| 1. |
- O'Connor, C. M., et al.
(author)
-
Effect of nesiritide in patients with acute decompensated heart failure
- 2011
-
In: The New England journal of medicine. - : Massachusetts Medical Society. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 365:1, s. 32-43
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Nesiritide is approved in the United States for early relief of dyspnea in patients with acute heart failure. Previous meta-analyses have raised questions regarding renal toxicity and the mortality associated with this agent. METHODS: We randomly assigned 7141 patients who were hospitalized with acute heart failure to receive either nesiritide or placebo for 24 to 168 hours in addition to standard care. Coprimary end points were the change in dyspnea at 6 and 24 hours, as measured on a 7-point Likert scale, and the composite end point of rehospitalization for heart failure or death within 30 days. RESULTS: Patients randomly assigned to nesiritide, as compared with those assigned to placebo, more frequently reported markedly or moderately improved dyspnea at 6 hours (44.5% vs. 42.1%, P=0.03) and 24 hours (68.2% vs. 66.1%, P=0.007), but the prespecified level for significance (P
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Zannad, F., et al.
(author)
-
Clinical outcome endpoints in heart failure trials: a European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Association consensus document
- 2013
-
In: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 15:10, s. 1082-1094
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Endpoint selection is a critically important step in clinical trial design. It poses major challenges for investigators, regulators, and study sponsors, and it also has important clinical and practical implications for physicians and patients. Clinical outcomes of interest in heart failure trials include all-cause mortality, cause-specific mortality, relevant non-fatal morbidity (e.g. all-cause and cause-specific hospitalization), composites capturing both morbidity and mortality, safety, symptoms, functional capacity, and patient-reported outcomes. Each of these endpoints has strengths and weaknesses that create controversies regarding which is most appropriate in terms of clinical importance, sensitivity, reliability, and consistency. Not surprisingly, a lack of consensus exists within the scientific community regarding the optimal endpoint(s) for both acute and chronic heart failure trials. In an effort to address these issues, the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) convened a group of expert heart failure clinical investigators, biostatisticians, regulators, and pharmaceutical industry scientists (Nice, France, 12-13 February 2012) to evaluate the challenges of defining heart failure endpoints in clinical trials and to develop a consensus framework. This report summarizes the group's recommendations for achieving common views on heart failure endpoints in clinical trials.
|
|
| 4. |
- Metra, M., et al.
(author)
-
Geographic Differences in Patients in a Global Acute Heart Failure Clinical Trial (from the ASCEND-HF Trial)
- 2016
-
In: American Journal of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0002-9149. ; 117:11, s. 1771-1778
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- A growing number of countries and geographical regions are involved in major clinical trials. Acute Study of Clinical Effectiveness of Nesiritide in Decompensated Heart Failure is the largest trial in acutely decompensated heart failure (HF) with patients from 5 geographical regions: North America (NA), Latin America (LA), Western Europe (WE), Central Europe (CE), and Asia-Pacific (AP). Data from the 5 geographical, areas were compared including baseline characteristics, medications, 30-day outcomes (mortality and mortality or HF hospitalization), and 180-day mortality. Of the 7,141 study patients, 3,243 (45.4%) were from NA (average of 15.2 patients/site), 1,762 (24.7%) from AP (28.4 patients/site), 967 (13.5%) from CE (20.2 patients/site), 665 (9.3%) from LA (17.1 patients/site), and 504 (7.1%) from WE (14.4 patients/site). There were marked differences in co-morbidities, clinical profile, medication use, length of stay, 30-day event rates, and 180-day mortality by region. Compared with NA, the adjusted risk for death or HF hospitalization at 30 days was significantly lower in CE (odds ratio [OR] 0.46, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.64), WE (OR 0.52 95% CI 0.35 to 0.75), and AP (OR 0.62 95% CI 0.48 to 0:79) and numerically lower in LA (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.04) with similar results for 180-day mortality. In conclusion, in patients with acutely decompensated HF, major differences in baseline characteristics, treatments, length of the hospital stay, and 30-day HF rehospitalization rates, and 180-day mortality were found in patients enrolled from different, geographical areas. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 5. |
- Cosmi, F., et al.
(author)
-
Treatment with insulin is associated with worse outcome in patients with chronic heart failure and diabetes
- 2018
-
In: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842. ; 20:5, s. 888-895
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims Up to one-third of patients with diabetes mellitus and heart failure (HF) are treated with insulin. As insulin causes sodium retention and hypoglycaemia, its use might be associated with worse outcomes. Methods and results We examined two datasets: 24 012 patients with HF from four large randomized trials and an administrative database of 4 million individuals, 103 857 of whom with HF. In the former, survival was examined using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for baseline variables and separately for propensity scores. Fine-Gray competing risk regression models were used to assess the risk of hospitalization for HF. For the latter, a case-control nested within a population-based cohort study was conducted with propensity score. Prevalence of diabetes mellitus at study entry ranged from 25.5% to 29.5% across trials. Insulin alone or in combination with oral hypoglycaemic drugs was prescribed at randomization to 24.4% to 34.5% of the patients with diabetes. The rates of death from any cause and hospitalization for HF were higher in patients with vs. without diabetes, and highest of all in patients prescribed insulin [propensity score pooled hazard ratio for all-cause mortality 1.27 (1.16-1.38), for HF hospitalization 1.23 (1.13-1.33)]. In the administrative registry, insulin prescription was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death [odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.87-2.19] and rehospitalization for HF (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.32-1.53). Conclusions Whether insulin use is associated with poor outcomes in HF should be investigated further with controlled trials, as should the possibility that there may be safer alternative glucose-lowering treatments for patients with HF and type 2 diabetes mellitus.
|
|
| 6. |
- Hernandez, A. F., et al.
(author)
-
Rationale and design of the Acute Study of Clinical Effectiveness of Nesiritide in Decompensated Heart Failure Trial (ASCEND-HF)
- 2009
-
In: Am Heart J. - 1097-6744. ; 157:2, s. 271-7
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is a major public health burden with significant mortality and morbidity. Nesiritide is a recombinantly produced intravenous formulation of human B-type natriuretic peptide that promotes vasodilation and increases salt and water excretion, which results in reduced cardiac filling pressures. Prior studies have shown that dyspnea is improved in patients with ADHF 3 hours after nesiritide infusion with significant dose-related reductions in cardiac filling pressures and systemic vascular resistance without significant arrhythmias. However, the effect of nesiritide on dyspnea at 6 or 24 hours is unknown, and no clinical outcome trials have been done to provide a reliable estimate of the effect of nesiritide on morbidity and mortality. METHODS: The Acute Study of Clinical Effectiveness of Nesiritide in Decompensated Heart Failure trial (ASCEND-HF) is a phase III study evaluating the efficacy and safety of nesiritide in patients with ADHF. Patients hospitalized for hear failure will be randomly assigned to receive either intravenous nesiritide or matching placebo for 24 hours to 7 days. The 2 coprimary end points are (1) assessment of acute dyspnea at 6 or 24 hours and (2) death or rehospitalization for hear failure within 30 days. A total of 7,000 patients will be enrolled worldwide between 2007 and 2010. CONCLUSIONS: The data from the ASCEND-HF trial will establish whether nesiritide safely improves acute dyspnea as well as morbidity and mortality at 30 days.
|
|
| 7. |
- Shen, L., et al.
(author)
-
Development and external validation of prognostic models to predict sudden and pump-failure death in patients with HFrEF from PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE
- 2021
-
In: Clinical Research in Cardiology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1861-0684 .- 1861-0692. ; 110, s. 1334-1349
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
| 8. |
- Curtain, J. P., et al.
(author)
-
Clinical Outcomes Related to Background Diuretic Use and New Diuretic Initiation in Patients With HFrEF
- 2022
-
In: Jacc-Heart Failure. - : Elsevier BV. - 2213-1779. ; 10:6, s. 415-427
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND Up to 20% of patients in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) trials are not taking diuretic agents at baseline, but little is known about them. OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to examine outcomes in patients with HFrEF not taking diuretic medications and after diuretic medications are started. METHODS Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between patients taking or not taking diuretic drugs at baseline in the ATMOSPHERE (Aliskiren Trial of Minimizing Outcomes for Patients With Heart Failure) and PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure Trial) trials combined. Patients starting diuretic medications were also compared with those remaining off diuretic drugs during follow-up. Symptoms (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score [KCCQ-CSS]), hospitalization for worsening heart failure (HF), mortality, and kidney function (estimated glomerular filtration rate slope) were examined. RESULTS At baseline, the 3,079 of 15,415 patients (20%) not taking diuretic medications had a less severe HF profile, less neurohumoral activation, and better kidney function. They were less likely to experience the primary outcome (hospitalization for HF or cardiovascular death) than patients taking diuretic agents (adjusted HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.74-0.80; P < 0.001) and death of any cause. Commencement of a diuretic drug was associated with higher subsequent risk for death (adjusted HR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.99-2.11; P < 0.001) and greater decreases in KCCQ-CSS and estimated glomerular filtration rate. The 5 strongest predictors of initiation of diuretic medications were higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, higher body mass index, older age, history of diabetes, and worse KCCQ-CSS. In PARADIGM-HF, fewer patients who were treated with sacubitril/valsartan commenced diuretic agents (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.58-0.88; P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS Patients with HFrEF not taking diuretic medications and those who remained off them had better outcomes than patients treated with diuretic agents or who commenced them. (C) 2022 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
|
|
| 9. |
- Dewan, P., et al.
(author)
-
Income Inequality and Outcomes in Heart Failure A Global Between-Country Analysis
- 2019
-
In: Jacc-Heart Failure. - : Elsevier BV. - 2213-1779. ; 7:4, s. 336-346
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- OBJECTIVES This study examined the relationship between income inequality and heart failure outcomes. BACKGROUND The income inequality hypothesis postulates that population health is influenced by income distribution within a society, with greater inequality associated with worse outcomes. METHODS This study analyzed heart failure outcomes in 2 large trials conducted in 54 countries. Countries were divided by tertiles of Gini coefficients (where 0% represented absolute income equality and 100% represented absolute income inequality), and heart failure outcomes were adjusted for standard prognostic variables, country per capita income, education index, hospital bed density, and health worker density. RESULTS Of the 15,126 patients studied, 5,320 patients lived in Gini coefficient tertile 1 countries (coefficient: <33%), 6,124 patients lived in tertile 2 countries (33% to 41%), and 3,772 patients lived in tertile 3 countries (>41%). Patients in tertile 3 were younger than tertile 1 patients, were more often women, and had less comorbidity and several indicators of less severe heart failure, yet the tertile 3-to-1 hazard ratios (HRs) for the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization were 1.57 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.38 to 1.79) and 1.48 for all-cause death (95% CI: 1.29 to 1.71) after adjustment for recognized prognostic variables. After additional adjustments were made for per capita income, education index, hospital bed density, and health worker density, these HRs were 1.46 (95% CI: 1.25 to 1.70) and 1.30 (95% CI: 1.10 to 1.53), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Greater income inequality was associated with worse heart failure outcomes, with an impact similar to those of major comorbidities. Better understanding of the societal and personal bases of these findings may suggest approaches to improve heart failure outcomes. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
|
|
| 10. |
- Dewan, P., et al.
(author)
-
The prevalence and importance of frailty in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction - an analysis of PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE
- 2020
-
In: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 22:11, s. 2123-2133
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims Frailty, characterized by loss of homeostatic reserves and increased vulnerability to physiological decompensation, results from an aggregation of insults across multiple organ systems. Frailty can be quantified by counting the number of 'health deficits' across a range of domains. We assessed the frequency of, and outcomes related to, frailty in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Methods and results Using a cumulative deficits approach, we constructed a 42-item frailty index (FI) and applied it to identify frail patients enrolled in two HFrEF trials (PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE). In keeping with previous studies, patients with FI <= 0.210 were classified as non-frail and those with higher scores were divided into two categories using score increments of 0.100. Clinical outcomes were examined, adjusting for prognostic variables. Among 13 625 participants, mean (+/- standard deviation) FI was 0.250 (0.10) and 8383 patients (63%) were frail (FI >0.210). The frailest patients were older and had more symptoms and signs of heart failure. Women were frailer than men. All outcomes were worse in the frailest, with high rates of all-cause death or all-cause hospitalization: 40.7 (39.1-42.4) vs. 22.1 (21.2-23.0) per 100 person-years in the non-frail; adjusted hazard ratio 1.63 (1.53-1.75) (P < 0.001). The rate of all-cause hospitalizations, taking account of recurrences, was 61.5 (59.8-63.1) vs. 31.2 (30.3-32.2) per 100 person-years (incidence rate ratio 1.76; 1.62-1.90; P < 0.001). Conclusion Frailty is highly prevalent in HFrEF and associated with greater deterioration in quality of life and higher risk of hospitalization and death. Strategies to prevent and treat frailty are needed in HFrEF.
|
|
