| 1. |
- Desai, A. S., et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of the angiotensin-receptor-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 compared with enalapril on mode of death in heart failure patients
- 2015
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 36:30, s. 1990-1997
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims The angiotensin-receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) LCZ696 reduced cardiovascular deaths and all-cause mortality compared with enalapril in patients with chronic heart failure in the prospective comparison of ARNI with an Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) trial. To more completely understand the components of this mortality benefit, we examined the effect of LCZ696 on mode of death. Methods and results PARADIGM-HF was a prospective, double-blind, randomized trial in 8399 patients with chronic heart failure, New York Heart Association Class II-IV symptoms, and left ventricular ejection fraction <= 40% receiving guideline-recommended medical therapy and followed for a median of 27 months. Mode of death was adjudicated by a blinded clinical endpoints committee. The majority of deaths were cardiovascular (80.9%), and the risk of cardiovascular death was significantly reduced by treatment with LCZ (hazard ratio, HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.72-0.89, P < 0.001). Among cardiovascular deaths, both sudden cardiac death (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68-0.94, P = 0.008) and death due to worsening heart failure (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64-0.98, P = 0.034) were reduced by treatment with LCZ696 compared with enalapril. Deaths attributed to other cardiovascular causes, including myocardial infarction and stroke, were infrequent and distributed evenly between treatment groups, as were non-cardiovascular deaths. Conclusions LCZ696 was superior to enalapril in reducing both sudden cardiac deaths and deaths from worsening heart failure, which accounted for the majority of cardiovascular deaths.
|
|
| 2. |
- Cunningham, J. W., et al.
(författare)
-
Myocardial Infarction in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction Pooled Analysis of 3 Clinical Trials
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Jacc-Heart Failure. - : Elsevier BV. - 2213-1779. ; 8:8, s. 618-626
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVES The authors investigated the relationship between past or incident myocardial infarction (MI) and car-diovascular (CV) events in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). BACKGROUND MI and HFpEF share some common risk factors. The prognostic significance of MI in patients with HFpEF is uncertain. METHODS The authors pooled data from 3 trials-CHARM Preserved (Candesartan Cilexietil in Heart Failure Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity), I-Preserve (Irbesartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Systolic Function), and the Americas region of TOPCAT (Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist) (N 1/4 8,916)-and examined whether MI before or following enrollment independently predicted CV death and heart failure (HF) hospitalization. RESULTS At baseline, 2,668 patients (30%) had history of MI. Prior MI was independently associated with greater risk of CV death (4.7 vs. 3.5 events/100 patient-years [py], adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.42 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.23 to 1.64]; p < 0.001). Excess sudden death drove this difference (1.9 vs. 1.2 events/100 py, adjusted HR: 1.55 [95% CI: 1.23 to 1.97]; p < 0.001). There was no difference in HF hospitalization (5.9 vs. 5.5 events/100 py, adjusted HR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.19) or HF death by prior MI. During follow-up, MI occurred in 336 patients (3.8%). Risk of CV death increased 31-fold in the first 30 days after first post-enrollment MI, and remained 58% higher beyond 1 year after MI. Risk of first or recurrent HF hospitalization increased 2.4-fold after MI. CONCLUSIONS Prior MI in HFpEF is associated with greater CV and sudden death but similar risk of HF outcomes. Patients with HFpEF who experience MI are at high risk of subsequent CV death and HF hospitalization. These data highlight the importance of primary and secondary prevention of MI in patients with HFpEF. (Candesartan Cilexietil in Heart Failure Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity [CHARM Preserved]; NCT00634712; Irbesartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Systolic Function [I-Preserve]; NCT00095238; and Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist [TOPCAT]; NCT00094302) (J Am Coll Cardiol HF 2020;8:618-26) (c) 2020 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
|
|
| 3. |
- Mogensen, U. M., et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of sacubitril/valsartan on recurrent events in the Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure trial (PARADIGM-HF)
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842. ; 20:4, s. 760-768
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims Recurrent hospitalizations are a major part of the disease burden in heart failure (HF), but conventional analyses consider only the first event. We compared the effect of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril on recurrent events, incorporating all HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular (CV) deaths in PARADIGM-HF, using a variety of statistical approaches advocated for this type of analysis.& para;& para;Methods and results In PARADIGM-HF, a total of 8399 patients were randomized and followed for a median of 27 months. We applied various recurrent event analyses, including a negative binomial model, the Wei, Lin and Weissfeld (WLW), and Lin, Wei, Ying and Yang (LWYY) methods, and a joint frailty model, all adjusted for treatment and region. Among a total of 3181 primary endpoint events (including 1251 CV deaths) during the trial, only 2031 (63.8%) were first events (836 CV deaths). Among a total of 1195 patients with at least one HF hospitalization, 410 (34%) had at least one further HF hospitalization. Sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril reduced the risk of recurrent HF hospitalization using the negative binomial model [rate ratio (RR) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-0.89], the WLW method [hazard ratio (HR) 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.89], the LWYY method (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.90), and the joint frailty model (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.66-0.86) (all P <0.001). The effect of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril on recurrent HF hospitalizations/CV death was similar.& para;& para;Conclusions In PARADIGM-HF, approximately one third of patients with a primary endpoint (time-to-first) experienced a further event. Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan reduced both first and recurrent events. The treatment effect size was similar, regardless of the statistical approach applied.
|
|
| 4. |
- Shen, L., et al.
(författare)
-
Declining Risk of Sudden Death in Heart Failure
- 2017
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793. ; 377:1, s. 41-51
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND The risk of sudden death has changed over time among patients with symptomatic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction with the sequential introduction of medications including angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists. We sought to examine this trend in detail. We analyzed data from 40,195 patients who had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and were enrolled in any of 12 clinical trials spanning the period from 1995 through 2014. Patients who had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator at the time of trial enrollment were excluded. Weighted multivariable regression was used to examine trends in rates of sudden death over time. Adjusted hazard ratios for sudden death in each trial group were calculated with the use of Cox regression models. The cumulative incidence rates of sudden death were assessed at different time points after randomization and according to the length of time between the diagnosis of heart failure and randomization. Sudden death was reported in 3583 patients. Such patients were older and were more often male, with an ischemic cause of heart failure and worse cardiac function, than those in whom sudden death did not occur. There was a 44% decline in the rate of sudden death across the trials (P = 0.03). The cumulative incidence of sudden death at 90 days after randomization was 2.4% in the earliest trial and 1.0% in the most recent trial. The rate of sudden death was not higher among patients with a recent diagnosis of heart failure than among those with a longer-standing diagnosis. Rates of sudden death declined substantially over time among ambulatory patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction who were enrolled in clinical trials, a finding that is consistent with a cumulative benefit of evidence-based medications on this cause of death. (Funded by the China Scholarship Council and the University of Glasgow.)
|
|
| 5. |
- Shen, L., et al.
(författare)
-
Development and external validation of prognostic models to predict sudden and pump-failure death in patients with HFrEF from PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Clinical Research in Cardiology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1861-0684 .- 1861-0692. ; 110, s. 1334-1349
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Sudden death (SD) and pump failure death (PFD) are the two leading causes of death in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Objective Identifying patients at higher risk for mode-specific death would allow better targeting of individual patients for relevant device and other therapies. Methods We developed models in 7156 patients with HFrEF from the Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) trial, using Fine-Gray regressions counting other deaths as competing risks. The derived models were externally validated in the Aliskiren Trial to Minimize Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure (ATMOSPHERE) trial. Results NYHA class and NT-proBNP were independent predictors for both modes of death. The SD model additionally included male sex, Asian or Black race, prior CABG or PCI, cancer history, MI history, treatment with LCZ696 vs. enalapril, QRS duration and ECG left ventricular hypertrophy. While LVEF, ischemic etiology, systolic blood pressure, HF duration, ECG bundle branch block, and serum albumin, chloride and creatinine were included in the PFD model. Model discrimination was good for SD and excellent for PFD with Harrell's C of 0.67 and 0.78 after correction for optimism, respectively. The observed and predicted incidences were similar in each quartile of risk scores at 3 years in each model. The performance of both models remained robust in ATMOSPHERE. Conclusion We developed and validated models which separately predict SD and PFD in patients with HFrEF. These models may help clinicians and patients consider therapies targeted at these modes of death.
|
|
| 6. |
- Wijkman, Magnus, et al.
(författare)
-
Effects of sacubitril/valsartan on glycemia in patients with diabetes and heart failure: the PARAGON-HF and PARADIGM-HF trials
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Cardiovascular Diabetology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1475-2840. ; 21:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan lowered HbA1c and reduced new insulin therapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and diabetes in the PARADIGM-HF trial. We sought to assess the glycemic effects of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and diabetes, and across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in heart failure and diabetes. Methods We compared the effect of sacubitril/valsartan, relative to valsartan, on HbA1c, new insulin therapy and hypoglycemia in the randomized controlled trial PARAGON-HF, and performed pooled analyses of PARAGON-HF and PARADIGM-HF. Results Among 2395 patients with HFpEF and diabetes in PARAGON-HF, sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan reduced HbA1c (baseline-adjusted between-group difference in HbA1c change at 48 weeks: - 0.24%, 95% CI - 0.33 to - 0.16%, P < 0.001). Numerically, new insulin treatment was initiated less often in the sacubitril/valsartan group than in the valsartan group, but the difference was not statistically significant (12.8% vs. 16.1%; HR: 0.80, 95% CI 0.62-1.02, P = 0.07). Hypoglycemia adverse event reports were low, but more frequent in those receiving sacubitril/valsartan than in the valsartan group (4.2% vs. 2.6%; HR: 1.64, 95% CI 1.05-2.56, P = 0.030). In a pooled analysis of PARAGON-HF and PARADIGM-HF, the effect of sacubitril/valsartan on change in HbA1c was not significantly modified by LVEF (P-interaction = 0.56). Across the spectrum of LVEF, sacubitril/valsartan reduced new insulin therapy (HR: 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.89, P = 0.001), compared with enalapril or valsartan. Conclusions Sacubitril/valsartan reduced HbA1c and new insulin therapy in patients with heart failure and diabetes across the spectrum of LVEF but may be associated with a slightly higher risk for hypoglycemia. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01920711
|
|
| 7. |
- Bhatt, A. S., et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril on changes in heart failure therapies over time: the PARADIGM-HF trial
- 2021
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 23:9, s. 1518-1524
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims Sacubitril/valsartan improves morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Whether initiation of sacubitril/valsartan limits the use and dosing of other elements of guideline-directed medical therapy for HFrEF is unknown. We examined the effects of sacubitril/valsartan, compared with enalapril, on beta-blocker and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) use and dosing in a large randomized clinical trial. Methods and results Patients with full data on medication use were included. We examined beta-blocker and MRA use in patients randomized to sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril through 12-month follow-up. New initiations and discontinuations of beta-blocker and MRA were compared between treatment groups. Overall, 8398 (99.9%) had full medication and dose data at baseline. Baseline use of beta-blocker and MRA at any dose was 87% and 56%, respectively. Mean doses of beta-blocker and MRA were similar between treatment groups at baseline and at 6-month and 12-month follow-up. New initiations through 12-month follow-up were infrequent and similar in the sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril groups for beta-blockers [37 (9.0%) vs. 42 (10.2%), P = 0.56] and MRA [127 (7.6%) vs. 143 (9.2%), P = 0.10]. Among patients on MRA therapy at baseline, there were fewer MRA discontinuations in patients on sacubitril/valsartan as compared with enalapril at 12 months [125 (6.2%) vs. 187 (9.0%), P = 0.001]. Discontinuations of beta-blockers were not significantly different between groups in follow-up (2.2% vs. 2.6%, P = 0.26). Conclusions Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan, even when titrated to target dose, did not appear to lead to greater discontinuation or dose down-titration of other key guideline-directed medical therapies, and was associated with fewer discontinuations of MRA. Use of sacubitril/valsartan (when compared with enalapril) may promote sustained MRA use in follow-up.
|
|
| 8. |
- Desai, A. S., et al.
(författare)
-
Influence of Sacubitril/Valsartan (LCZ696) on 30-Day Readmission After Heart Failure Hospitalization
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0735-1097. ; 68:3, s. 242-248
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND Patients with heart failure (HF) are at high risk for hospital readmission in the first 30 days following HF hospitalization. OBJECTIVES This study sought to determine if treatment with sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) reduces rates of hospital readmission at 30-days following HF hospitalization compared with enalapril. METHODS We assessed the risk of 30-day readmission for any cause following investigator-reported hospitalizations for HF in the PARADIGM-HF trial, which randomized 8,399 participants with HF and reduced ejection fraction to treatment with LCZ696 or enalapril. RESULTS Accounting for multiple hospitalizations per patient, there were 2,383 investigator-reported HF hospitalizations, of which 1,076 (45.2%) occurred in subjects assigned to LCZ696 and 1,307 (54.8%) occurred in subjects assigned to enalapril. Rates of readmission for any cause at 30 days were 17.8% in LCZ696-assigned subjects and 21.0% in enalapril-assigned subjects (odds ratio: 0.74; 95% confidence interval: 0.56 to 0.97; p = 0.031). Rates of readmission for HF at 30-days were also lower in subjects assigned to LCZ696 (9.7% vs. 13.4%; odds ratio: 0.62; 95% confidence interval: 0.45 to 0.87; p = 0.006). The reduction in both all-cause and HF readmissions with LCZ696 was maintained when the time window from discharge was extended to 60 days and in sensitivity analyses restricted to adjudicated HF hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS Compared with enalapril, treatment with LCZ696 reduces 30-day readmissions for any cause following discharge from HF hospitalization.
|
|
| 9. |
- Seferovic, J. P., et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril on glycaemic control in patients with heart failure and diabetes: a post-hoc analysis from the PARADIGM-HF trial
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology. - 2213-8587 .- 2213-8595. ; 5:5, s. 333-340
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Diabetes is an independent risk factor for heart failure progression. Sacubitril/valsartan, a combination angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, improves morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), compared with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril, and improves peripheral insulin sensitivity in obese hypertensive patients. We aimed to investigate the effect of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril on HbA1c and time to first-time initiation of insulin or oral antihyperglycaemic drugs in patients with diabetes and HFrEF. METHODS: In a post-hoc analysis of the PARADIGM-HF trial, we included 3778 patients with known diabetes or an HbA1c >/=6.5% at screening out of 8399 patients with HFrEF who were randomly assigned to treatment with sacubitril/valsartan or enalapril. Of these patients, most (98%) had type 2 diabetes. We assessed changes in HbA1c, triglycerides, HDL cholesterol and BMI in a mixed effects longitudinal analysis model. Time to initiation of oral antihyperglycaemic drugs or insulin in subjects previously not treated with these agents were compared between treatment groups. FINDINGS: There were no significant differences in HbA1c concentrations between randomised groups at screening. During the first year of follow-up, HbA1c concentrations decreased by 0.16% (SD 1.40) in the enalapril group and 0.26% (SD 1.25) in the sacubitril/valsartan group (between-group reduction 0.13%, 95% CI 0.05-0.22, p=0.0023). HbA1c concentrations were persistently lower in the sacubitril/valsartan group than in the enalapril group over the 3-year follow-up (between-group reduction 0.14%, 95% CI 0.06-0.23, p=0.0055). New use of insulin was 29% lower in patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan (114 [7%] patients) compared with patients receiving enalapril (153 [10%]; hazard ratio 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.90, p=0.0052). Similarly, fewer patients were started on oral antihyperglycaemic therapy (0.77, 0.58-1.02, p=0.073) in the sacubitril/valsartan group. INTERPRETATION: Patients with diabetes and HFrEF enrolled in PARADIGM-HF who received sacubitril/valsartan had a greater long-term reduction in HbA1c than those receiving enalapril. These data suggest that sacubitril/valsartan might enhance glycaemic control in patients with diabetes and HFrEF. FUNDING: Novartis.
|
|
| 10. |
- Simpson, J., et al.
(författare)
-
Prognostic Models Derived in PARADIGM-HF and Validated in ATMOSPHERE and the Swedish Heart Failure Registry to Predict Mortality and Morbidity in Chronic Heart Failure
- 2020
-
Ingår i: JAMA Cardiology. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2380-6583 .- 2380-6591. ; 5:4, s. 432-441
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Importance: Accurate prediction of risk of death or hospitalizations in patients with heart failure (HF) may allow physicians to explore how more accurate decisions regarding appropriateness and timing of disease-modifying treatments, advanced therapies, or the need for end-of-life care can be made. Objective: To develop and validate a prognostic model for patients with HF. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multivariable analyses were performed in a stepwise fashion. Harrell C statistic was used to assess the discriminative ability. The derivation cohort was Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure trial (PARADIGM-HF) participants. The models were validated using the Aliskiren Trial to Minimize Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure Trial (ATMOSPHERE) study and in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF). A total of 8399 participants enrolled in PARADIGM-HF. Data were analyzed between June 2016 and June 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and the composite of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization at both 1 and 2 years. Results: Complete baseline clinical data were available for 8011 patients in PARADIGM-HF. The mean (SD) age of participants was 64 (11.4) years, 78.2% were men (n = 6567 of 8011), and 70.6% were New York Heart Association class II (n = 5919 of 8011). During a mean follow-up of 27 months, 1546 patients died, and 2031 had a cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization. The common variables were: Male sex, race/ethnicity (black or Asian), region (Central Europe or Latin America), HF duration of more than 5 years, New York Heart Association class III/IV, left ventricular ejection fraction, diabetes mellitus, β-blocker use at baseline, and allocation to sacubitril/valsartan. Ranked by χ2, N-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide was the single most powerful independent predictor of each outcome. The C statistic at 1 and 2 years was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.71-0.76) and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.70-0.73) for the primary composite end point, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.71-0.75) and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.73) for cardiovascular death, and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.74) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.67-0.74) for all-cause death, respectively. When validated in ATMOSPHERE, the C statistic at 1 and 2 years was 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.72) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.68-0.71) for the primary composite end point, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.74) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.69-0.72) for cardiovascular death, and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69-0.74) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.68-0.72) for all-cause death, respectively. An online calculator was created to allow calculation of an individual's risk (http://www.predict-hf.com). Conclusions and Relevance: Predictive models performed well and were developed and externally validated in large cohorts of geographically representative patients, comprehensively characterized with clinical and laboratory data including natriuretic peptides, who were receiving contemporary evidence-based treatment. © 2020 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
|
|
