| 1. |
|
|
| 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. |
- McMurray, J., et al.
(författare)
-
A putative placebo analysis of the effects of LCZ696 on clinical outcomes in heart failure
- 2015
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 36:7, s. 434-439
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- AIMS: Although active-controlled trials with renin-angiotensin inhibitors are ethically mandated in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, clinicians and regulators often want to know how the experimental therapy would perform compared with placebo. The angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 was compared with enalapril in PARADIGM-HF. We made indirect comparisons of the effects of LCZ696 with putative placebos. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used the treatment-arm of the Studies Of Left Ventricular Dysfunction (SOLVD-T) as the reference trial for comparison of an ACE inhibitor to placebo and the Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity-Alternative trial (CHARM-Alternative) as the reference trial for comparison of an ARB to placebo. The hazard ratio of LCZ696 vs. a putative placebo was estimated through the product of the hazard ratio of LCZ696 vs. enalapril (active-control) and that of the historical active-control (enalapril or candesartan) vs. placebo. For the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization in PARADIGM-HF, the relative risk reduction with LCZ696 vs. a putative placebo from SOLVD-T was 43% (95%CI 34-50%; P < 0.0001) with similarly large effects on cardiovascular death (34%, 21-44%; P < 0.0001) and heart failure hospitalization (49%, 39-58%; P < 0.0001). For all-cause mortality, the reduction compared with a putative placebo was 28% (95%CI 15-39%; P < 0.0001). Putative placebo analyses based on CHARM-Alternative gave relative risk reductions of 39% (95%CI 27-48%; P < 0.0001) for the composite outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization, 32% (95%CI 16-45%; P < 0.0001) for cardiovascular death, 46% (33-56%; P < 0.0001) for heart failure hospitalization, and 26% (95%CI 11-39%; P < 0.0001) for all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION: These indirect comparisons of LCZ696 with a putative placebo show that the strategy of combined angiotensin receptor blockade and neprilysin inhibition led to striking reductions in cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, as well as heart failure hospitalization. These benefits were obtained even though LCZ696 was added to comprehensive background beta-blocker and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist therapy.
|
|
| 4. |
- Packer, M., et al.
(författare)
-
Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibition Compared With Enalapril on the Risk of Clinical Progression in Surviving Patients With Heart Failure
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Circulation. - 0009-7322. ; 131, s. 54-61
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: -Clinical trials in heart failure have focused on the improvement in symptoms or decreases in the risk of death and other cardiovascular events. Little is known about the effect of drugs on the risk of clinical deterioration in surviving patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: -We compared the angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 (400 mg daily) with the angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibitor enalapril (20 mg daily) in 8399 patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction in a double-blind trial. The analyses focused on prespecified measures of nonfatal clinical deterioration. In comparison with the enalapril group, fewer LCZ696-treated patients required intensification of medical treatment for heart failure (520 versus 604; hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.94; P=0.003) or an emergency department visit for worsening heart failure (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.85; P=0.001). The patients in the LCZ696 group had 23% fewer hospitalizations for worsening heart failure (851 versus 1079; P<0.001) and were less likely to require intensive care (768 versus 879; 18% rate reduction, P=0.005), to receive intravenous positive inotropic agents (31% risk reduction, P<0.001), and to have implantation of a heart failure device or cardiac transplantation (22% risk reduction, P=0.07). The reduction in heart failure hospitalization with LCZ696 was evident within the first 30 days after randomization. Worsening of symptom scores in surviving patients was consistently more common in the enalapril group. LCZ696 led to an early and sustained reduction in biomarkers of myocardial wall stress and injury (N-terminal pro-Btype natriuretic peptide and troponin) versus enalapril. CONCLUSIONS: -Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition prevents the clinical progression of surviving patients with heart failure more effectively than angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition. Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01035255.
|
|
| 5. |
- Rohde, L. E., et al.
(författare)
-
Cardiac and Noncardiac Disease Burden and Treatment Effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan Insights From a Combined PARAGON-HF and PARADIGM-HF Analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Circulation-Heart Failure. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 1941-3289 .- 1941-3297. ; 14:3, s. 361-371
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The net clinical benefit of cardiac disease-modifying drugs might be influenced by the interaction of different domains of disease burden. We assessed the relative contribution of cardiac, comorbid, and demographic factors in heart failure (HF) and how their interplay might influence HF prognosis and efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction. Methods: We combined data from 2 global trials that evaluated the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan compared with a renin-angiotensin antagonist in symptomatic HF patients (PARADIGM-HF [Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With an Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure; n=8399] and PARAGON-HF [Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor With Angiotensin Receptors Blockers Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction; n=4796]). We decomposed the previously validated Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure risk score into cardiac (left ventricular ejection fraction, New York Heart Association class, blood pressure, time since HF diagnosis, HF medications), noncardiac comorbid (body mass index, creatinine, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, smoking), and demographic (age, gender) categories. Based on these domains, an index representing the balance of cardiac to noncardiac comorbid burden was created (cardiac-comorbid index). Clinical outcomes were time to first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular deaths and all-cause mortality. Results: Higher scores of the cardiac domain were observed in PARADIGM-HF (10 [7-13] versus 5 [3-6], P<0.001) and higher scores of the demographic domain in PARAGON-HF (10 [8-13] versus 5 [2-9], P<0.001). In PARADIGM-HF, the contribution of the cardiac domain to clinical outcomes was greater than the noncardiac domain (P<0.001), while in PARAGON-HF the attributable risk of the comorbid and demographic categories predominated. Individual scores from each sub-domain were linearly associated with the risk of clinical outcomes (P<0.001). Beneficial effects of sacubitril/valsartan were observed in patients with preponderance of cardiac over noncardiac comorbid burden (cardiac-comorbid index >5 points), suggesting a significant treatment effect modification (interaction P<0.05 for both outcomes). Conclusions: Domains of disease burden are clinically relevant features that influence the prognosis and treatment of patients with HF. The therapeutic benefits of sacubitril/valsartan vary according to the balance of components of disease burden, across different ranges of left ventricular ejection fraction.
|
|
| 6. |
- Shen, L., et al.
(författare)
-
Contemporary Characteristics and Outcomes in Chagasic Heart Failure Compared With Other Nonischemic and Ischemic Cardiomyopathy
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Circulation. Heart failure. - 1941-3289 .- 1941-3297. ; 10:11
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Chagas' disease is an important cause of cardiomyopathy in Latin America. We aimed to compare clinical characteristics and outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction caused by Chagas' disease, with other etiologies, in the era of modern HF therapies. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study included 2552 Latin American patients randomized in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) and ATMOSPHERE (Aliskiren Trial to Minimize Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure) trials. The investigator-reported etiology was categorized as Chagasic, other nonischemic, or ischemic cardiomyopathy. The outcomes of interest included the composite of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization and its components and death from any cause. Unadjusted and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were performed to compare outcomes by pathogenesis. There were 195 patients with Chagasic HF with reduced ejection fraction, 1300 with other nonischemic cardiomyopathy, and 1057 with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Compared with other etiologies, Chagasic patients were more often female, younger, and had lower prevalence of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and renal impairment (but had higher prevalence of stroke and pacemaker implantation) and had worse health-related quality of life. The rates of the composite outcome were 17.2, 12.5, and 11.4 per 100 person-years for Chagasic, other nonischemic, and ischemic patients, respectively-adjusted hazard ratio for Chagasic versus other nonischemic: 1.49 (95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.94; P=0.003) and Chagasic versus ischemic: 1.55 (1.18-2.04; P=0.002). The rates of all-cause mortality were also higher. CONCLUSIONS: Despite younger age, less comorbidity, and comprehensive use of conventional HF therapies, patients with Chagasic HF with reduced ejection fraction continue to have worse quality of life and higher hospitalization and mortality rates compared with other etiologies. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: PARADIGM-HF: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01035255; ATMOSPHERE: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00853658.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Abdul-Rahim, A. H., et al.
(författare)
-
Risk of stroke in chronic heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction, but without atrial fibrillation: analysis of the CHARM-Preserved and I-Preserve trials
- 2017
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 38:10, s. 742-750
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims The incidence and predictors of stroke in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF), but without atrial fibrillation (AF), are unknown. We described the incidence of stroke in HF-PEF patients with and without AF and predictors of stroke in those without AF. Methods and results We pooled data from the CHARM-Preserved and I-Preserve trials. Using Cox regression, we derived a model for stroke in patients without AF in this cohort and compared its performance with a published model in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF)-predictive variables: age, body mass index, New York Heart Association class, history of stroke, and insulin-treated diabetes. The two stroke models were compared and Kaplan-Meier curves for stroke estimated. The risk model was validated in a third HF-PEF trial. Of the 6701 patients, 4676 did not have AF. Stroke occurred in 124 (6.1%) with AF and in 171 (3.7%) without AF (rates 1.80 and 1.00 per 100 patient-years, respectively). There was no difference in performance of the stroke model derived in the HF-PEF cohort and the published HF-REF model (c-index 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.57-0.84 vs. 0.73, 0.59-0.85, respectively) as the predictive variables overlapped. The model performed well in the validation cohort (0.86, 0.62-0.99). The rate of stroke in patients in the upper third of risk approximated to that in patients with AF (1.60 and 1.80 per 100 patient-years, respectively). Conclusions A small number of clinical variables identify a subset of patients with HF-PEF, but without AF, at elevated risk of stroke.
|
|
| 9. |
- Bouabdallaoui, N, et al.
(författare)
-
Growth differentiation factor-15 is not modified by sacubitril/valsartan and is an independent marker of risk in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: the PARADIGM-HF trial
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : Wiley. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 20:12, s. 1701-1709
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- AIMS: Growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) is associated with adverse prognosis in cardiovascular (CV) and non-CV diseases. We evaluated the association of GDF-15 with CV and non-CV outcomes in the PARADIGM-HF trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 1935 patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in PARADIGM-HF, median GDF-15 values were elevated and similar in sacubitril/valsartan and enalapril patients (1626 ng/L and 1690 ng/L, respectively). Diabetes, age, creatinine, high-sensitive troponin T, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and New York Heart Association class III/IV were most strongly associated with elevated GDF-15 values (all P < 0.001) (adjusted R(2) = 0.3857). Baseline GDF-15 and changes in GDF-15 at both 1 month and 8 months (log-transformed) were associated with subsequent mortality and CV events. Each 20% increment in baseline GDF-15 value was associated with a higher risk of mortality [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.18, P < 0.001], the combined endpoint of CV death or hospitalization for heart failure (adjusted HR 1.09, 95% CI 1.05-1.14, P < 0.001) and heart failure death (adjusted HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.05-1.28, P < 0.001). Changes in GDF-15 were not influenced by assigned therapy (all P-values >/= 0.1). CONCLUSION: In patients with ambulatory HFrEF, GDF-15 is not modified by sacubitril/valsartan and is strongly associated with mortality and CV outcomes, suggesting that GDF-15 is a marker of poor outcomes in these patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01035255.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
