Inflammation in Obesity-Related HFpEF: The STEP-HFpEF Program.

BACKGROUND: Inflammation is thought to be an important mechanism for the development and progression of obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). In the STEP-HFpEF Program, once-weekly 2.4 mg semaglutide improved heart failure-related symptoms, physical limitations, and exercise function, reduced the levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), a biomarker of inflammation, and reduced body weight in participants with obesity-related HFpEF. However, neither the prevalence nor the clinical characteristics of patients who have various magnitudes of inflammation in the context of obesity-related HFpEF have been well described. Furthermore, whether the beneficial effects of semaglutide on the various HF efficacy endpoints in the STEP-HFpEF Program are modified by the baseline levels of inflammation has not been fully established. Finally, the relationship between weight reduction and changes in CRP across the STEP-HFpEF Program have not been fully defined. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to: 1) evaluate baseline characteristics and clinical features of patients with obesity-related HFpEF that have various levels of inflammation in the STEP-HFpEF Program; 2) determine if the effects of weekly semaglutide 2.4 mg vs placebo across all key outcomes are influenced by baseline levels of inflammation assessed by CRP levels; and 3) determine the relationship between change in CRP and weight loss in the STEP-HFpEF Program. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of pooled data from 2 international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trials (STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM). The outcomes were change in the dual primary endpoints (health status [measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS)] and body weight) from baseline to 52 weeks according to baseline CRP levels. Additional efficacy endpoints included change in 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), a hierarchical composite endpoint that included death, heart failure events, and differences in the change in the KCCQ-CSS and 6MWD, and levels of CRP in semaglutide- vs placebo-treated patients. Patients were stratified into 3 categories based on baseline CRP levels (<2, ≥2 to <10, and ≥10 mg/L). RESULTS: In total, 1,145 patients were randomized, of which 71% of patients had evidence of inflammation (CRP ≥2 mg/L). At baseline, those with higher levels of inflammation were younger, were more likely to be female, and had higher body mass index, worse health status (KCCQ-CSS), and shorter 6MWD. Semaglutide vs placebo led to reductions in HF-related symptoms and physical limitations as well as body weight, and to improvements in 6MWD and the hierarchical composite endpoint that were consistent across baseline CRP categories (all P interaction nonsignificant). Semaglutide also reduced CRP to a greater extent than placebo regardless of baseline CRP levels (P interaction = 0.32). Change in CRP from baseline to 52 weeks was similar regardless of the magnitude of weight loss (P interaction = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: Inflammation is highly prevalent in obesity-related HFpEF. Semaglutide consistently improved HF-related symptoms, physical limitations, and exercise function, and reduced body weight across the categories of baseline CRP. Semaglutide also reduced inflammation, regardless of either baseline CRP or magnitude of weight loss during the trials. (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]).

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).

Finerenone in Heart Failure and Chronic Kidney Disease with Type 2 Diabetes: the FINE-HEART pooled analysis of cardiovascular, kidney, and mortality outcomes.

Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome is an emerging entity that connects cardiovascular diseases, chronic kidney disease, and diabetes. The non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, finerenone, has been studied in three prospective randomized clinical trials of patients with cardio-kidney-metabolic syndrome: FIDELIO-DKD, FIGARO-DKD, and FINEARTS-HF. In light of the strong epidemiological overlap and shared mechanistic drivers of clinical outcomes across cardio-kidney-metabolic syndrome, we summarize the efficacy and safety of finerenone on cardiovascular, kidney, and mortality outcomes in this prespecified participant-level pooled analysis. The three trials included 18,991 participants (mean age 67 ± 10 years; 35% women). During 2.9 years median follow-up, the primary outcome of cardiovascular death occurred in 421 (4.4%) assigned to finerenone and 471 (5.0%) assigned to placebo (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.78-1.01; P = 0.076). Death from any cause occurred in 1,042 (11.0%) participants in the finerenone arm and 1,136 (12.0%) in the placebo arm (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.84-0.99; P = 0.027). Finerenone further reduced the risk of HF hospitalization (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.75-0.92; P < 0.001) and the composite kidney outcome (HR 0.80; 95% CI 0.72-0.90; P < 0.001). While this pooled analysis failed to demonstrate significant reductions in cardiovascular death, finerenone was associated with significantly lower deaths of any cause, cardiovascular events, and kidney outcomes. PROSPERO identifier: CRD42024570467.

Finerenone in Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists reduce morbidity and mortality among patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction, but their efficacy in those with heart failure and mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction has not been established. Data regarding the efficacy and safety of the nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist finerenone in patients with heart failure and mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction are needed. METHODS: In this international, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or greater, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive finerenone (at a maximum dose of 20 mg or 40 mg once daily) or matching placebo, in addition to usual therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of total worsening heart failure events (with an event defined as a first or recurrent unplanned hospitalization or urgent visit for heart failure) and death from cardiovascular causes. The components of the primary outcome and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 32 months, 1083 primary-outcome events occurred in 624 of 3003 patients in the finerenone group, and 1283 primary-outcome events occurred in 719 of 2998 patients in the placebo group (rate ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 0.95; P = 0.007). The total number of worsening heart failure events was 842 in the finerenone group and 1024 in the placebo group (rate ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.94; P = 0.006). The percentage of patients who died from cardiovascular causes was 8.1% and 8.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.11). Finerenone was associated with an increased risk of hyperkalemia and a reduced risk of hypokalemia. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure and mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, finerenone resulted in a significantly lower rate of a composite of total worsening heart failure events and death from cardiovascular causes than placebo. (Funded by Bayer; FINEARTS-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04435626.).

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in heart failure: an individual patient level meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) reduce hospitalisations and death in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but the benefit in patients with heart failure and mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) or heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is unclear. We evaluated the effect of MRAs in four trials that enrolled patients with heart failure across the range of ejection fraction. METHODS: This is a prespecified, individual patient level meta-analysis of the RALES (spironolactone) and EMPHASIS-HF (eplerenone) trials, which enrolled patients with HFrEF, and of the TOPCAT (spironolactone) and FINEARTS-HF (finerenone) trials, which enrolled patients with HFmrEF or HFpEF. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis was a composite of time to first hospitalisation for heart failure or cardiovascular death. We also estimated the effect of MRAs on components of this composite, total (first or repeat) heart failure hospitalisations (with and without cardiovascular deaths), and all-cause death. Safety outcomes were also assessed, including serum creatinine, estimated glomerular filtration rate, serum potassium, and systolic blood pressure. An interaction between trials and treatment was tested to examine the heterogeneity of effect in these populations. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42024541487. FINDINGS: 13 846 patients were included in the four trials. MRAs reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalisation (hazard ratio 0·77 [95% CI 0·72-0·83]). There was a statistically significant interaction by trials and treatment (p for interaction=0·0012) due to the greater efficacy in HFrEF (0·66 [0·59-0·73]) compared with HFmrEF or HFpEF (0·87 [0·79-0·95]). We observed significant reductions in heart failure hospitalisation in the HFrEF trials (0·63 [0·55-0·72]) and the HFmrEF or HFpEF trials (0·82 [0·74-0·91]). The same pattern was observed for total heart failure hospitalisations with or without cardiovascular death. Cardiovascular death was reduced in the HFrEF trials (0·72 [0·63-0·82]) but not in the HFmrEF or HFpEF trials (0·92 [0·80-1·05]). All-cause death was also reduced in the HFrEF trials (0·73 [0·65-0·83]) but not in the HFmrEF or HFpEF trials (0·94 [0·85-1·03]). With an MRA, the risk of hyperkalaemia was doubled compared with placebo (odds ratio 2·27 [95% CI 2·02-2·56]), but the incidence of serious hyperkalaemia (serum potassium >6·0 mmol/L) was low (2·9% vs 1·4%); the risk of hypokalaemia (potassium <3·5 mmol/L) was halved (0·51 [0·45-0·57]; 7% vs 14%). INTERPRETATION: Steroidal MRAs reduce the risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalisation in patients with HFrEF and non-steroidal MRAs reduce this risk in patients with HFmrEF or HFpEF. FUNDING: None.

Patiromer-Facilitated Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Inhibitor Utilization in Patients With Heart Failure With or Without Comorbid Chronic Kidney Disease: Subgroup Analysis of DIAMOND Randomized Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASis; including mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists [MRAs]) benefits are greatest in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD); however, the risk of hyperkalemia (HK) is high. METHODS: The DIAMOND trial (NCT03888066) assessed the ability of patiromer to control serum potassium (sK+) in patients with HFrEF with/without CKD. Prior to randomization (double-blind withdrawal, 1:1), patients on patiromer had to achieve ≥50% recommended doses of RAASi and 50 mg/day of MRA with normokalemia during a run-in period. The present analysis assessed the effect of baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in subgroups of ≥/<60, ≥/<45 (prespecified), and ≥/<30 mL/min/1.73 m2 (added post hoc). RESULTS: In total, 81.3%, 78.9%, and 81.1% of patients with eGFR <60, <45, and <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 at screening achieved RAASi/MRA targets. A greater efficacy of patiromer vs placebo to control sK+ in patients with more advanced CKD was reported (p-interaction ≤ 0.027 for all eGFR subgroups). Greater effects on secondary endpoints were observed with patiromer vs placebo in patients with eGFR <60 and <45 mL/min/1.73 m2. Adverse effects were similar between patiromer and placebo across subgroups. CONCLUSION: Patiromer enabled use of RAASi, controlled sK+, and minimized HK risk in patients with HFrEF, with greater effect sizes for most endpoints noted in patient subgroups with lower eGFR. Patiromer was well tolerated by patients in all eGFR subgroups.

Prognostic role of gait speed in worsening heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Worsening Heart Failure (WHF) is associated with adverse prognosis. Identifying novel prognostic markers in WHF is crucial. Gait speed (GS), a validated frailty index, is an easily obtainable parameter that may aid in reclassifying the risk of HF patients. We assessed the independent prognostic role of GS in WHF patients. METHODS: We studied 171 patients with chronic HF with worsening congestion symptoms and inadequate response to standard therapies, requiring intravenous diuretic treatment. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality or HF hospitalization. We assessed the association and the incremental value of GS, as compared to other clinical confounders, with the primary outcome. RESULTS: The mean age was 76±11 years, 66 % were male, median BNP was 481 pg/ml, and median ejection fraction was 40 %. Over a median follow-up of 11.3 months, 71 events occurred. Lower GS was significantly associated with a higher risk of events (HR of 4.03, 95 % CI 2.25-7.21), along with neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, BNP, QRS duration, natremia, and previous myocardial infarction. When added to the MAGGIC risk score and the other significant confounders identified, GS significantly enhanced the model risk prediction (Harrell's C-index 0.75 vs 0.71, p < 0.001). At Classification And Regression Tree analysis, GS≤0.8 m/s was the first parameter to be considered to risk stratify the population. CONCLUSIONS: GS, an easily obtainable marker of frailty, may contribute to improve the risk stratification of patients with WHF.

The Effect of Dapagliflozin on Accelerometer-Based Measures of Physical Activity in Patients with Heart Failure: An Analysis of the DETERMINE Trials.

Background: Wearable accelerometers can quantify the frequency and intensity of physical activity during everyday life and may provide complementary data to established functional outcome measures on the effect of heart failure therapies on functional limitations. Methods: In a voluntary substudy of the DETERMINE (Dapagliflozin EffecT on ExeRcise capacity using a 6-MINutE walk test in patients with HF) trials, patients wore a waist-worn tri-axial accelerometer for as long as possible (ideally for 24 hours/day for 7 days) at 3 points during the trial; between the screening visit and randomization (baseline data), and during weeks 8 and 14-16. Accelerometer outcomes included the change from baseline to week 16 in the total number of steps, time spent in light-to-vigorous physical activity (LVPA), time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), movement intensity during walking, number of vector magnitude units (VMUs)' and total activity counts. Results: Adequate baseline and week 16 accelerometer data were available for 211 of 817 (26%) randomized patients (defined as ≥10 hours of wear-time for ≥3 days). Dapagliflozin had a favorable effect on the mean change from baseline at 16 weeks in the number of steps (between-group difference 778 [95%CI 240, 1315]), time spent in MVPA (0.16 hours [95%CI 0.03, 0.29]) and in the mean VMUs (25 counts per minute [95%CI 0.1, 49]). There were no between-group differences in the other accelerometer outcomes of interest. Conclusions: In this exploratory analysis of the DETERMINE trials, dapagliflozin had a beneficial effect on selected accelerometer-based measures of physical activity in patients with HF across the entire left ventricular ejection fraction spectrum, yet did not improve 6MWD, as previously reported. These data suggest that accelerometer-based measurements of everyday activity may provide complementary information to 6MWD and identify beneficial effects of treatment not detected by 6MWD. Trial Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT03877237 and NCT03877224.

Long-term outcomes of phenoclusters in preclinical heart failure with preserved and mildly reduced ejection fraction.

AIMS: The identification of subjects at higher risk for incident heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (EF) suitable for more intensive preventive programmes remains challenging. We applied phenomapping to the DAVID-Berg population, comprising subjects with preclinical HF, aiming to refine HF risk stratification. METHODS: The DAVID-Berg study prospectively enrolled 596 asymptomatic outpatients with EF > 40% with hypertension, diabetes mellitus or known cardiovascular disease. In this cohort, we performed an unsupervised cluster analysis on 591 patients, including clinical, laboratory, electrocardiographic and echocardiographic parameters. We tested the association between each cluster and a composite outcome of HF/death. RESULTS: The median age was 70 years, 55.5% were males and the median EF was 61.0%. Phenomapping provided three different clusters. Subjects in Cluster 3 were the oldest and had the highest prevalence of atrial fibrillation, the lowest estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), the highest N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and the largest left atrium. During a median follow-up of 5.7 years, 13.4% of subjects experienced HF/death events (N = 79). Compared with Clusters 1 and 2, Cluster 3 had the worst prognosis (log-rank test: Cluster 3 vs. 1 P < 0.001; Cluster 3 vs. 2 P = 0.008). Cluster 3 was associated with a risk of HF/death 2.5 times higher than Cluster 1 [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 2.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24-4.90]. CONCLUSIONS: Based on phenomapping, older patients with lower kidney function and worse diastolic function might represent a subset of preclinical HF with EF > 40% who deserve more efforts to prevent clinical HF.

A matter of sex-persistent predictive value of MECKI score prognostic power in men and women with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: a multicenter study.

Background: A sex-based evaluation of prognosis in heart failure (HF) is lacking. Methods and results: We analyzed the Metabolic Exercise test data combined with Cardiac and Kidney Indexes (MECKI) score registry, which includes HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients. A cross-validation procedure was performed to estimate weights separately for men and women of all MECKI score parameters: left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), hemoglobin, kidney function assessed by Modification of Diet in Renal Disease, blood sodium level, ventilation vs. carbon dioxide production slope, and peak oxygen consumption (peakVO2). The primary outcomes were the composite of all-cause mortality, urgent heart transplant, and implant of a left ventricle assist device. The difference in predictive ability between the native and sex recalibrated MECKI (S-MECKI) was calculated using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve at 2 years and a calibration plot. We retrospectively analyzed 7,900 HFrEF patients included in the MECKI score registry (mean age 61 ± 13 years, 6,456 men/1,444 women, mean LVEF 33% ± 10%, mean peakVO2 56.2% ± 17.6% of predicted) with a median follow-up of 4.05 years (range 1.72-7.47). Our results revealed an unadjusted risk of events that was doubled in men compared to women (9.7 vs. 4.1) and a significant difference in weight between the sexes of most of the parameters included in the MECKI score. S-MECKI showed improved risk classification and accuracy (area under the ROC curve: 0.7893 vs. 0.7799, p = 0.02) due to prognostication improvement in the high-risk settings in both sexes (MECKI score >10 in men and >5 in women). Conclusions: S-MECKI, i.e., the recalibrated MECKI according to sex-specific differences, constitutes a further step in the prognostic assessment of patients with severe HFrEF.

OPTImal PHARMacological therapy for patients with heart failure: Rationale and design of the OPTIPHARM-HF registry.

AIMS: Patients with heart failure (HF) remain often undertreated for multiple reasons, including treatment inertia, contraindications, and intolerance. The OPTIimal PHARMacological therapy for patients with Heart Failure (OPTIPHARM-HF) registry is designed to evaluate the prevalence of evidence-based medical treatment prescription and titration, as well as the causes of its underuse, in a broad real-world population of consecutive patients with HF across the whole ejection fraction spectrum and among different clinical phenotypes. METHODS: The OPTIPHARM-HF registry (NCT06192524) is a prospective, multicenter, observational, national study of adult patients with symptomatic HF, as defined by current international guidelines, regardless of ejection fraction. Both outpatients and inpatients with chronic and acute decompensated HF will be recruited. The study will enroll up to 2500 patients with chronic HF at approximately 35 Italian HF centres. Patients will be followed for a maximum duration of 24 months. The primary objective of the OPTIPHARM-HF registry is to assess prescription and adherence to evidence-based guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with HF. The primary outcome is to describe the prevalence of GDMT use according to target guideline recommendation. Secondary objectives include implementation of comorbidity treatment, evaluation of sequence of treatment introduction and up-titration, description of GDMT implementation in the specific HF population, main causes of GDMT underuse, and assessment of cumulative rate of cardiovascular events. CONCLUSION: The OPTIPHARM-HF registry will provide important implications for improving patient care and adoption of recommended medical therapy into clinical practice among HF patients.

Moderate aortic stenosis in the dysfunctional ventricle: should it be treated?

Moderate aortic stenosis is associated with a worse prognosis than milder degrees. Pathophysiologically, this condition in a dysfunctional ventricle could lead to a further mechanism of haemodynamic worsening, so its treatment should lead to clinical advantages for the patient. The low risk of complications associated with percutaneous correction of aortic valve disease (transcatheter aortic valve implantation) should also be considered, which would seem to favour an interventional approach even in the aforementioned condition. However, sparse data and small population studies make this approach still controversial. Three randomized controlled trials are underway to shed definitive light on the topic.

Hyperkalemia in chronic kidney disease patients with and without heart failure: an Italian economic modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Hyperkalemia (HK) is frequently present in chronic kidney disease (CKD). Risk factors for HK among CKD patients include comorbidities and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi) treatment. Current standard of care (SoC) often necessitates RAASi down-titration or discontinuation, resulting in poorer cardiorenal outcomes, hospitalization and mortality. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of patiromer for HK in CKD patients with and without heart failure (HF) in an Italian setting. METHODS: A lifetime Markov cohort model was developed based on OPAL-HK to assess the health economic impact of patiromer therapy in comparison to SoC after accounting for the effects of HK and RAASi use on clinical events. Outcomes included accumulated clinical events, number needed to treat (NNT) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Subgroup analysis was conducted in CKD patients with and without HF. RESULTS: Patiromer was associated with an incremental discounted cost of €4,660 and 0.194 quality adjusted life years (QALYs), yielding an ICER of €24,004. Per 1000 patients, patiromer treatment prevented 275 moderate/severe HK events, 54 major adverse cardiovascular event, 246 RAASi discontinuation and 213 RAASi up-titration/restart. Subgroup analysis showed patiromer was more effective in preventing clinical events in CKD patients with HF compared to those without; QALY gains were greater in CKD patients without HF versus those with HF (0.267 versus 0.092, respectively). Scenario analysis and sensitivity analysis results support base-case conclusions. CONCLUSION: Patiromer is associated with QALY gains in CKD patients with and without HF compared to SoC in Italy. Patiromer prevented HK events, enabled RAASi therapy maintenance and reduced cardiovascular event risk.

Finerenone in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction: Rationale and design of the FINEARTS-HF trial.

AIM: Steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), spironolactone and eplerenone, are strongly recommended in the treatment of patients with chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), but the balance of efficacy and safety in those with higher LVEF has not been well established. Broad use of steroidal MRAs has further been limited in part due to safety concerns around risks of hyperkalaemia, gynecomastia, and kidney dysfunction. These risks may be mitigated by the unique pharmacological properties of the non-steroidal MRA finerenone. The FINEARTS-HF trial is designed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of the selective non-steroidal MRA finerenone among patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. METHODS: FINEARTS-HF is a global, multicentre, event-driven randomized trial evaluating oral finerenone versus matching placebo in symptomatic patients with HF with LVEF ≥40%. Adults (≥40 years) with HF with New York Heart Association class II-IV symptoms, LVEF ≥40%, evidence of structural heart disease, and diuretic use for at least the previous 30 days were eligible. All patients required elevated natriuretic peptide levels: for patients in sinus rhythm, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) ≥300 pg/ml (or B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP] ≥100 pg/ml) were required, measured within 30 days (in those without a recent worsening HF event) or within 90 days (in those with a recent worsening HF event). Qualifying levels of NT-proBNP or BNP were tripled if a patient was in atrial fibrillation at screening. Estimated glomerular filtration rate <25 ml/min/1.73 m2 or serum potassium >5.0 mmol/L were key exclusion criteria. Patients were enrolled irrespective of clinical care setting (whether hospitalized, recently hospitalized, or ambulatory). The primary endpoint is the composite of cardiovascular death and total (first and recurrent) HF events. The trial started on 14 September 2020 and has validly randomized 6001 participants across 37 countries. Approximately 2375 total primary composite events are targeted. CONCLUSIONS: The FINEARTS-HF trial will determine the efficacy and safety of the non-steroidal MRA finerenone in a broad population of hospitalized and ambulatory patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04435626 and EudraCT 2020-000306-29.

The Therapy and Management of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: New Insights on Treatment.

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a clinical syndrome characterised by the presence of diastolic dysfunction and elevated left ventricular filling pressure, in the setting of a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 50%. Despite the epidemiological prevalence of HFpEF, a prompt diagnosis is challenging and many uncertainties exist. HFpEF is characterised by different phenotypes driven by various cardiac and non-cardiac comorbidities. This is probably the reason why several HFpEF clinical trials in the past did not reach strong outcomes to recommend a single therapy for this syndrome; however, this paradigm has recently changed, and the unmet clinical need for HFpEF treatment found a proper response as a result of a new class of drug, the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, which beneficially act through the whole spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction. The aim of this review was to focus on the therapeutic target of HFpEF, the role of new drugs and the potential role of new devices to manage the syndrome.

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.

Semaglutide versus placebo in people with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a pooled analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: In the STEP-HFpEF (NCT04788511) and STEP-HFpEF DM (NCT04916470) trials, the GLP-1 receptor agonist semaglutide improved symptoms, physical limitations, bodyweight, and exercise function in people with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. In this prespecified pooled analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM trials, we aimed to provide a more definitive assessment of the effects of semaglutide across a range of outcomes and to test whether these effects were consistent across key patient subgroups. METHODS: We conducted a prespecified pooled analysis of individual patient data from STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials at 129 clinical research sites in 18 countries. In both trials, eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, had heart failure with a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 45%, a BMI of at least 30 kg/m2, New York Heart Association class II-IV symptoms, and a Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS; a measure of heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations) of less than 90 points. In STEP-HFpEF, people with diabetes or glycated haemoglobin A1c concentrations of at least 6·5% were excluded, whereas for inclusion in STEP-HFpEF DM participants had to have been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes at least 90 days before screening and to have an HbA1c of 10% or lower. In both trials, participants were randomly assigned to either 2·4 mg semaglutide once weekly or matched placebo for 52 weeks. The dual primary endpoints were change from baseline to week 52 in KCCQ-CSS and bodyweight in all randomly assigned participants. Confirmatory secondary endpoints included change from baseline to week 52 in 6-min walk distance, a hierarchical composite endpoint (all-cause death, heart failure events, and differences in changes in KCCQ-CSS and 6-min walk distance); and C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations. Heterogeneity in treatment effects was assessed across subgroups of interest. We assessed safety in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. FINDINGS: Between March 19, 2021 and March 9, 2022, 529 people were randomly assigned in STEP-HFpEF, and between June 27, 2021 and Sept 2, 2022, 616 were randomly assigned in STEP-HFpEF DM. Overall, 1145 were included in our pooled analysis, 573 in the semaglutide group and 572 in the placebo group. Improvements in KCCQ-CSS and reductions in bodyweight between baseline and week 52 were significantly greater in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group (mean between-group difference for the change from baseline to week 52 in KCCQ-CSS 7·5 points [95% CI 5·3 to 9·8]; p<0·0001; mean between-group difference in bodyweight at week 52 -8·4% [-9·2 to -7·5]; p<0·0001). For the confirmatory secondary endpoints, 6-min walk distance (mean between-group difference at week 52 17·1 metres [9·2 to 25·0]) and the hierarchical composite endpoint (win ratio 1·65 [1·42 to 1·91]) were significantly improved, and CRP concentrations (treatment ratio 0·64 [0·56 to 0·72]) were significantly reduced, in the semaglutide group compared with the placebo group (p<0·0001 for all comparisons). For the dual primary endpoints, the efficacy of semaglutide was largely consistent across multiple subgroups, including those defined by age, race, sex, BMI, systolic blood pressure, baseline CRP, and left ventricular ejection fraction. 161 serious adverse events were reported in the semaglutide group compared with 301 in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: In this prespecified pooled analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM trials, semaglutide was superior to placebo in improving heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations, and reducing bodyweight in participants with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. These effects were largely consistent across patient demographic and clinical characteristics. Semaglutide was well tolerated. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

Semaglutide in Patients with Obesity-Related Heart Failure and Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Obesity and type 2 diabetes are prevalent in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and are characterized by a high symptom burden. No approved therapies specifically target obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in persons with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients who had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, a body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) of 30 or more, and type 2 diabetes to receive once-weekly semaglutide (2.4 mg) or placebo for 52 weeks. The primary end points were the change from baseline in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS; scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating fewer symptoms and physical limitations) and the change in body weight. Confirmatory secondary end points included the change in 6-minute walk distance; a hierarchical composite end point that included death, heart failure events, and differences in the change in the KCCQ-CSS and 6-minute walk distance; and the change in the C-reactive protein (CRP) level. RESULTS: A total of 616 participants underwent randomization. The mean change in the KCCQ-CSS was 13.7 points with semaglutide and 6.4 points with placebo (estimated difference, 7.3 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1 to 10.4; P<0.001), and the mean percentage change in body weight was -9.8% with semaglutide and -3.4% with placebo (estimated difference, -6.4 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.6 to -5.2; P<0.001). The results for the confirmatory secondary end points favored semaglutide over placebo (estimated between-group difference in change in 6-minute walk distance, 14.3 m [95% CI, 3.7 to 24.9; P = 0.008]; win ratio for hierarchical composite end point, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.29 to 1.94; P<0.001]; and estimated treatment ratio for change in CRP level, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.80; P<0.001]). Serious adverse events were reported in 55 participants (17.7%) in the semaglutide group and 88 (28.8%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and type 2 diabetes, semaglutide led to larger reductions in heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations and greater weight loss than placebo at 1 year. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; STEP-HFpEF DM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04916470.).