and Vifor Pharma; and has stock options in Artera Health and Saghmos Therapeutics. Dr Metra has received honoraria for participation on a DIAMOND trial meeting. Dr Böhm has received research support from Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, SFB-TTR 219, S-01); has received honoraria for speaking from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Medtronic, Novartis, Servier, and Vifor; and has particiapted in advisory boards for Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Medtronic, Novartis, Pfizer, ReCor, Servier, and Vifor. Dr Ezekowitz has received research support for trial leadership or grants from American Regent, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Merck & Co, Novo Nordisk, and Otsuka; and has received honoraria for consultancy from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Otsuka. Dr Bayes-Genis has lectured and/or participated in boards for Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Novartis, Roche Diagnostics, and Vifor. Dr Mentz has received honoraria from Vifor; and has received research support and honoraria from AstraZeneca. Dr Ponikowski has received grants or contracts, consulting fees, and payment or honoraria from Abbott Vascular, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Berlin Chemie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cibiem, BMS, Impulse Dynamics, Merck, Renal Guard Solution, Novartis, Servier, and Vifor. Dr Senni has been a consultant for Novartis, Merck, Bayer, Vifor Pharma, Abbott, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Bioventrix, Servier, Novo Nordisk, Cardurion, and AnaCardio. Dr Brugts has received an independent research grant from Abbott to the Institute; and has received honoraria for advisory boards or speaker fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Vifor (5-year period). Drs Perrin, Waechter, and Budden have been paid employees and have stock/stock options in CSL Vifor. Dr Butler has received personal consulting fees from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardior, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Edwards, Element Science, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva, Lexicon, Lilly, LivaNova, Janssen, Medtronics, Merck, Occlutech, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Pharmain, Roche, Sequana, SQ Innovation, 3live, and Vifor; and has received payment from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim-Lilly, Janssen, and Novartis. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Clinical trials in heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF) commonly have detailed eligibility criteria. This may contribute to challenges with efficient enrolment and questions regarding the generalizability of trial findings., Methods and Results: Patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF from a large US healthcare system were identified through a computable phenotype applied in linked imaging and electronic health record databases. We evaluated shared eligibility criteria from five recent/ongoing HFmrEF/HFpEF trials (PARAGON-HF, EMPEROR-Preserved, DELIVER, FINE-ARTS, and SPIRRIT-HFpEF) and compared clinical and echocardiographic features as well as outcomes between trial-eligible and trial-ineligible patients. Among 5552 patients with HFpEF/HFmrEF, 792 (14%) were eligible for trial consideration, having met all criteria assessed. Causes of ineligibility included lack of recent loop diuretics (37%), significant pulmonary disease (24%), reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (17%), recent stroke/transient ischaemic attack (13%), or low natriuretic peptides (12%); 53% of ineligible patients had >1 reason for exclusion. Compared with eligible patients, ineligible patients were younger (age 71 vs. 75 years, P < 0.001) with higher rates of coronary artery disease (66% vs. 59%, P < 0.001) and peripheral vascular disease (40% vs. 33%, P < 0.001), but less mitral regurgitation, lower E/e' ratio, and smaller left atrial sizes. Both eligible and ineligible patients demonstrated high rates of structural heart disease consistent with HFpEF [elevated left atrial size or left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy/increased LV mass], although this was slightly higher among eligible patients (95% vs. 92%, P = 0.001). The two cohorts demonstrated similar LV global longitudinal strain along with a similar prevalence of atrial fibrillation/flutter, hypertension, and obesity. Ineligible patients had similar all-cause mortality (33% vs. 33% at 3 years) to those eligible but lower rates of heart failure hospitalization (20% vs. 28% at 3 years, P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Among patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF from a large health system, approximately one in seven were eligible for major trials based on key criteria applied through a clinical computable phenotype. These findings highlight the large proportion of patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF ineligible for contemporary trials for whom the generalizability of trial findings may be questioned and further investigation would be beneficial., (© 2024 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: The objective of this study was to examine associations between elevated depressive symptoms and increased risk of adverse clinical events patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), as well as the potential contribution of health behaviours., Methods and Results: One hundred forty-two men and women with HFrEF were enrolled through heart failure (HF) clinics and followed over time. At baseline and 6 months, depressive symptoms were assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and HFrEF disease activity by B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP). The Self-Care of Heart Failure Index (SCHFI) was used to assess HF self-care behaviours. Proportional hazards regression models assessed the contribution of depressive symptoms and HFrEF disease biomarkers on death or cardiovascular hospitalization. Over a median follow-up period of 4 years, 42 patients (30%) died, and 84 (60%) had cardiovascular hospitalizations. A 10-point higher baseline BDI-II score was associated with a 35% greater risk of death or cardiovascular hospitalization. Higher baseline BDI-II scores were associated with poorer HF self-care maintenance behaviours (R = -0.30, P < 0.001) and fewer daily steps (R = -0.19, P = 0.04), suggesting that elevated depressive symptoms may diminish important health behaviours. Increases in plasma BNP over 6 months were associated with worse outcomes. Changes in BDI-II and plasma BNP over 6 months were positively related (R = 0.25, P = 0.004)., Conclusions: This study confirms that elevated depressive symptoms are associated with an increased likelihood of adverse clinical outcomes in patients with HFrEF. Poor health behaviours may contribute to the adverse association of elevated depressive symptoms with the increased hazard of adverse clinical outcomes., (© 2024 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Importance: Elevated serum uric acid (SUA) level may contribute to endothelial dysfunction; therefore, SUA is an attractive target for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, to the authors' knowledge, no prior randomized clinical trials have evaluated SUA lowering in HFpEF., Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of the novel urate transporter-1 inhibitor, verinurad, in patients with HFpEF and elevated SUA level., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a phase 2, double-blind, randomized clinical trial (32-week duration) conducted from May 2020 to April 2022. The study took place at 59 centers in 12 countries and included patients 40 years and older with HFpEF and SUA level greater than 6 mg/dL. Data were analyzed from August 2022 to May 2024., Interventions: Eligible patients were randomized 1:1:1 to once-daily, oral verinurad, 12 mg, plus allopurinol, 300 mg; allopurinol, 300 mg, monotherapy; or placebo for 24 weeks after an 8-week titration period. Allopurinol was combined with verinurad to prevent verinurad-induced urate nephropathy, and the allopurinol monotherapy group was included to account for allopurinol effects in the combination therapy group. All patients received oral colchicine, 0.5 to 0.6 mg, daily for the first 12 weeks after randomization., Main Outcomes and Measures: Key end points included changes from baseline to week 32 in peak oxygen uptake (VO2), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score (KCCQ-TSS), and SUA level; and safety/tolerability (including adjudicated cardiovascular events)., Results: Among 159 randomized patients (53 per treatment group; median [IQR] age, 71 [40-86] years; 103 male [65%]) with median (IQR) N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide level of 527 (239-1044) pg/mL and SUA level of 7.5 (6.6-8.4) mg/dL, verinurad plus allopurinol (mean change, -59.6%; 95% CI, -64.4% to -54.2%) lowered SUA level to a greater extent than allopurinol (mean change, -37.6%; 95% CI, -45.3% to -28.9%) or placebo (mean change, 0.8%; 95% CI, -11.8% to 15.2%; P < .001). Changes in peak VO2 (verinurad plus allopurinol, 0.27 mL/kg/min; 95% CI, -0.56 to 1.10 mL/kg/min; allopurinol, -0.17 mL/kg/min; 95% CI, -1.03 to 0.69 mL/kg/min; placebo, 0.37 mL/kg/min; 95% CI, -0.45 to 1.19 mL/kg/min) and KCCQ-TSS (verinurad plus allopurinol, 4.3; 95% CI, 0.3-8.3; allopurinol, 4.5; 95% CI, 0.3-8.6; placebo, 1.2; 95% CI, -3.0 to 5.3) were similar across groups. There were no adverse safety signals. Deaths or cardiovascular events occurred in 3 patients (5.7%) in the verinurad plus allopurinol group, 8 patients (15.1%) in the allopurinol monotherapy group, and 6 patients (11.3%) in the placebo group., Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this randomized clinical trial show that despite substantial SUA lowering, verinurad plus allopurinol did not result in a significant improvement in peak VO2 or symptoms compared with allopurinol monotherapy or placebo in HFpEF., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04327024.

Background: For heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), suboptimal use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASis), including mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), due to hyperkalemia, may be improved by potassium binders., Objectives: This prespecified analysis of the phase 3 DIAMOND (Patiromer for the Management of Hyperkalemia in Subjects Receiving RAASi Medications for the Treatment of Heart Failure) trial assessed the effect of patiromer in patients with HFrEF and either current or past hyperkalemia., Methods: Patients with HFrEF and current or past (within 1 year before enrollment) hyperkalemia (serum potassium [sK + ] >5.0 mmol/L) entered a single-blind, run-in phase to optimize RAASis while receiving patiromer. They were subsequently randomized, double-blind, to continue patiromer or change to placebo., Results: Of the 1,038 patients who completed run-in, 354 (83.9%) of 422 with current hyperkalemia and 524 (85.1%) of 616 with past hyperkalemia achieved RAASi optimization and were randomized to treatment. During the double-blind phase, patiromer lowered sK + levels compared with placebo in both the current and past hyperkalemia subgroups: difference in adjusted mean change from baseline: -0.12 (95% CI: -0.17 to -0.07) and -0.08 (95% CI: -0.12 to -0.05), respectively; P interaction  = 0.166. Patiromer was more effective than placebo in maintaining MRA at target dose in patients with current vs past hyperkalemia (HR: 0.45 [95% CI: 0.26-0.76] vs HR: 0.85 [95% CI: 0.54-1.32]; P interaction  = 0.031). Adverse events were similar between subgroups., Conclusions: The use of patiromer facilitates achieving target doses of RAASis in patients with HFrEF with either current or past hyperkalemia. For those with current hyperkalemia before RAASi optimization, use of patiromer may be more beneficial in helping to maintain sK + control and achieve MRA target dose. (Patiromer for the Management of Hyperkalemia in Subjects Receiving RAASi Medications for the Treatment of Heart Failure [DIAMOND]; NCT03888066)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This trial was funded by Vifor Pharma Management Ltd. Dr Coats has received consulting fees from Actimed, Cardiac Dimensions, Corvia, CVRx, Enopace, ESN Cleer, Faraday, Impulse Dynamics, and Respicardia; has received payment or honoraria from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Edwards, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Novartis, Servier, Vifor, and Viatris; and has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from Impulse Dynamics. Dr Anker has received grants and personal fees from Vifor and Abbott Vascular; has received personal fees for consultancies, trial committee work, and/or lectures from Actimed, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bioventrix, Boehringer Ingelheim, Brahms, Cardiac Dimensions, Cardior, Cordio, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Edwards, Farraday Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, HeartKinetics, Impulse Dynamics, Medtronic, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Occlutech, Pfizer, Regeneron, Relaxera, Repairon, Scirent, Sensible Medical, Servier, Vectorious, and V-Wave; and is named coinventor of 2 patent applications regarding Midregional pro-atrial natriuretic peptide (DE 102007010834 and DE 102007022367) but does not benefit personally from the related issued patents. Dr Lund has received grants or contracts from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Novartis, and Vifor Pharma; has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lexicon, Medscope, Merck, Pharmacosmos, MyoKardia, Sanofi, Servier, and Vifor Pharma; has received payment or honoraria from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Medscope, Novartis, and Radcliffe; is a board member/fellow of the European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Association, the European Society of Cardiology, and the Swedish Society of Cardiology HF Working Group; and has stock or stock options in AnaCardio. Dr Filippatos reports being a committee member in trials for the European Commission; has received payment or honoraria from Bayer and Boehringer Ingelheim; reports participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from Bayer; reports leadership or fiduciary role from European Academy, Heart Failure Association, and JACC: Heart Failure; and reports lecture fees and advisory or committee membership in trials from Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardior, Impulse Dynamics, Medtronic, Novartis, Servier, and Vifor. Dr Rossignol reports being a DIAMOND Steering Committee member; has received honoraria from Vifor; has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, CinCor, Idorsia, KBP Biosciences, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Servier, and Vifor; has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Vifor; is a cofounder of CardioRenal; has participated on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from Bayer, Idorsia, and Sequana Medical; and has stock from Cardiorenal and stock options from G3P. Dr Pitt has received consulting fees, payment or honoraria, support for attending meetings and/or travel, and stock or stock option from Vifor. Dr Weir reports serving on the DIAMOND Steering Committee; and has received personal fees from CSL Vifor, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Johnson & Johnson, and Care DX. Dr Kosiborod has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Pfizer; reports consultancy/advisory board activities for 35Pharma, Alnylam, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Dexcom, Eli Lilly, Esperion Therapeutics, Imbria, Janssen, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Merck (Diabetes and Cardiovascular), Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Pfizer, Sanofi, scPharmaceuticals, Structure Therapeutics, Vifor Pharma, and Youngene Therapeutics; has received other research support from AstraZeneca; has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novo Nordisk; has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, and Vifor Pharma; and reports stock options from Artera Health, and Saghmos Therapeutics. Dr Metra has received honoraria for participation on a DIAMOND trial meeting. Dr Böhm has received research support from Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, SFB-TTR 219, S-01); has received honoraria for speaking from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Medtronic, Novartis, Servier, and Vifor; and has participated in advisory boards for Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Medtronic, Novartis, Pfizer, ReCor, Servier, and Vifor. Dr Ezekowitz has received research support for trial leadership or grants from American Regent, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Merck and Co, Novo Nordisk, and Otsuka; and honoraria for consultancy from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Otsuka. Dr Bayes-Genis has received consulting and/or lecturing fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Roche Diagnostics, and Vifor. Dr Mentz has received honoraria from Vifor and research support and honoraria from AstraZeneca. Dr Ponikowski has received grants or contracts, consulting fees, and payment or honoraria from Abbott Vascular, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Berlin Chemie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cibiem, Bristol Myers Squibb, Impulse Dynamics, Merck, Renal Guard Solution, Novartis, Servier, and Vifor. Dr Senni reports consultancy with Novartis, Merck, Bayer, Vifor Pharma, Abbott, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, BioVentrix, Servier, Novo Nordisk, Cardurion Pharmaceuticals, and AnaCardio. Dr Cleland has received personal fees from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Idorsia, Innolife, Medtronic, Novartis, Respicardia, Servier and Torrent, and grants and personal fees from Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Johnson & Johnson, MyoKardia, Pharmacosmos, Stealth Biopharmaceuticals, Vifor, and VisCardia; and personal fees and nonfinancial support from Boehringer Ingelheim outside the submitted work. Dr Merkely has received personal fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, DUKE Clinical Institute, Medtronic, Novartis, and institutional grants from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, DUKE Clinical Institute, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Novartis, Terumo, and Vifor Pharma. Dr Wächter, Mr Budden, and Dr Perrin report being paid employees and having stock/stock options in CSL Vifor. Dr Butler has received personal consulting fees from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, Applied Therapeutic, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardiac Dimension, Cardior, CVRx, Cytokinetics, Edwards, Element Science, Innolife, Impulse Dynamics, Imbria, Inventiva Pharma, Lexicon, Lilly, LivaNova, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, Occlutech, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, PharmaIN, Roche, Sequana, SQ Innovation, 3live, and Vifor; and payment from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim-Lilly, Janssen, and Novartis. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The extent to which metabolic syndrome (MetS) severity influences subclinical myocardial remodelling, heart failure (HF) incidence and subtypes, remains unclear. We assessed the association of MetS with incident HF (including ejection fraction subtypes) among Black individuals., Methods and Results: We included 4069 Jackson Heart Study participants (mean age 54.4 years, 63.8% women, 37.2% with MetS) without HF. We categorized participants based on MetS status and MetS severity scores (based on waist circumference [MetS-Z-WC] and body mass index [MetS-Z-BMI]). We assessed the associations of MetS indices with echocardiographic parameters, biomarkers of myocardial damage (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I [hs-cTnI] and B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP]) and incident HF hospitalizations including HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). MetS severity was associated with subclinical cardiac remodelling (assessed by echocardiographic measures and biomarkers of myocardial damage). Over a median of 12 years, 319 participants developed HF (157 HFpEF, 149 HFrEF and 13 HF of unknown type). MetS was associated with a twofold greater risk of HF (hazard ratio [HR] 2.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.64-2.61). Compared to the lowest quartile (Q1) of MetS-Z-WC, the highest quartile (Q4) conferred a higher risk of HF (HR 2.35, 95% CI 1.67-3.30), with a stronger association for HFpEF (Q4 vs. Q1: HR 4.94, 95% CI 2.67-9.14) vs. HFrEF (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.06-2.70)., Conclusions: Metabolic syndrome severity was associated with both HF subtypes among Black individuals, highlighting the importance of optimal metabolic health for preventing HF., (© 2024 European Society of Cardiology.)

The pathophysiology of heart failure (HF) is related to the overactivation of the mineralocorticoid receptor, leading to fluid retention and adverse myocardial remodeling. Although mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) are recommended for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), they remain underused due to adverse effects such as hyperkalemia; and their efficacy is controversial in heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Recent trials in people with diabetes and kidney disease have supported the use of nonsteroidal MRAs in reducing HF-related morbidity and mortality and have fewer side effects than their steroidal counterparts. The efficacy and safety of nonsteroidal MRAs have not been tested in HF and are currently being evaluated in additional clinical trials. This review comprehensively examines the current data regarding MRAs for HF and the future direction of nonsteroidal MRA research while exploring the causes of MRA underutilization., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Ambrosy has received institutional research grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) (K23HL150159), the American Heart Association (2nd Century Early Faculty Independence Award), The Permanente Medical Group, Northern California Community Benefits Programs, Garfield Memorial Fund, Abbott Laboratories, Amarin Pharma, Inc, Edwards Lifesciences LLC, Esperion Therapeutics, Inc, and Novartis. Dr Vardeny has received institutional research support from NHLBI, the Food and Drug Administration, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and Cardurion; and personal consulting fees from Bayer, Cardior, Cytokinetics, and Moderna. Dr Mentz has received research support and honoraria from Abbott, Alleviant Medical, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Fast BioMedical, Gilead, Innolife, Eli Lilly, Lexicon, Medtronic, Medable, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Relypsa, Reprieve Cardiovascular, Respicardia, Roche, Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Verily, Vifor, Windtree Therapeutics, and Zoll. Dr Sauer has received research funding from the Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA), American Heart Association, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, CSL Vifor, Pfizer, Rivus Pharmaceuticals, 35Pharma, Novo Nordisk, Edwards Lifesciences, and Story Health; has received consulting fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Impulse Dynamics, Acorai, General Prognostics, Story Health, Amgen, and Bayer; and owns stock in ISHI and Pulsli (both privately held digital health companies). All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Quadruple therapy is effective for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, providing significant clinical benefits, including reduced mortality. Clinicians are now in an era focused on how to initiate and titrate quadrable therapy in the early phase of the disease trajectory, including during heart failure hospitalization. However, patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction still face a significant "residual risk" of mortality and heart failure hospitalization. Despite the effective implementation of quadruple therapy, high mortality and rehospitalization rates persist in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, and many patients cannot maximize therapy due to side effects such as hypotension and renal dysfunction. In this context, ivabradine, vericiguat, and omecamtiv mecarbil may have adjunct roles in addition to quadruple therapy (note that omecamtiv mecarbil is not currently approved for clinical use). However, the contemporary use of ivabradine and vericiguat is relatively low globally, likely due in part to the under-recognition of the role of these therapies as well as costs. This review offers clinicians a straightforward guide for bedside evaluation of potential candidates for these medications. Quadruple therapy, with strong evidence to reduce mortality, should always be prioritized for implementation. As second-line therapies, ivabradine could be considered for patients who cannot achieve optimal heart rate control (≥ 70 bpm at rest) despite maximally tolerated beta-blocker dosing. Vericiguat could be considered for high-risk patients who have recently experienced worsening heart failure events despite being on quadrable therapy, but they should not have N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels exceeding 8000 pg/mL. In the future, omecamtiv mecarbil may be considered for severe heart failure (New York Heart Association class III to IV, ejection fraction ≤ 30%, and heart failure hospitalization within 6 months) when current quadrable therapy is limited, although this is still hypothesis-generating and requires further investigation before its approval., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Understanding the relationship between neighborhood environment and cardiovascular outcomes is important to achieve health equity and implement effective quality strategies. We conducted a population-based cohort study to determine the association of neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation and 30-day mortality and readmission rate for patients admitted with common cardiovascular conditions., Methods and Results: We examined claims data from fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years between 2017 and 2019 admitted for heart failure, valvular heart disease, ischemic heart disease, or cardiac arrhythmias. The primary exposure was the Area Deprivation Index; outcomes were 30-day all-cause death and unplanned readmission. More than 2 million admissions were included. After sequential adjustment for patient characteristics (demographics, dual eligibility, comorbidities), area health care resources (primary care clinicians, specialists, and hospital beds per capita), and admitting hospital characteristics (ownership, size, teaching status), there was a dose-dependent association between neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation and 30-day mortality rate for all conditions. In the fully adjusted model for death, estimated effect sizes of residence in the most disadvantaged versus least disadvantaged neighborhoods ranged from adjusted odds ratio 1.29 (95% CI, 1.22-1.36) for the heart failure group to adjusted odds ratio 1.63 (95% CI, 1.36-1.95) for the valvular heart disease group. Neighborhood deprivation was associated with increased adjusted 30-day readmission rates, with estimated effect sizes from adjusted odds ratio 1.09 (95% CI, 1.05-1.14) for heart failure to adjusted odds ratio 1.19 (95% CI, 1.13-1.26) for arrhythmia., Conclusions: Neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with 30-day mortality rate and readmission for patients admitted with common cardiovascular conditions independent of individual demographics, socioeconomic status, medical risk, care access, or admitting hospital characteristics.

Introduction: Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi; including mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists [MRAs]) benefits are greatest in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD); however, the risk of hyperkalemia (HK) is high., Methods: The DIAMOND trial (NCT03888066) assessed the ability of patiromer to control serum potassium (sK+) in patients with HFrEF with/without CKD. Prior to randomization (double-blind withdrawal, 1:1), patients on patiromer had to achieve ≥50% recommended doses of RAASi and 50 mg/day of MRA with normokalemia during a run-in period. The present analysis assessed the effect of baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in subgroups of ≥/&lt;60, ≥/&lt;45 (prespecified), and ≥/&lt;30 mL/min/1.73 m2 (added post hoc)., Results: In total, 81.3, 78.9, and 81.1% of patients with eGFR &lt;60, &lt;45, and &lt;30 mL/min/1.73 m2 at screening achieved RAASi/MRA targets. A greater efficacy of patiromer versus placebo to control sK+ in patients with more advanced CKD was reported (p-interaction ≤ 0.027 for all eGFR subgroups). Greater effects on secondary endpoints were observed with patiromer versus placebo in patients with eGFR &lt;60 and &lt;45 mL/min/1.73 m2. Adverse effects were similar between patiromer and placebo across subgroups., Conclusion: Patiromer enabled use of RAASi, controlled sK+, and minimized HK risk in patients with HFrEF, with greater effect sizes for most endpoints noted in patient subgroups with lower eGFR. Patiromer was well tolerated by patients in all eGFR subgroups., (© 2024 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Increased hsCRP (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein), a marker of inflammation, is associated with incident cardiovascular events. We aim to determine whether the baseline or trajectory of hsCRP levels over time predicts incident heart failure (HF) hospitalization., Methods: JHS (Jackson Heart Study) participants' (n=3920 Black adults) hsCRP levels were measured over 3 visits (from 2000 to 2013). We assessed the association of hsCRP at baseline (visit 1) with incident HF hospitalization using Cox proportional hazards models. Furthermore, we assessed the association of the trajectory of hsCRP over repeated measurements (visits 1-3) with incident HF using joint models. Hazard ratios are reflective of an increase in hsCRP by 1 SD on a log2 scale. We also assessed the association of change in hsCRP between visit 1 and visit 3 with Cox proportional hazards models by grouping patients by low (<2 mg/L) and high (≥2 mg/L) hsCRP levels. The 4 groups were low-to-low (referent), low-to-high, high-to-low, and high-to-high., Results: Mean baseline age of participants was 54±13 years, and 63.8% were women. Over a median follow-up of 12 years, 308 (7.9%) participants were hospitalized with incident HF. Baseline hsCRP was not associated with incident HF (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.96-1.22]). However, increasing hsCRP levels over repeated measures were associated with a higher risk of incident HF overall (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.03-1.44]) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.02-1.65]) but not HF with reduced ejection fraction ( P >0.05). Furthermore, changes in hsCRP from low-to-high and high-to-low levels were associated with incident HF ( P <0.05)., Conclusions: While baseline hsCRP was not associated with incident HF, an increasing trajectory of hsCRP over time was associated with increased risk for incident HF (particularly HF with preserved ejection fraction). Temporal change in hsCRP may be an important marker of risk for incident HF with preserved ejection fraction in Black adults., Competing Interests: Dr Mentz received research support and honoraria from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim/Eli Lilly, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Fast BioMedical, Gilead, Innolife, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Relypsa, Respicardia, Roche, Sanofi, Vifor, Windtree Therapeutics, and Zoll. Dr Shah reports research support not related to this study from Novartis and Philips Ultrasound and consulting fees from Philips Ultrasound. Dr Virani receives research support from the Department of Veterans Affairs, the National Institutes of Health, and Tahir and Jooma Family. Dr Virani also received an honorarium from the American College of Cardiology in his role as an Associate Editor for Innovations, acc.org. Dr Butler reported personal fees from Abbott, Adrenomed, Amgen, Array, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CVRx, G3 Pharmaceutical, Impulse Dynamics, Innolife, Janssen, LivaNova, Luitpold, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Relypsa, Roche, V-Wave Ltd, and Vifor outside the submitted work. The other authors report no conflicts. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the National Institutes of Health, the US Department of Health and Human Services, or the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Background and Aims: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) has not only been associated with recurrent hospitalization for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) but is also associated with chronic kidney disease (CKD), a known risk factor for worse heart failure outcomes. The interaction of CKD with PAD in post-discharge ADHF outcomes is not well known., Methods: Since 2005, hospitalizations for ADHF were sampled from 4 US regions by the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study and classified by physician review. We examined the adjusted association of PAD with 1-year ADHF readmissions, in patients with and without CKD (defined by glomerular filtration rate [GFR] ≤60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 [stage 3a or worse])., Results: From 2005 to 2018, there were 1049 index hospitalizations for patients with ADHF (mean age 77 years, 66 % white) with creatinine data, who were discharged alive. Of these, 155 (15 %) had PAD and 66 % had CKD. In comparison to those without PAD, patients with PAD had more comorbid conditions and higher 1-year ADHF readmission rates, irrespective of CKD status. After adjustment, PAD was associated with a greater risk of 1-year ADHF readmissions, both for patients with concomitant CKD (HR, 1.70; 95 % CI: 1.29-2.24) and those without CKD (HR, 1.97; 95 % CI: 1.14-3.40); p-interaction = 0.8., Conclusion: Among patients hospitalized with ADHF, those with concurrent PAD have more prevalent cardiovascular comorbidities and higher likelihood of 1-year ADHF readmission, irrespective of CKD status. Integrating a more holistic approach in management of patients with concomitant heart failure, PAD and CKD may be an important strategy to improve the prognosis in this vulnerable population., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Bhatt discloses the following relationships - Advisory Board: Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Stasys; Board of Directors: American Heart Association New York City, Angiowave (stock options), Bristol Myers Squibb (stock), DRS.LINQ (stock options), High Enroll (stock); Consultant: Broadview Ventures, Hims, SFJ, Youngene; Data Monitoring Committees: Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St. Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific (Chair, PEITHO trial), Cleveland Clinic, Contego Medical (Chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi Sankyo; for the ABILITY-DM trial, funded by Concept Medical; for ALLAY-HF, funded by Alleviant Medical), Novartis, Population Health Research Institute; Rutgers University (for the NIH-funded MINT Trial); Honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; Chair, ACC Accreditation Oversight Committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/Bristol-Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (clinical trial steering committees), CSL Behring (AHA lecture), Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest Editor; Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME (Course Director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer), WebMD (CME steering committees), Wiley (steering committee); Other: Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor); Patent: Sotagliflozin (named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham and Women's Hospital who assigned to Lexicon; neither I nor Brigham and Women's Hospital receive any income from this patent); Research Funding: Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, 89Bio; Royalties: Elsevier (Editor, Braunwald’s Heart Disease); Site Co-Investigator: Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St. Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, Vascular Solutions; Trustee: American College of Cardiology; Unfunded Research: FlowCo.Dr. Robert J. Mentz received research support and honoraria from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Fast BioMedical, Gilead, Innolife, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Medable, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmacosmos, Relypsa, Respicardia, Roche, Rocket Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Verily, Vifor, Windtree Therapeutics, and Zoll. Dr. Grodin reports consulting fees from Pfizer, Eidos/BridgeBio, Alnylam, Alexion, Intellia, and Astra-Zeneca. Dr. Matsushita received research funding from NHLBI (R01HL146132) and Resolve to Save Lives and personal fee from Fukuda Denshi, Kowa Company, and RhythmX AI outside of the submitted work. Dr. Vaduganathan has received research grant support, served on advisory boards, or had speaker engagements with American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Baxter Healthcare, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Cytokinetics, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Relypsa, Roche Diagnostics, Sanofi, and Tricog Health, and participates on clinical trial committees for studies sponsored by AstraZeneca, Galmed, Novartis, Bayer AG, Occlutech, and Impulse Dynamics. The other authors report no disclosures., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with obesity and advanced heart failure requiring left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support are more likely to experience LVAD complications and may be disproportionately Black and/or female when compared to patients without obesity. Among these patients, obesity may represent a barrier to transplant eligibility and a marker of inequity in heart transplantation and health outcomes in advanced heart failure., Methods: To better understand this issue at our institution, we examined our active LVAD cohort and found that almost one-third of all patients had severe obesity with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m 2 ., Results: Patients with LVADs and severe obesity were significantly younger and more likely to self-identify as Black, and numerically more likely to be female., Conclusion: Weight management in this group represents a vital area for improved equity in health outcomes and barriers to heart transplantation., Trial Registration: NA., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest CM, SB, and JH have no disclosures. KAS has received research funding from Teleflex. GMF has received research grants from NHLBI, American Heart Association, Amgen, Bayer, BMS, Novartis, Daxor, Merck, Cytokinetics, and CSL-Behring; he has acted as a consultant to Novartis, Amgen, BMS, Cytokinetics, Innolife, Medtronic, Cardionomic, Boehringer-Ingelheim, American Regent, Abbott, Astra-Zeneca, Regeneron, Reprieve, Myovant, Sequana, Windtree Therapuetics, Rocket Pharma, and Whiteswell, and has served on clinical endpoint committees/data safety monitoring boards for Amgen, Merck, Medtronic, EBR Systems, V-Wave, LivaNova. RJM has received research support and honoraria from Abbott, American Regent, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim/Eli Lilly, Boston Scientific, Cytokinetics, Fast BioMedical, Gilead, Innolife, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, Relypsa, Respicardia, Roche, Sanofi, Vifor, Windtree Therapeutics, and Zoll. JNS has served as a consultant to Abbott and Abiomed. NJP reports research support from Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eggland's Best, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Verily Life Sciences, has served as a consultant or on an advisory panel for Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, CRISPR Therapeutics, Eli Lilly, Esperion, AstraZeneca, Merck, Novartis, and Novo Nordisk, is an Executive Committee member for trials sponsored by Novo Nordisk and Amgen on DSMBs for trials sponsored by Janssen and Novartis., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Climate change has been associated with adverse cardiovascular health, prompting interest in climate mitigation strategies while improving access for cardiovascular patients. We estimated greenhouse gas and air pollution savings from telehealth use in cardiology., Methods: Using cardiology telehealth visits at a large academic medical center from July 2020 to March 2024, carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), nitrogen oxides (NO x ), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) emissions saved were calculated using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency modeling software. Savings were converted into real-world comparators and differences were assessed by cardiology subspecialty and patient insurance status., Results: Over 45 months, 14,828 telehealth visits among 9942 patients resulted in savings of 484,152 kg of CO 2 , 5225 kg of CO, 243,491 g of NO x , and 9091 g of PM 2.5 with the total carbon saved equivalent to planting 9070 tree saplings over ten years. CO 2 emissions saved per visit (kg) differed significantly by payor (Self-pay 24.99, Medicare 19.67, Medicaid 19.54, Private 17.85, Other 17.37, p  = 0.004) and by subspecialty (Interventional 23.79, General 19.08, Heart Failure 18.86, Electrophysiology 17.81, Adult Congenital 16.59, p  < 0.001)., Conclusions: Carbon emission and air pollution savings from telehealth in cardiology were substantial, with an estimated 19.06 kg of CO 2 saved per visit and total savings over 45 months equivalent to planting over nine thousand trees., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Dr. Robert J. Mentz received research support and honoraria from 10.13039/100001316Abbott, American Regent, 10.13039/100002429Amgen, 10.13039/100004325AstraZeneca, 10.13039/100004326Bayer, 10.13039/100001003Boehringer Ingelheim, 10.13039/100008497Boston Scientific, 10.13039/100014941Cytokinetics, Fast BioMedical, 10.13039/100005564Gilead, Innolife, 10.13039/100004312Eli Lilly and Company, 10.13039/100004374Medtronic, Medable, 10.13039/100004334Merck, 10.13039/100004336Novartis, 10.13039/501100004191Novo Nordisk, Pharmacosmos, Relypsa, Respicardia, 10.13039/100004337Roche, 10.13039/100004339Sanofi, Vifor, Windtree Therapeutics, and 10.13039/100015345ZOLL. Dr. Manesh R. Patel received research support and honoraria from 10.13039/100004326Bayer, Janssen, 10.13039/100004336Novartis, Esperion, and Research Grants from NHBLI, Idorsia, and Heartflow., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Iron deficiency (ID) is present in approximately 50% of patients with heart failure (HF) and even higher prevalence rate up to 80% in post-acute HF setting. The current guidelines for HF recommend intravenous (IV) iron replacement in HF with reduced or mildly reduced ejection fraction and ID based on clinical trials showing improvements in quality of life and exercise capacity, and an overall treatment benefit for recurrent HF hospitalization. However, several barriers cause challenges in implementing IV iron supplementation in practice due, in part, to clinician knowledge gaps and limited resource availability to protocolize routine utilization in appropriate patients. Thus, the current review will discuss practical considerations in ID treatment, implementation of evidence-based ID treatment to improve regional health disparities with toolkits, inclusion/exclusion criteria of IV iron supplementation, and clinical controversies in ID treatment, as well as gaps in evidence and questions to be answered., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Narang has received honoraria from Boehringer Ingelheim, Abbott, and Zoll Medical. Dr Rajagopalan has served as a consultant for Abbott Laboratories. Dr Ramu has received an honorarium from Abbott. Dr Jankowska has received honoraria for lectures and/or participation in advisory boards from Vifor Pharma and Pharmacosmos. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (HF) could be enrolled in EMPULSE (NCT04157751) upon haemodynamic stabilization and between 24 h and 5 days after hospital admission. The timing of treatment initiation may influence the efficacy and safety of drugs such as empagliflozin. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient characteristics, clinical events, and treatment effects according to time from admission to randomization., Methods and Results: The EMPULSE population was dichotomized by median time from hospital admission to randomization (1-2 days vs. 3-5 days). The primary outcome was a hierarchical composite endpoint of time to all-cause death, number of HF events, time to first HF event, and a ≥5-point difference in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score change from baseline after 90 days, analysed using the win ratio (WR) method. Patients randomized later (3-5 days, average time 3.9 days; n = 312) had a higher risk of experiencing clinical events than patients randomized earlier (1-2 days, average time 1.7 days; n = 215). The treatment effect favoured empagliflozin versus placebo in patients randomized later (3-5 days: WR 1.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-2.25) but was attenuated in patients randomized earlier (1-2 days: WR 1.04, 95% CI 0.74-1.44) (interaction p = 0.029). A similar pattern was observed for the composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death and all-cause hospitalizations (interaction p < 0.1 for both). The reduction of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels was more pronounced with empagliflozin among patients randomized later than in patients randomized earlier (interaction p = 0.004)., Conclusions: Among patients hospitalized for acute HF enrolled in EMPULSE, those randomized later after hospital admission (3-5 days) experienced greater clinical benefit with empagliflozin than those randomized earlier (1-2 days). These findings should be confirmed in future studies before clinical application., (© 2024 European Society of Cardiology.)

Current understanding of iron-deficient heart failure is based on blood tests that are thought to reflect systemic iron stores, but the available evidence suggests greater complexity. The entry and egress of circulating iron is controlled by erythroblasts, which (in severe iron deficiency) will sacrifice erythropoiesis to supply iron to other organs, e.g. the heart. Marked hypoferraemia (typically with anaemia) can drive the depletion of cardiomyocyte iron, impairing contractile performance and explaining why a transferrin saturation < ≈15%-16% predicts the ability of intravenous iron to reduce the risk of major heart failure events in long-term trials (Type 1 iron-deficient heart failure). However, heart failure may be accompanied by intracellular iron depletion within skeletal muscle and cardiomyocytes, which is disproportionate to the findings of systemic iron biomarkers. Inflammation- and deconditioning-mediated skeletal muscle dysfunction-a primary cause of dyspnoea and exercise intolerance in patients with heart failure-is accompanied by intracellular skeletal myocyte iron depletion, which can be exacerbated by even mild hypoferraemia, explaining why symptoms and functional capacity improve following intravenous iron, regardless of baseline haemoglobin or changes in haemoglobin (Type 2 iron-deficient heart failure). Additionally, patients with advanced heart failure show myocardial iron depletion due to both diminished entry into and enhanced egress of iron from the myocardium; the changes in iron proteins in the cardiomyocytes of these patients are opposite to those expected from systemic iron deficiency. Nevertheless, iron supplementation can prevent ventricular remodelling and cardiomyopathy produced by experimental injury in the absence of systemic iron deficiency (Type 3 iron-deficient heart failure). These observations, taken collectively, support the possibility of three different mechanistic pathways for the development of iron-deficient heart failure: one that is driven through systemic iron depletion and impaired erythropoiesis and two that are characterized by disproportionate depletion of intracellular iron in skeletal and cardiac muscle. These mechanisms are not mutually exclusive, and all pathways may be operative at the same time or may occur sequentially in the same patients., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)