| 1. |
- Cannon, J. A., et al.
(author)
-
Clinical outcomes according to QRS duration and morphology in the Eplerenone in Mild Patients: Hospitalization and SurvIval Study in Heart Failure (EMPHASIS-HF)
- 2015
-
In: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842. ; 17:7, s. 707-716
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- AimsWe examined the relationship between different degrees of QRS prolongation and different QRS morphologies and clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure, reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF), and mild symptoms in the Eplerenone in Mild Patients Hospitalization and SurvIval Study in Heart Failure trial (EMPHASIS-HF). We also evaluated the effect of eplerenone in these patients according to QRS duration/morphology. Methods and resultsPatients were categorized as: QRS duration (ms) (i) <120 (n = 1375); (ii) 120-149 (n = 517); and (iii) 150 (n = 383), and QRS morphology (i) normal (n = 1252); (ii) left bundle branch block (BBB) (n = 608); and (iii) right BBB/intraventricular conduction defect (IVCD) (n = 415). The outcomes examined were the composite of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization and all-cause mortality. Both abnormal QRS duration and QRS morphology were associated with higher risk, e.g. the rates of the composite outcome were: 10.2, 17.6, and 15.5 per 100 patient-years in the <120, 120-149, and 150ms groups, respectively. Eplerenone reduced the risk of the primary outcome and mortality, compared with placebo, consistently across the QRS duration/morphology subgroups. ConclusionWe found that even moderate prolongation of QRS duration and right BBB/IVCD were associated with a high risk of adverse outcomes in HF-REF. Eplerenone was similarly effective, irrespective of QRS duration/morphology.
|
|
| 2. |
- Cleland, J. G. F., et al.
(author)
-
Beta-blockers for heart failure with reduced, mid-range, and preserved ejection fraction: an individual patient-level analysis of double-blind randomized trials
- 2018
-
In: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 39:1, s. 26-35
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aims Recent guidelines recommend that patients with heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 40-49% should be managed similar to LVEF >= 50%. We investigated the effect of beta-blockers according to LVEF in double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Methods and results Individual patient data meta-analysis of 11 trials, stratified by baseline LVEF and heart rhythm (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT0083244; PROSPERO: CRD42014010012). Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and cardiovascular death over 1.3 years median follow-up, with an intention-to-treat analysis. For 14 262 patients in sinus rhythm, median LVEF was 27% (interquartile range 21-33%), including 575 patients with LVEF 40-49% and 244 >= 50%. Beta-blockers reduced all-cause and cardiovascular mortality compared to placebo in sinus rhythm, an effect that was consistent across LVEF strata, except for those in the small subgroup with LVEF >= 50%. For LVEF 40-49%, death occurred in 21/292 [7.2%] randomized to beta-blockers compared to 35/283 [12.4%] with placebo; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.59 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-1.03]. Cardiovascular death occurred in 13/292 [4.5%] with beta-blockers and 26/283 [9.2%] with placebo; adjusted HR 0.48 (95% CI 0.24-0.97). Over a median of 1.0 years following randomization (n = 4601), LVEF increased with beta-blockers in all groups in sinus rhythm except LVEF >= 50%. For patients in atrial fibrillation at baseline (n = 3050), beta-blockers increased LVEF when < 50% at baseline, but did not improve prognosis. Conculations Beta-blockers improve LVEF and prognosis for patients with heart failure in sinus rhythm with a reduced LVEF. The data are most robust for LVEF < 40%, but similar benefit was observed in the subgroup of patients with LVEF 40-49%.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Rogers, J. K., et al.
(author)
-
Effect of rosuvastatin on repeat heart failure hospitalizations: The CORONA trial (controlled rosuvastatin multinational trial in heart failure)
- 2014
-
In: JACC: Heart Failure. - : Elsevier Inc.. - 2213-1787 .- 2213-1779. ; 2:3, s. 289-297
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: This study sought to examine the effect of statin therapy hospitalizations for heart failure (HFH) in patients in the CORONA (Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure) trial. Background: HFH is an important, frequently recurrent event. Conventional time-to-first event analyses do not take account repeat events. We used a number of statistical approaches to examine the effect of treatment on first and repeat HFH in the CORONA trial. Methods: In the CORONA trial, 5,011 patients ≥60 years of age with chronic New York Heart Association functional classes II to IV systolic heart failure resulting from ischemia were randomized to receive rosuvastatin or placebo. Poisson, Andersen-Gill, and negative binomial methods (NB) were used to analyze the effect of rosuvastatin on HFH, and the NB and a parametric joint frailty model (JF) were used to examine this effect while accounting for the competing risk of cardiovascular (CV) death. Rosuvastatin/placebo rate ratios were calculated, both unadjusted and adjusted. Results: A total of 1,291 patients had 1 or more HFH (750 of these had a single HFH only), and there were a total of 2,408 HFHs. The hazard ratio for the conventional time-to-first event analysis for HFH was 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82 to 1.02, p = 0.105). In contrast, the NB on repeat hospitalizations gave an unadjusted RR (RR) for HFH of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.75 to 0.99, p = 0.030), adjusted 0.82 (95% CI: 0.72 to 0.92, p = 0.001), and after including CV death as the last event, adjusted RR of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.77 to 0.94, p = 0.001). The JF gave an adjusted RR of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.73 to 0.92, p = 0.001). Similar results were found in analyses of all CV hospitalizations and all-cause hospitalizations. Conclusions: When repeat events were included, rosuvastatin was shown to reduce the risk of HFH by approximately 15% to 20%, equating to approximately 76 fewer admissions per 1,000 patients treated over a median 33 months of follow-up. Including repeat events could increase the ability to detect treatment effects in heart failure trials. © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation.
|
|
| 5. |
- Chin, K. L., et al.
(author)
-
Aspirin does not reduce the clinical benefits of the mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist eplerenone in patients with systolic heart failure and mild symptoms: an analysis of the EMPHASIS-HF study
- 2016
-
In: European journal of heart failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 18:9
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- AIMS: It is not known whether concomitant use of aspirin might attenuate the beneficial effects of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs). The purpose of this subgroup analysis was to explore the interaction between baseline aspirin treatment and the effect of eplerenone on the primary efficacy outcomes (composite of hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular mortality), its components, and safety markers [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and serum potassium >5.5 mmol/L] in the Eplerenone in Mild Patients Hospitalization and SurvIval Study in Heart Failure trial (EMPHASIS-HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with chronic heart failure, reduced ejection fraction (HFREF), and mild symptoms were enrolled in EMPHASIS-HF. We evaluated baseline characteristics according to aspirin use. We explored the interaction between aspirin and eplerenone, using Cox proportional hazards models providing adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and P-values for interaction. Of the 2737 patients randomized, 1605 patients (58.6%) were taking aspirin. The beneficial effects of eplerenone on the primary endpoint were similar in patients not treated (adjusted HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.75) or treated (adjusted HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59-0.87) with aspirin at baseline (interaction P-value = 0.19). We did not observe any significant modification of the safety markers by aspirin that was clinically meaningful. CONCLUSION: Aspirin use in patients with chronic systolic heart failure and mild symptoms did not substantially reduce the overall beneficial effects of the MRA eplerenone contrary to what has been described in some studies with ACE inhibitors.
|
|
| 6. |
- Collier, T. J., et al.
(author)
-
The impact of eplerenone at different levels of risk in patients with systolic heart failure and mild symptoms: insight from a novel risk score for prognosis derived from the EMPHASIS-HF trial
- 2013
-
In: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 34:36, s. 2823-2829
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- AIMS: Our objective was to create a simple prognostic risk score for patients with systolic heart failure and mild symptoms. We then assessed the efficacy of eplerenone across different categories of risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Eplerenone in Mild Patients Hospitalization and Survival Study in Heart Failure trial (EMPHASIS-HF) was an international randomized trial, comparing eplerenone with placebo in 2737 patients with systolic heart failure and mild symptoms. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure, over a median 2.1 years follow-up. Using multivariable Cox modelling age, sex, systolic blood pressure, estimated glomerular filtration rate, diabetes, BMI, haemoglobin, prior heart failure (HF) hospitalization, prior myocardial infarction/coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG), and heart rate were identified as strong independent risk factors. Estimates from the model were converted into a simple integer risk score which was categorized into three groups of low-, medium-, and high risk. In placebo patients, the rates (per 100 patient-years) for the primary outcome were 7.6, 19.0, and 39.4 in the low-, medium-, and high-risk groups, respectively. On eplerenone, these rates were reduced to 5.6, 12.2, and 24.2, respectively. Eplerenone was beneficial across all risk categories and the hazard ratios were similar. The absolute treatment benefit was greatest among those at highest risk. Similar patterns emerged for all-cause mortality and for all HF hospitalizations. CONCLUSION: This easy-to-use integer risk score should be of value in quantifying individual patient risk in patients with systolic HF and mild symptoms. The relative benefits of eplerenone appeared consistent across the whole spectrum of risk, including those at lower risk.
|
|
| 7. |
- Ferreira, J. P., et al.
(author)
-
Impact of Insulin Treatment on the Effect of Eplerenone: Insights From the EMPHASIS-HF Trial
- 2021
-
In: Circulation-Heart Failure. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 1941-3289 .- 1941-3297. ; 14:6
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and insulin-treated diabetes have a high risk of cardiovascular complications. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists may mitigate this risk. We aim to explore the effect of eplerenone on cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality in HFrEF patients with diabetes, including those treated with insulin in the EMPHASIS-HF trial (Eplerenone in Patients with Systolic Heart Failure and Mild Symptoms). METHODS: The primary outcome was the composite of heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death. Cox models with treatment-by-diabetes subgroup interaction terms were used. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 21 (10-33) months. Of the 2737 patients included, 623 (23%) had non-insulin-treated diabetes, 236 (9%) had insulin-treated diabetes and 1878 did not have diabetes. Patients with insulin-treated diabetes were younger, more often women, with higher body mass index, waist circumference, more frequent ischemic heart failure cause, impaired kidney function, and longer diabetes duration. Compared with patients without diabetes, those with insulintreated diabetes had a 2-fold higher risk of having a primary outcome event. The hazard ratio (95% CI) for the effect of eplerenone, compared with placebo, on the primary outcome was 0.31 (0.19-0.50) in insulin-treated diabetes, 0.69 (0.500.93) in non-insulin-treated diabetes, and 0.72 (0.58-0.88) in patients without diabetes; interaction P=0.007. The annualized number needed-to-treat-to-benefit with regards to the primary outcome was 3 (95% CI, 3-4) in patients with insulin-treated diabetes, 16 (13-19) in patients with diabetes not receiving insulin, and 26 (24-28) in patients without diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with insulin-treated diabetes experienced a greater benefit from eplerenone than those with diabetes not treated with insulin and people without diabetes.
|
|
| 8. |
- Ferreira, J. P., et al.
(author)
-
Renal function stratified dose comparisons of eplerenone versus placebo in the EMPHASIS-HF trial
- 2019
-
In: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 21:3, s. 345-351
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Current heart failure guidelines recommend target eplerenone dose of 50 mg/day. We have examined the effect of different eplerenone doses based on pre-specified renal function stratification in the Eplerenone in Mild Patients Hospitalization and Survival Study in Heart Failure (EMPHASIS-HF). Methods and results In EMPHASIS-HF, the target dose of eplerenone/placebo was stratified at randomization according to estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR): 50 mg/day if eGFR >= 50 mL/min/1.73m(2) and <= 25 mg/day if eGFR 30-49mL/min/1.73m(2). Patients remained within these dose ranges during the trial (as per stratification). The primary outcome was a composite of heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality. Eplerenone was superior to placebo within each respective eGFR stratum [eplerenone vs. placebo in the eGFR >= 50 mL/min/1.73m2 stratum: hazard ratio (HR) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-0.74; and eplerenone vs. placebo in the eGFR 30-49mL/min/1.73m(2) stratum: HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.49-0.78; P-interaction = 0.89]. Despite receiving lower eplerenone doses, patients in the eGFR 30-49mL/min/1.73m(2) stratum more often had hyperkalaemia, renal failure events, and drug discontinuation. Conclusion In EMPHASIS-HF the eplerenone dose was stratified according to renal function and the treatment effect was not influenced by renal function: 25 mg/day in patients with eGFR 30-49mL/min/1.73m(2) was as effective as 50 mg/day in patients with eGFR> = 50 mL/min/1.73m(2). However, patients with impaired renal function experienced more adverse events, despite reveiving lower eplerenone doses. Current guidelines do not recommend tailoring the dose of eplereone according to renal function but the current data suggest they should.
|
|
| 9. |
- Olivier, A., et al.
(author)
-
Effect of eplerenone in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: potential effect modification by abdominal obesity: Insight from the EMPHASIS-HF trial
- 2017
-
In: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 19:9, s. 1186-1197
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- AIMS: An excessive production of aldosterone influences outcome in patients with heart failure (HF) and in obese patients. Findings from laboratory studies suggest that chronic aldosterone blockade maybe more beneficial in abdominally obese HF-prone rats. In the current study, we investigated if the clinical response to a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist in mildly symptomatic HF patients varied by abdominal obesity. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 2587 NYHA class II, reduced ejection fraction HF (HFrEF) patients enrolled in the EMPHASIS-HF trial were randomly assigned to eplerenone and placebo. In this post hoc analysis, patients were categorized according to waist circumference (WC) (normal if WC < 102 cm in men and < 88 cm in women; abdominal obesity if WC >/= 102 cm in men and >/= 88 cm women). The potential statistical interaction between the treatment and WC was assessed on the primary endpoint of death from cardiovascular causes or hospitalization for HF and other secondary endpoints. Over a median follow-up of 21 months, a significant benefit of eplerenone for the primary outcome was noted in both normal [hazard ratio (HR) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.98, P = 0.03] and increased (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.37-0.63, P < 0.0001) WC subgroups, but the latter patients appeared to receive greater benefit than patients with normal WC (P for interaction = 0.01). This suggests a significant quantitative (treatment effect varies in magnitude by subgroup, but is always in same direction) rather than a qualitative interaction (direction of the treatment effect varies by subgroup) between eplerenone and WC in the adjusted analysis. Mean doses of eplerenone, blood pressure and serum potassium changes and adverse events were similar between WC subgroups. CONCLUSION: In EMPHASIS-HF, eplerenone improved outcomes in HFrEF patients with and without abdominal obesity, although the benefit appeared to be more pronounced among those with abdominal obesity. The findings are potentially hypothesis generating and need to be replicated in other HFrEF populations.
|
|
| 10. |
- Perez, A. C., et al.
(author)
-
Thyroid-Stimulating Hormone and Clinical Outcomes: The CORONA Trial (Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Study in Heart Failure)
- 2014
-
In: JACC: Heart Failure. - : Elsevier BV. - 2213-1779. ; 2:1, s. 35-40
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: This study sought to examine the association between thyroid status and clinical outcomes in patients in the CORONA (Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure) study. Background: Hypo- and hyperthyroidism were associated with worse clinical outcomes in the SCD-HeFT (Sudden Cardiac DeathinHeart Failure Trial). Methods: In CORONA, 4,987 patients underwent baseline thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) measurement, 237 of which(4.8%) were receiving thyroid replacement therapy (TRT). Patients were classified as euthyroid (TSH: 0.3 to 5.0μU/ml,and no TRT), hyperthyroid (<0.3 μU/ml and no TRT), or hypothyroid (>5.0 μU/ml and no TRT). The outcome composites of cardiovascular (CV) death or hospitalization for heart failure (HF), the components of this composite, and all-cause death were compared among hyperthyroid, hypothyroid, and euthyroid states, using multivariable models adjusting for previously reported prognostic variables. Results: A total of 91.3% of patients were euthyroid, 5.0% were hypothyroid, and 3.7% were hyperthyroid. Compared with euthyroid patients, hypothyroid patients were more likely to have a history of stroke, had worse renal function andhigher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels, were more likely to be treated with an antiarrhythmic drug (or have an implantable cardioverter defibrillator), and were less likely to smoke or be treated with a beta-blocker or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker. In univariate analyses, hypothyroidism was associated with an increased risk of the composite outcome of CV death or HF hospitalization (hazard ratio: 1.29; 95% confidence interval: 1.07 to 1.57; p= 0.008), as well as all-cause death (HR: 1.36; 95% confidence interval: 1.03 to 1.76; p= 0.004). However, after adjustment for other known predictors of outcome, the associations were weakened, and when NT-proBNP was added to the models, the association between hypothyroidism and all outcomes was eliminated. Conclusions: Thyroid status is not an independent predictor of outcome in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. (Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Study in Heart Failure [CORONA]; NCT00206310). © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation.
|
|
