Search

Aims: Angiotensin receptor blockers have been shown to reduce heart failure hospitalization and cardiovascular mortality in men and women with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). It is unknown whether there are differences between men and women in achieved dose and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events of candesartan., Methods and Results: We conducted a post hoc analysis of the Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity (CHARM) programme. A total of 3172 men and 1106 women with HFrEF [left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 40%] in New York Heart Association class II-IV were randomized to candesartan or placebo. Every 2 weeks, patients were up-titrated from 4 or 8, to16, to 32 mg once daily, unless a higher dose was contraindicated or not tolerated. Women were older (66 vs. 64 years), had a higher LVEF (29.9% vs. 28.6%), and had more hypertension (54% vs. 47%) than men. The mean achieved dose of candesartan was 21.5 ± 12.6 mg in men and 20.7 ± 12.9 mg in women (P = 0.19). In both the candesartan and placebo groups, cardiovascular death and heart failure hospitalizations were higher in men and women who achieved lower dose levels. Event rates for achieved dose levels of 0, 4 or 8, 16, and 32 mg candesartan were 20.8, 17.2, 14.0, and 10.1 per 100 person-years in men, respectively, and 23.6, 13.7, 14.0, and 9.1 per 100 person-years in women, respectively. In each of the achieved dose levels, there was no sex difference in the proportion of patients with an event, neither in the candesartan group nor in the placebo group (P-value for all > 0.05). There was no significant interaction between sex and treatment-related discontinuation for hypotension (P = 0.520), an increase in creatinine (P = 0.102), and hyperkalaemia (P = 0.905)., Conclusions: In a randomized clinical trial in patients with HFrEF, men and women achieved similar doses of candesartan. Primary event rates and treatment-related discontinuation due to adverse events were also similar between men and women., (© 2024 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Clinical differences between women and men have been described in heart failure (HF). However, less is known about the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms. In this study, we compared multiple circulating biomarkers to gain better insights into differential HF pathophysiology between women and men., Methods and Results: In 537 women and 1485 men with HF, we compared differential expression of a panel of 363 biomarkers. Then, we performed a pathway over-representation analysis to identify differential biological pathways in women and men. Findings were validated in an independent HF cohort (575 women, 1123 men). In both cohorts, women were older and had higher left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). In the index and validation cohorts respectively, we found 14/363 and 12/363 biomarkers that were relatively up-regulated in women, while 21/363 and 14/363 were up-regulated in men. In both cohorts, the strongest up-regulated biomarkers in women were leptin and fatty acid binding protein-4, compared to matrix metalloproteinase-3 in men. Similar findings were replicated in a subset of patients from both cohorts matched by age and LVEF. Pathway over-representation analysis revealed increased activity of pathways associated with lipid metabolism in women, and neuro-inflammatory response in men (all p < 0.0001)., Conclusion: In two independent cohorts of HF patients, biomarkers associated with lipid metabolic pathways were observed in women, while biomarkers associated with neuro-inflammatory response were more active in men. Differences in inflammatory and metabolic pathways may contribute to sex differences in clinical phenotype observed in HF, and provide useful insights towards development of tailored HF therapies., (© 2022 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) are two growing epidemics that frequently co-exist. We aimed to gain insights into the underlying pathophysiological pathways in HF patients with AF by comparing circulating biomarkers using pathway overrepresentation analyses., Methods and Results: From a panel of 92 biomarkers from different pathophysiological domains available in 1620 patients with HF, we first tested which biomarkers were dysregulated in patients with HF and AF (n = 648) compared with patients in sinus rhythm (n = 972). Secondly, pathway overrepresentation analyses were performed to identify biological pathways linked to higher plasma concentrations of biomarkers in patients who had HF and AF. Findings were validated in an independent HF cohort (n = 1219, 38% with AF). Patient with AF and HF were older, less often women, and less often had a history of coronary artery disease compared with those in sinus rhythm. In the index cohort, 24 biomarkers were up-regulated in patients with AF and HF. In the validation cohort, eight biomarkers were up-regulated, which all overlapped with the 24 biomarkers found in the index cohort. The strongest up-regulated biomarkers in patients with AF were spondin-1 (fold change 1.18, P = 1.33 × 10-12), insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-1 (fold change 1.32, P = 1.08 × 10-8), and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-7 (fold change 1.33, P = 1.35 × 10-18). Pathway overrepresentation analyses revealed that the presence of AF was associated with activation amyloid-beta metabolic processes, amyloid-beta formation, and amyloid precursor protein catabolic processes with a remarkable consistency observed in the validation cohort., Conclusion: In two independent cohorts of patients with HF, the presence of AF was associated with activation of three pathways related to amyloid-beta. These hypothesis-generating results warrant confirmation in future studies., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: A.A.V. and/or his institution received grants and/or consultancy reimbursements from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Boehringer, Cytokinetics, Merck, Myokardia, Novartis, Roche, and Novo Nordisk. B.T.S. received funding from the Dutch Heart Foundation (2019T094). I.C.V.G. reports support from the Netherlands Cardiovascular Research Initiative, an initiative with support of the Dutch heart Foundation (CVON 2014-9 and CVON 2018-28) and support from Medtronic to the institution. F.Z. reports personal fees from Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer, Boston Scientific, Cardior, Cardiorenal, Cereno pharmaceutical, Cirius, CVCT, CVRx, Janssen, Novartis, Merck, and Vifor Fresenius. P.v.d.M. received consultancy fees and/or grants from Novartis, Servier, Vifor, Pharma, Astra Zeneca, Pfizer, and Ionis. C.S.P.L. is supported by a Clinician Scientist Award from the National Medical Research Council of Singapore; has received research support from Boston Scientific, Bayer, Roche Diagnostics, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, and Vifor Pharma; has served as consultant or on the Advisory Board/Steering Committee/Executive Committee for Boston Scientific, Bayer, Roche Diagnostics, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Vifor Pharma, Novartis, Amgen, Merck, Janssen Research & Development LLC, Menarini, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, Abbott Diagnostics, Corvia, Stealth BioTherapeutics, JanaCare, Biofourmis, Darma, Applied Therapeutics, MyoKardia, Cytokinetics, WebMD Global LLC, Radcliffe Group Ltd and Corpus; and serves as co-founder and non-executive director of eKo.ai. G.F. is committee member in trials and/or registries sponsored by Medtronic, Novartis, BI, Vifor, Servier, outside the submitted work. S.D.A. reports receiving fees from Abbott Vascular, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardiac Dimension, Impulse Dynamics, Novartis, Servier, and Vifor Pharma, and grant support from Abbott Vascular and Vifor Pharma. V.A.A. received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant (754425). None of the funders had any role in the trial design, the collection or analysis of the data, or the writing of the manuscript. All other authors declare no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Elderly patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) have worse prognosis and less often receive guideline-recommended therapies. We aim to better understand the underlying pathophysiological processes associated with ageing in HFrEF potentially leading to targeted therapies in this vulnerable population., Methods and Results: From a panel of 363 cardiovascular biomarkers available in 1611 patients with HFrEF in the BIOSTAT-CHF index cohort and cross-validated in 823 patients in the BIOSTAT-CHF validation cohort, we tested which biomarkers were dysregulated in patients aged >75 vs. <65 years. Second, pathway overrepresentation analyses were performed to identify biological pathways linked to higher plasma concentrations of biomarkers in elderly vs. younger patients. After adjustment, multiple test correction [false discovery rate (FDR) 1%], and cross-validation, 27/363 biomarkers were associated with older age, 22 positively and 5 negatively. The biomarkers that were positively associated with older age were associated with tumour cell regulation, extra-cellular matrix organization, and inflammatory processes, whereas biomarkers negatively associated with older age were associated with pathways that may point to cell proliferation and tumourigenesis. Among the 27 biomarkers, WFDC2 (WAP four-disulphide core domain protein 2)-that broadly functions as a protease inhibitor-was associated with older age and had the strongest association with all outcomes. No protein-by-sex interaction was observed., Conclusions: In elderly HFrEF patients, pathways associated with extra-cellular matrix organization, inflammatory processes, and tumour cell regulation were activated, while pathways associated with tumour proliferation functions were down-regulated. These findings may help in a better understanding of the ageing processes in HFrEF and identify potential therapeutic targets., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: Recent studies have reported suboptimal up-titration of heart failure (HF) therapies in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Here, we report on the achieved doses after nurse-led up-titration, reasons for not achieving the target dose, subsequent changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and mortality., Methods: From 2012 to 2018, 378 HFrEF patients with a recent (< 3 months) diagnosis of HF were referred to a specialised HF-nurse led clinic for protocolised up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). The achieved doses of GDMT at 9 months were recorded, as well as reasons for not achieving the optimal dose in all patients. Echocardiography was performed at baseline and after up-titration in 278 patients., Results: Of 345 HFrEF patients with a follow-up visit after 9 months, 69% reached ≥ 50% of the recommended dose of renin-angiotensin-system (RAS) inhibitors, 73% reached ≥ 50% of the recommended dose of beta-blockers and 77% reached ≥ 50% of the recommended dose of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. The main reasons for not reaching the target dose were hypotension (RAS inhibitors and beta-blockers), bradycardia (beta-blockers) and renal dysfunction (RAS inhibitors). During a median follow-up of 9 months, mean LVEF increased from 27.6% at baseline to 38.8% at follow-up. Each 5% increase in LVEF was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.84 (0.75-0.94, p = 0.002) for mortality and 0.85 (0.78-0.94, p = 0.001) for the combined endpoint of mortality and/or HF hospitalisation after a mean follow-up of 3.3 years., Conclusions: This study shows that protocolised up-titration in a nurse-led HF clinic leads to high doses of GDMT and improvement of LVEF in patients with new-onset HFrEF., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of hospitalisation, morbidity, and mortality in Canada. There are sex-specific differences in the etiology, epidemiology, comorbidities, treatment response, and treatment adverse effects that have implications on outcomes in HF. Sex-specific analyses of some HF trials indicate that optimal doses of drug therapies and benefit of device therapies may differ between male and female patients, but the trials were not designed to test sex differences. The under-representation of female participants in HF randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is a major limitation in assessing the sex-specific efficacy and safety of treatments. To ensure that female patients receive safe and effective HF therapies, RCTs should include participants proportionate to the sex-specific distribution of disease. This review outlines the sex-specific differences in HF phenotype and treatment response, and highlights disparities in services and gaps in knowledge that merit further investigation., (Copyright © 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: We sought to analyse quality of life (QoL) measures derived from two questionnaires widely used in clinical trials, the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and the EuroQoL 5 dimensions (EQ-5D), and to compare their prognostic value in men and women with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)., Methods and Results: From the BIOlogy Study to TAilored Treatment in Chronic Heart Failure (BIOSTAT-CHF) we compared KCCQ and EQ-5D at baseline and after 9 months in 1276 men and 373 women with new-onset or worsening symptoms of HFrEF, who were sub-optimally treated and in whom there was an anticipated up-titration of guideline-derived medical therapies. Women had significantly worse baseline QoL (median) as compared with men, both when assessed with KCCQ overall score (KCCQ-OS, 44 vs. 53, P < 0.001) and EQ-5D utility score (0.62 vs. 0.73, P < 0.001). QoL improved equally in women and men at follow-up. All summary measures of QoL were independently associated with all-cause mortality, with KCCQ-OS showing the most remarkable association with mortality up to 1 year compared to the EQ-5D scores (C-statistic 0.650 for KCCQ-OS vs. 0.633 and 0.599 for EQ-5D utility score and EQ-5D visual analogue scale, respectively). QoL was associated with all outcomes analysed, both in men and women (all P for interaction with sex >0.2)., Conclusion: Amongst patients with HFrEF, women reported significantly worse QoL than men. QoL was independently associated with subsequent outcome, similarly in men and women. The KCCQ in general, and the KCCQ-OS in particular, showed the strongest independent association with outcome., (© 2021 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: We aimed to characterize ethnic differences in prevalence, clinical correlates, and outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) in heart failure (HF) with preserved and reduced ejection fraction (HFpEF and HFrEF) across Asia., Methods and Results: Among 5504 patients with HF prospectively recruited across 11 Asian regions using identical protocols in the Asian Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure study (mean age 61 ± 13 years, 27% women, 83% HFrEF), 1383 (25%) had AF defined as a history of AF and/or AF/flutter on baseline electrocardiogram. Clinical correlates of AF were similar across ethnicities and included older age, prior stroke, higher NT-proBNP, and larger left atria. Diabetes was associated with lower odds of AF in HFrEF [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.95] and HFpEF (AOR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39-0.84) regardless of ethnicity. Compared with Chinese ethnicity, Japanese/Koreans had higher odds of AF in HFrEF (AOR 1.76, 95% CI 1.40-2.21), while Indians had lower odds in HFrEF (AOR 0.18, 95% CI 0.13-0.24) and HFpEF (AOR 0.28, 95% CI 0.16-0.49) even after adjusting for clinical covariates. Interaction between ethnicity and region was observed among Indians, with Southeast Asian Indians having higher odds of AF (AOR 3.01, 95% CI 1.60-5.67) compared with South Asian Indians. AF was associated with poorer quality of life and increased risk of 1 year all-cause mortality or HF hospitalisation (adjusted hazard ratio 1.39, 95% CI 1.18-1.63) regardless of ethnicity., Conclusions: Among patients with HF across Asia, clinical correlates and adverse outcomes associated with AF are similar across ethnicities; however, there are striking ethnic variations in the prevalence of AF that are not accounted for by known risk factors., (© 2020 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: The current pandemic coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 infects a wide age group but predominantly elderly individuals, especially men and those with cardiovascular disease. Recent reports suggest an association with use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors. Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is a functional receptor for coronaviruses. Higher ACE2 concentrations might lead to increased vulnerability to SARS-CoV-2 in patients on RAAS inhibitors., Methods and Results: We measured ACE2 concentrations in 1485 men and 537 women with heart failure (index cohort). Results were validated in 1123 men and 575 women (validation cohort).The median age was 69 years for men and 75 years for women. The strongest predictor of elevated concentrations of ACE2 in both cohorts was male sex (estimate = 0.26, P < 0.001; and 0.19, P < 0.001, respectively). In the index cohort, use of ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), or mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) was not an independent predictor of plasma ACE2. In the validation cohort, ACE inhibitor (estimate = -0.17, P = 0.002) and ARB use (estimate = -0.15, P = 0.03) were independent predictors of lower plasma ACE2, while use of an MRA (estimate = 0.11, P = 0.04) was an independent predictor of higher plasma ACE2 concentrations., Conclusion: In two independent cohorts of patients with heart failure, plasma concentrations of ACE2 were higher in men than in women, but use of neither an ACE inhibitor nor an ARB was associated with higher plasma ACE2 concentrations. These data might explain the higher incidence and fatality rate of COVID-19 in men, but do not support previous reports suggesting that ACE inhibitors or ARBs increase the vulnerability for COVID-19 through increased plasma ACE2 concentrations., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: To study the association between an atrial fibrillation (AF) genetic risk score with prevalent AF and all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure., Methods and Results: An AF genetic risk score was calculated in 3759 European ancestry individuals (1783 with sinus rhythm, 1976 with AF) from the BIOlogy Study to TAilored Treatment in Chronic Heart Failure (BIOSTAT-CHF) by summing 97 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) alleles (ranging from 0-2) weighted by the natural logarithm of the relative SNP risk from the latest AF genome-wide association study. Further, we assessed AF risk variance explained by additive SNP variation, and performance of clinical or genetic risk factors, and the combination in classifying AF prevalence. AF was classified as AF or atrial flutter (AFL) at baseline electrocardiogram and/or a history of AF or AFL. The genetic risk score was associated with AF after multivariable adjustment. Odds ratio for AF prevalence per 1-unit increase genetic risk score was 2.12 (95% confidence interval 1.84-2.45, P = 2.15 × 10 -24 ) in the total cohort, 2.08 (1.72-2.50, P = 1.30 × 10 -14 ) in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and 2.02 (1.37-2.99, P = 4.37 × 10 -4 ) in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). AF-associated loci explained 22.9% of overall AF SNP heritability. Addition of the genetic risk score to clinical risk factors increased the C-index by 2.2% to 0.721., Conclusions: The AF genetic risk score was associated with increased AF prevalence in HFrEF and HFpEF. Genetic variation accounted for 22.9% of overall AF SNP heritability. Addition of genetic risk to clinical risk improved model performance in classifying AF prevalence., (© 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: In heart failure (HF), levels of NT-proBNP are influenced by the presence of concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF), making it difficult to distinguish between HF versus AF in patients with raised NT-proBNP. It is unknown whether levels of GDF-15 are also influenced by AF in patients with HF. In this study we compared the plasma levels of NT-proBNP versus GDF-15 in patients with HF in AF versus sinus rhythm (SR)., Methods: In a post hoc analysis of the index cohort of BIOSTAT-CHF (n = 2516), we studied patients with HF categorized into three groups: (1) AF at baseline (n = 733), (2) SR at baseline with a history of AF (n = 183), and (3) SR at baseline and no history of AF (n = 1025). The findings were validated in the validation cohort of BIOSTAT-CHF (n = 1738)., Results: Plasma NT-proBNP levels of patients who had AF at baseline were higher than those of patients in SR (both with and without a history of AF), even after multivariable adjustment (3417 [25th-75th percentile 1897-6486] versus 1788 [682-3870], adjusted p < 0.001, versus 2231 pg/mL [902-5270], adjusted p < 0.001). In contrast, after adjusting for clinical confounders, the levels of GDF-15 were comparable between the three groups (3179 [2062-5253] versus 2545 [1686-4337], adjusted p = 0.36, versus 2294 [1471-3855] pg/mL, adjusted p = 0.08). Similar patterns of both NT-proBNP and GDF-15 were found in the validation cohort., Conclusion: These data show that in patients with HF, NT-proBNP is significantly influenced by underlying AF at time of measurement and not by previous episodes of AF, whereas the levels of GDF-15 are not influenced by the presence of AF. Therefore, GDF-15 might have additive value combined with NT-proBNP in the assessment of patients with HF and concomitant AF.

The overall lifetime risk of heart failure (HF) is similar between men and women, however, there are marked sex differences in the landscape of this condition that are both important and under-recognized. Men are predisposed to HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), whereas women predominate in HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Sex differences are also notable in the penetrance of genetic cardiomyopathies, risk factors, e.g. breast cancer which may be associated with cancer treatment-induced cardiomyopathy, as well as sex-specific conditions such as peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM). This review outlines the key sex differences with respect to clinical characteristics, pathophysiology, and therapeutic responses to HF treatments. Finally, we address important differences in the prognosis of HF. A central hypothesis is that the higher risk of HFrEF in men compared to women may be attributable to their predisposition to macrovascular coronary artery disease and myocardial infarction, whereas coronary microvascular dysfunction/endothelial inflammation has been postulated to play a key role in HFpEF and maybe the common link among HF syndromes that women are predisposed to Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, PPCM, and breast cancer radiotherapy-induced cardiomyopathy. Under-pinning current sex disparities in HF, there is a paucity of women recruited to HF clinical trials (20-25% of cohorts) and thus treatment guidelines are predominantly based on male-derived data. Large gaps in knowledge exist in sex-specific mechanisms, optimal drug doses for women and sex-specific criteria for device therapy., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Guideline-recommended doses of angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs), and β blockers are similar for men and women with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), even though there are known sex differences in pharmacokinetics of these drugs. We hypothesised that there might be sex differences in the optimal dose of ACE inhibitors or ARBs and β blockers in patients with HFrEF., Methods: We did a post-hoc analysis of BIOSTAT-CHF, a prospective study in 11 European countries of patients with heart failure in whom initiation and up-titration of ACE inhibitors or ARBs and β blockers was encouraged by protocol. We included only patients with left ventricular ejection fraction less than 40%, and excluded those who died within the first 3 months. Primary outcome was a composite of time to all-cause mortality or hospitalisation for heart failure. Findings were validated in ASIAN-HF, an independent cohort of 3539 men and 961 women with HFrEF., Findings: Among 1308 men and 402 women with HFrEF from BIOSTAT-CHF, women were older (74 [12] years vs 70 [12] years, p<0·0001) and had lower bodyweights (72 [16] kg vs 85 [18] kg, p<0·0001) and heights (162 [7] cm vs 174 [8] cm, p<0·0001) than did men, although body-mass index did not differ significantly. A similar number of men and women reached guideline-recommended target doses of ACE inhibitors or ARBs (99 [25%] vs 304 [23%], p=0·61) and β blockers (57 [14%] vs 168 [13%], p=0·54). In men, the lowest hazards of death or hospitalisation for heart failure occurred at 100% of the recommended dose of ACE inhibitors or ARBs and β blockers, but women showed approximately 30% lower risk at only 50% of the recommended doses, with no further decrease in risk at higher dose levels. These sex differences were still present after adjusting for clinical covariates, including age and body surface area. In the ASIAN-HF registry, similar patterns were observed for both ACE inhibitors or ARBs and β blockers, with women having approximately 30% lower risk at 50% of the recommended doses, with no further benefit at higher dose levels., Interpretation: This study suggests that women with HFrEF might need lower doses of ACE inhibitors or ARBs and β blockers than men, and brings into question what the true optimal medical therapy is for women versus men., Funding: European Commission., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: In patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) on sub-optimal doses of beta-blockers, it is conceivable that changes in heart rate following treatment intensification might be important regardless of underlying heart rhythm. We aimed to compare the prognostic significance of both achieved heart rate and change in heart rate following beta-blocker uptitration in patients with HFrEF either in sinus rhythm (SR) or atrial fibrillation (AF)., Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of the BIOSTAT-CHF study. We evaluated 1548 patients with HFrEF (mean age 67 years, 35% AF). Median follow-up was 21 months. Patients were evaluated at baseline and at 9 months. The combined primary outcome was all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalisation stratified by heart rhythm and heart rate at baseline., Results: Despite similar changes in heart rate and beta-blocker dose, a decrease in heart rate at 9 months was associated with reduced incidence of the primary outcome in both SR and AF patients [HR per 10 bpm decrease-SR: 0.83 (0.75-0.91), p < 0.001; AF: 0.89 (0.81-0.98), p = 0.018], whereas the relationship was less strong for achieved heart rate in AF [HR per 10 bpm higher-SR: 1.26 (1.10-1.46), p = 0.001; AF: 1.08 (0.94-1.23), p = 0.18]. Achieved heart rate at 9 months was only prognostically significant in AF patients with high baseline heart rates (p for interaction 0.017 vs. low)., Conclusions: Following beta-blocker uptitration, both achieved and change in heart rate were prognostically significant regardless of starting heart rate in SR, however, they were only significant in AF patients with high baseline heart rate.

Aims: The clinical correlates and consequences of atrial fibrillation (AF) might be different between heart failure with reduced vs. preserved ejection fraction (HFrEF vs. HFpEF). Biomarkers may provide insights into underlying pathophysiological mechanisms of AF in these different heart failure (HF) phenotypes., Methods and Results: We performed a retrospective analysis of the BIOlogy Study to TAilored Treatment in Chronic Heart Failure (BIOSTAT-CHF), which was an observational cohort. We studied 2152 patients with HFrEF [ejection fraction (EF < 40%)], of which 1419 were in sinus rhythm (SR) and 733 had AF. Another 524 patients with HFpEF (EF ≥50%) were studied, of which 286 in SR and 238 with AF. For the comparison of biomarker profiles, 92 cardiovascular risk markers were measured (Proseek® Olink Cardiovascular III panel). The circulating risk marker pattern observed in HFrEF was different than the pattern in HFpEF: in HFrEF, AF was associated with higher levels of 77 of 92 (84%) risk markers compared to SR; whereas in HFpEF, many more markers were higher in SR than in AF. Over a median follow-up of 21 months, AF was associated with increased mortality risk [multivariable hazard ratio (HR) of 1.27; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09-1.48, P = 0.002]; there was no significant interaction between heart rhythm and EF group on outcome., Conclusion: In patients with HFrEF, the presence of AF was associated with a homogeneously elevated cardiovascular risk marker profile. In contrast, in patients with HFpEF, the presence of AF was associated with a more scattered risk marker profile, suggesting differences in underlying pathophysiological mechanisms of AF in these HF phenotypes.

Background: Coronary artery disease affects both men and women. In this study, we examine sex-specific differences in occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) after coronary angiography., Methods: We analyzed data from the coronary angiography cohort Utrecht Coronary Biobank (n = 1283 men, 480 women). Using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox-regression, we tested for sex differences in MACE occurrence. Additionally, we compared mortality with an age- and sex-matched control group from the general Dutch population., Results: During a median follow-up of 2.1 years (interquartile range 1.6-2.8), MACEs occurred in 265 men and 103 women (20.7% vs 21.3%, P = .744). Women with myocardial infarction (MI) had significantly more MACE during follow-up than men (hazard ratio [HR] 1.66 for female sex, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-2.50, P = .015), which was also the case for women who had multivessel disease (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.03-1.94, P = .031). During follow-up, mortality in women presenting with MI was higher than mortality of women in the general population; men with MI did not show this disadvantage., Conclusion: MACEs occurred more often in women than in men who presented with MI or who had angiographic multivessel disease upon coronary angiography., Clinical Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02304744. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02304744., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Background: Heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (HFPEF) affects about half of all patients diagnosed with heart failure. The pathophysiological aspect of this complex disease state has been extensively explored, yet it is still not fully understood. Since the sympathetic nervous system is related to the development of systolic HF, we hypothesized that an increased sympathetic nerve activation (SNA) is also related to the development of HFPEF. This review summarizes the available literature regarding the relation between HFPEF and SNA., Methods and Results: Electronic databases and reference lists through April 2014 were searched resulting in 7722 unique articles. Three authors independently evaluated citation titles and abstracts, resulting in 77 articles reporting about the role of the sympathetic nervous system and HFPEF. Of these 77 articles, 15 were included for critical appraisal: 6 animal and 9 human studies. Based on the critical appraisal, we selected 9 articles (3 animal, 6 human) for further analysis. In all the animal studies, isoproterenol was administered to mimic an increased sympathetic activity. In human studies, different modalities for assessment of sympathetic activity were used. The studies selected for further evaluation reported a clear relation between HFPEF and SNA., Conclusion: Current literature confirms a relation between increased SNA and HFPEF. However, current literature is not able to distinguish whether enhanced SNA results in HFPEF, or HFPEF results in enhanced SNA. The most likely setting is a vicious circle in which HFPEF and SNA sustain each other.