Effect of Semaglutide on Cardiac Structure and Function in Patients With Obesity-Related Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is associated with adverse cardiac remodeling and is a key driver for the development and progression of heart failure (HF). Once-weekly semaglutide (2.4 mg) has been shown to improve HF-related symptoms and physical limitations, body weight, and exercise function in patients with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), but the effects of semaglutide on cardiac structure and function in this population remain unknown. OBJECTIVES: In this echocardiography substudy of the STEP-HFpEF Program, we evaluated treatment effects of once-weekly semaglutide (2.4 mg) vs placebo on cardiac structure and function. METHODS: Echocardiography at randomization and 52 weeks was performed in 491 of 1,145 participants (43%) in the STEP-HFpEF Program (pooled STEP-HFpEF [Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with Obesity and HFpEF] and STEP-HFpEF DM [Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with Obesity, HFpEF, and Type 2 Diabetes] trials). The prespecified primary outcome was change in left atrial (LA) volume, with changes in other echocardiography parameters evaluated as secondary outcomes. Treatment effects of semaglutide vs placebo were assessed using analysis of covariance stratified by trial and body mass index, with adjustment for baseline parameter values. RESULTS: Overall, baseline clinical and echocardiographic characteristics were balanced among those receiving semaglutide (n = 253) and placebo (n = 238). Between baseline and 52 weeks, semaglutide attenuated progression of LA remodeling (estimated mean difference [EMD] in LA volume, -6.13 mL; 95% CI: -9.85 to -2.41 mL; P = 0.0013) and right ventricular (RV) enlargement (EMD in RV end-diastolic area: -1.99 cm2; 95% CI: -3.60 to -0.38 cm2; P = 0.016; EMD in RV end-systolic area: -1.41 cm2; 95% CI: -2.42 to -0.40] cm2; P = 0.0064) compared with placebo. Semaglutide additionally improved E-wave velocity (EMD: -5.63 cm/s; 95% CI: -9.42 to -1.84 cm/s; P = 0.0037), E/A (early/late mitral inflow velocity) ratio (EMD: -0.14; 95% CI: -0.24 to -0.04; P = 0.0075), and E/e' (early mitral inflow velocity/early diastolic mitral annular velocity) average (EMD: -0.79; 95% CI: -1.60 to 0.01; P = 0.05). These associations were not modified by diabetes or atrial fibrillation status. Semaglutide did not significantly affect left ventricular dimensions, mass, or systolic function. Greater weight loss with semaglutide was associated with greater reduction in LA volume (Pinteraction = 0.033) but not with changes in E-wave velocity, E/e' average, or RV end-diastolic area. CONCLUSIONS: In the STEP-HFpEF Program echocardiography substudy, semaglutide appeared to improve adverse cardiac remodeling compared with placebo, further suggesting that treatment with semaglutide may be disease modifying among patients with obesity-related HFpEF. (Research Study to Investigate How Well Semaglutide Works in People Living With Heart Failure and Obesity [STEP-HFpEF]; NCT04788511; Research Study to Look at How Well Semaglutide Works in People Living With Heart Failure, Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes [STEP-HFpEF DM]; NCT04916470).

Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic overlap in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: Cardiac structure and function, clinical outcomes, and response to sacubitril/valsartan in PARAGON-HF.

AIMS: Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic (CKM) multimorbidity is prevalent among individuals with heart failure (HF), but whether cardiac structure and function, clinical outcomes, and treatment response to sacubitril/valsartan vary in relation to CKM status is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this PARAGON-HF post-hoc analysis, we evaluated the impact of CKM multimorbidity (atherosclerotic cardiovascular [CV] disease, chronic kidney disease, and type 2 diabetes) on cardiac structure and function, clinical outcomes, and treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan versus valsartan. The primary outcome was a composite of total HF hospitalizations and CV death. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary outcome and a composite kidney outcome (sustained estimated glomerular filtration rate reduction of ≥50%, end-stage kidney disease, or kidney-related death). At baseline, 35.2% had one CKM condition, 33.3% had two, 15.9% had three, and only 15.6% had HF alone. CKM multimorbidity was associated with higher septal and posterior wall thickness, lower global longitudinal strain, higher E/e', and worse right ventricular function. Total HF hospitalizations or CV death increased with greater CKM multimorbidity, with the highest relative risk observed with three CKM conditions (rate ratio 3.06, 95% confidence interval 2.33-4.03), compared with HF alone. Treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan were consistent irrespective of the number of CKM conditions for the primary endpoint (pinteraction = 0.75), CV death (pinteraction = 0.82), total HF hospitalizations (pinteraction = 0.67), and the composite kidney endpoint (pinteraction = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic multimorbidity was common in PARAGON-HF and associated with adverse changes in cardiac structure and function and with a stepwise increase in risk of clinical outcomes. Treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan were consistent irrespective of CKM burden. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01920711.

Effect of dapagliflozin in patients with diabetes and heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction according to background glucose-lowering therapy: A pre-specified analysis of the DELIVER trial.

AIMS: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and heart failure (HF) frequently coexist, but whether clinical outcomes and treatment effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) vary in relation to background glucose-lowering therapy (GLT) in this population is uncertain. METHODS AND RESULTS: DELIVER randomized patients with HF and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >40% to dapagliflozin or placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of worsening HF (HF hospitalization or urgent HF visit) or cardiovascular death. In this pre-specified analysis of participants with T2D, treatment effects were assessed by number and class of background GLT(s). Of 3150 participants with T2D at baseline, 22.9% were on no GLT, 36.5% were treated with 1 GLT, and 40.6% with ≥2 GLTs. During follow-up (median: 2.3 years), treatment benefits of dapagliflozin (vs. placebo) on the primary outcome were consistent irrespective of the number of background GLTs (0 GLTs: hazard ratio [HR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-1.00; 1 GLT: HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.80-1.34; ≥2 GLTs: HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.90; pinteraction = 0.59). Similar findings were observed among participants with (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59-0.92) and without background metformin use (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.72-1.11; pinteraction = 0.22) and in participants with (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.69-1.16) and without background insulin use (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.95; pinteraction = 0.45). Dapagliflozin was well-tolerated irrespective of the number of background GLTs. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin safely and consistently improved clinical outcomes among individuals with T2D and HF with LVEF >40% irrespective of the number and class of background GLTs, and the benefits were not influenced by concomitant metformin or insulin use. These data bolster contemporary guidelines supporting first-line SGLT2i among individuals with T2D and HF, irrespective of background GLT.

Kidney Outcomes Among Medicare Beneficiaries After Hospitalization for Heart Failure.

Importance: Kidney health has received increasing focus as part of comprehensive heart failure (HF) treatment efforts. However, the occurrence of clinically relevant kidney outcomes in contemporary populations with HF has not been well studied. Objective: To examine rates of incident dialysis and acute kidney injury (AKI) among Medicare beneficiaries after HF hospitalization. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study evaluated adults aged 65 years or older who were hospitalized for HF across 372 sites in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure registry in the US between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018. Patients younger than 65 years or requiring dialysis either during or prior to hospitalization were excluded. Data were analyzed from May 4, 2021, to March 8, 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was inpatient dialysis initiation in the year after HF hospitalization and was ascertained via linkage with Medicare claims data. Other all-cause and cause-specific hospitalizations were also evaluated. The covariate-adjusted association between discharge estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and 1-year postdischarge outcomes was examined using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: Overall, among 85 298 patients included in the analysis (mean [SD] age, 80 [9] years; 53% women) mean (SD) left ventricular ejection fraction was 47% (16%) and mean (SD) eGFR was 53 (29) mL/min per 1.73 m2; 54 010 (63%) had an eGFR less than 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2. By 1 year after HF hospitalization, 6% had progressed to dialysis, 7% had progressed to dialysis or end-stage kidney disease, and 7% had been readmitted for AKI. Incident dialysis increased steeply with lower discharge eGFR category: compared with patients with an eGFR of 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2 or more, individuals with an eGFR of 45 to less than 60 and of less than 30 mL/min per 1.73 m2 had higher rates of dialysis readmission (45 to <60: adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 2.16 [95% CI, 1.86-2.51]; <30: AHR, 28.46 [95% CI, 25.25-32.08]). Lower discharge eGFR (per 10 mL/min per 1.73 m2 decrease) was independently associated with a higher rate of readmission for dialysis (AHR, 2.23; 95% CI, 2.14-2.32), dialysis or end-stage kidney disease (AHR, 2.34; 95% CI, 2.24-2.44), and AKI (AHR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.23-1.27), with similar findings for all-cause mortality, all-cause readmission, and HF readmission. Baseline left ventricular ejection fraction did not modify the covariate-adjusted association between lower discharge eGFR and kidney outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, older adults with HF had substantial risk of kidney complications, with an estimated 6% progressing to dialysis in the year after HF hospitalization. These findings emphasize the need for health care approaches prioritizing kidney health in this high-risk population.

Prevalence of Cardiovascular-Kidney-Metabolic Syndrome Stages in US Adults, 2011-2020.

This cross-sectional study assesses the prevalence and temporal evolution of cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome stages.

Baseline characteristics of patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction: The FINEARTS-HF trial.

AIMS: To describe the baseline characteristics of participants in the FINEARTS-HF trial, contextualized with prior trials including patients with heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF). The FINEARTS-HF trial is comparing the effects of the non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist finerenone with placebo in reducing cardiovascular death and total worsening HF events in patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with symptomatic HF, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥40%, estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥ 25 ml/min/1.73 m2, elevated natriuretic peptide levels and evidence of structural heart disease were enrolled and randomized to finerenone titrated to a maximum of 40 mg once daily or matching placebo. We validly randomized 6001 patients to finerenone or placebo (mean age 72 ± 10 years, 46% women). The majority were New York Heart Association functional class II (69%). The baseline mean LVEF was 53 ± 8% (range 34-84%); 36% of participants had a LVEF <50% and 64% had a LVEF ≥50%. The median N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) was 1041 (interquartile range 449-1946) pg/ml. A total of 1219 (20%) patients were enrolled during or within 7 days of a worsening HF event, and 3247 (54%) patients were enrolled within 3 months of a worsening HF event. Compared with prior large-scale HFmrEF/HFpEF trials, FINEARTS-HF participants were more likely to have recent (within 6 months) HF hospitalization and greater symptoms and functional limitations. Further, concomitant medications included a larger percentage of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors than previous trials. CONCLUSIONS: FINEARTS-HF has enrolled a broad range of high-risk patients with HFmrEF and HFpEF. The trial will determine the safety and efficacy of finerenone in this population.

Contemporary American and European Guidelines for Heart Failure Management: JACC: Heart Failure Guideline Comparison.

This review serves to compare contemporary clinical practice recommendations for the management of heart failure (HF), as codified in the 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline, the 2022 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA)/Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA) guideline, and the 2023 focused update of the 2021 ESC document. Overall, these guidelines aim to solidify significant advances throughout the HF continuum since the publication of previous full guideline iterations (2013 and 2016 for the ACC/AHA and ESC, respectively). All guidelines provide new recommendations for an increasingly complex landscape of HF care, with focus on primary HF prevention, HF stages, rapid initiation and optimization of evidence-based pharmacotherapies, overlapping cardiac and noncardiac comorbidities, device-based therapies, and management pathways for special groups of patients, including those with cardiac amyloidosis. Importantly, the ACC/AHA/HFSA document features special emphasis on HF risk prediction and screening, cost/value, social determinants of health, and health care disparities. The review discusses major similarities and differences between these recent guidelines and guideline updates, as well as their potential downstream implications for clinical care.

Qualitative evaluation of artificial intelligence-generated weight management diet plans.

Importance: The transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI), particularly via large language models, is increasingly being manifested in healthcare. Dietary interventions are foundational to weight management efforts, but whether AI techniques are presently capable of generating clinically applicable diet plans has not been evaluated. Objective: Our study sought to evaluate the potential of personalized AI-generated weight-loss diet plans for clinical applications by employing a survey-based assessment conducted by experts in the fields of obesity medicine and clinical nutrition. Design setting and participants: We utilized ChatGPT (4.0) to create weight-loss diet plans and selected two control diet plans from tertiary medical centers for comparison. Dietitians, physicians, and nurse practitioners specializing in obesity medicine or nutrition were invited to provide feedback on the AI-generated plans. Each plan was assessed blindly based on its effectiveness, balanced-ness, comprehensiveness, flexibility, and applicability. Personalized plans for hypothetical patients with specific health conditions were also evaluated. Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcomes measured included the indistinguishability of the AI diet plan from human-created plans, and the potential of personalized AI-generated diet plans for real-world clinical applications. Results: Of 95 participants, 67 completed the survey and were included in the final analysis. No significant differences were found among the three weight-loss diet plans in any evaluation category. Among the 14 experts who believed that they could identify the AI plan, only five did so correctly. In an evaluation involving 57 experts, the AI-generated personalized weight-loss diet plan was assessed, with scores above neutral for all evaluation variables. Several limitations, of the AI-generated plans were highlighted, including conflicting dietary considerations, lack of affordability, and insufficient specificity in recommendations, such as exact portion sizes. These limitations suggest that refining inputs could enhance the quality and applicability of AI-generated diet plans. Conclusion: Despite certain limitations, our study highlights the potential of AI-generated diet plans for clinical applications. AI-generated dietary plans were frequently indistinguishable from diet plans widely used at major tertiary medical centers. Although further refinement and prospective studies are needed, these findings illustrate the potential of AI in advancing personalized weight-centric care.