Impact of Renal Impairment on Beta-Blocker Efficacy in Patients With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Moderate and moderately severe renal impairment are common in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction, but whether beta-blockers are effective is unclear, leading to underuse of life-saving therapy. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate patient prognosis and the efficacy of beta-blockers according to renal function using estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). METHODS: Analysis of 16,740 individual patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <50% from 10 double-blind, placebo-controlled trials was performed. The authors report all-cause mortality on an intention-to-treat basis, adjusted for baseline covariates and stratified by heart rhythm. RESULTS: Median eGFR at baseline was 63 (interquartile range: 50 to 77) ml/min/1.73 m2; 4,584 patients (27.4%) had eGFR 45 to 59 ml/min/1.73 m2, and 2,286 (13.7%) 30 to 44 ml/min/1.73 m2. Over a median follow-up of 1.3 years, eGFR was independently associated with mortality, with a 12% higher risk of death for every 10 ml/min/1.73 m2 lower eGFR (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10% to 15%; p < 0.001). In 13,861 patients in sinus rhythm, beta-blockers reduced mortality versus placebo; adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.73 for eGFR 45 to 59 ml/min/1.73 m2 (95% CI: 0.62 to 0.86; p < 0.001) and 0.71 for eGFR 30 to 44 ml/min/1.73 m2 (95% CI: 0.58 to 0.87; p = 0.001). The authors observed no deterioration in renal function over time in patients with moderate or moderately severe renal impairment, no difference in adverse events comparing beta-blockers with placebo, and higher mortality in patients with worsening renal function on follow-up. Due to exclusion criteria, there were insufficient patients with severe renal dysfunction (eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73 m2) to draw conclusions. In 2,879 patients with atrial fibrillation, there was no reduction in mortality with beta-blockers at any level of eGFR. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction <50% and sinus rhythm should receive beta-blocker therapy even with moderate or moderately severe renal dysfunction.

Treatment with insulin is associated with worse outcome in patients with chronic heart failure and diabetes.

AIMS: Up to one-third of patients with diabetes mellitus and heart failure (HF) are treated with insulin. As insulin causes sodium retention and hypoglycaemia, its use might be associated with worse outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined two datasets: 24 012 patients with HF from four large randomized trials and an administrative database of 4 million individuals, 103 857 of whom with HF. In the former, survival was examined using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for baseline variables and separately for propensity scores. Fine-Gray competing risk regression models were used to assess the risk of hospitalization for HF. For the latter, a case-control nested within a population-based cohort study was conducted with propensity score. Prevalence of diabetes mellitus at study entry ranged from 25.5% to 29.5% across trials. Insulin alone or in combination with oral hypoglycaemic drugs was prescribed at randomization to 24.4% to 34.5% of the patients with diabetes. The rates of death from any cause and hospitalization for HF were higher in patients with vs. without diabetes, and highest of all in patients prescribed insulin [propensity score pooled hazard ratio for all-cause mortality 1.27 (1.16-1.38), for HF hospitalization 1.23 (1.13-1.33)]. In the administrative registry, insulin prescription was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death [odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.87-2.19] and rehospitalization for HF (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.32-1.53). CONCLUSIONS: Whether insulin use is associated with poor outcomes in HF should be investigated further with controlled trials, as should the possibility that there may be safer alternative glucose-lowering treatments for patients with HF and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Beta-blockers for heart failure with reduced, mid-range, and preserved ejection fraction: an individual patient-level analysis of double-blind randomized trials.

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. Conclusion: 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%.

Declining Risk of Sudden Death in Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The risk of sudden death has changed over time among patients with symptomatic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction with the sequential introduction of medications including angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists. We sought to examine this trend in detail. METHODS: We analyzed data from 40,195 patients who had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and were enrolled in any of 12 clinical trials spanning the period from 1995 through 2014. Patients who had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator at the time of trial enrollment were excluded. Weighted multivariable regression was used to examine trends in rates of sudden death over time. Adjusted hazard ratios for sudden death in each trial group were calculated with the use of Cox regression models. The cumulative incidence rates of sudden death were assessed at different time points after randomization and according to the length of time between the diagnosis of heart failure and randomization. RESULTS: Sudden death was reported in 3583 patients. Such patients were older and were more often male, with an ischemic cause of heart failure and worse cardiac function, than those in whom sudden death did not occur. There was a 44% decline in the rate of sudden death across the trials (P=0.03). The cumulative incidence of sudden death at 90 days after randomization was 2.4% in the earliest trial and 1.0% in the most recent trial. The rate of sudden death was not higher among patients with a recent diagnosis of heart failure than among those with a longer-standing diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of sudden death declined substantially over time among ambulatory patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction who were enrolled in clinical trials, a finding that is consistent with a cumulative benefit of evidence-based medications on this cause of death. (Funded by the China Scholarship Council and the University of Glasgow.).

Heart Rate and Rhythm and the Benefit of Beta-Blockers in Patients With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between mortality and heart rate remains unclear for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in either sinus rhythm or atrial fibrillation (AF). OBJECTIVES: This analysis explored the prognostic importance of heart rate in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in randomized controlled trials comparing beta-blockers and placebo. METHODS: The Beta-Blockers in Heart Failure Collaborative Group performed a meta-analysis of harmonized individual patient data from 11 double-blind randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, analyzed with Cox proportional hazard ratios (HR) modeling heart rate measured at baseline and approximately 6 months post-randomization. RESULTS: A higher heart rate at baseline was associated with greater all-cause mortality for patients in sinus rhythm (n = 14,166; adjusted HR: 1.11 per 10 beats/min; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07 to 1.15; p < 0.0001) but not in AF (n = 3,034; HR: 1.03 per 10 beats/min; 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.08; p = 0.38). Beta-blockers reduced ventricular rate by 12 beats/min in both sinus rhythm and AF. Mortality was lower for patients in sinus rhythm randomized to beta-blockers (HR: 0.73 vs. placebo; 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.79; p < 0.001), regardless of baseline heart rate (interaction p = 0.35). Beta-blockers had no effect on mortality in patients with AF (HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.81 to 1.12; p = 0.58) at any heart rate (interaction p = 0.48). A lower achieved resting heart rate, irrespective of treatment, was associated with better prognosis only for patients in sinus rhythm (HR: 1.16 per 10 beats/min increase, 95% CI: 1.11 to 1.22; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of pre-treatment heart rate, beta-blockers reduce mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in sinus rhythm. Achieving a lower heart rate is associated with better prognosis, but only for those in sinus rhythm.

Limited Added Value of Circulating Inflammatory Biomarkers in Chronic Heart Failure.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate whether a panel of biomarkers improved prognostication in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction of ischemic origin using a systematized approach according to suggested requirements for validation of new biomarkers. BACKGROUND: Modeling combinations of multiple circulating markers could potentially identify patients with HF at particularly high risk and aid in the selection of individualized therapy. METHODS: From a panel of 20 inflammatory and extracellular matrix biomarkers, 2 different biomarker panels were created and added to the Seattle HF score and the prognostic model from the CORONA (Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure) study (n = 1,497), which included conventional clinical characteristics and C-reactive protein and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide. Interactions with statin treatment were also assessed. RESULTS: The two models-model 1 (endostatin, interleukin 8, soluble ST2, troponin T, galectin 3, and chemokine [C-C motif] ligand 21) and model 2 (troponin T, soluble ST2, galectin 3, pentraxin 3, and soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor 2)-significantly improved the CORONA and Seattle HF models but added only modestly to their Harrell's C statistic and net reclassification index. In addition, rosuvastatin had no effect on the levels of a wide range of inflammatory and extracellular matrix markers, but there was a tendency for patients with a lower level of biomarkers in the 2 panels to have a positive effect from statin treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In the specific HF patient population studied, a multimarker approach using the particular panel of biomarkers measured was of limited clinical value for identifying future risk of adverse outcomes.

Low YKL-40 in chronic heart failure may predict beneficial effects of statins: analysis from the controlled rosuvastatin multinational trial in heart failure (CORONA).

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if YKL-40 can provide prognostic information in patients with ischemic heart failure (HF) and identify patients who may benefit from statin therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The association between serum YKL-40 and predefined outcome was evaluated in 1344 HF patients assigned to rosuvastatin or placebo. RESULTS: YKL-40 was not associated with outcome in adjusted analysis. In YKL-40 tertile 1, an effect on the primary outcome (HR 0.50, p = 0.006) and CV death (HR 0.54, p = 0.040) was seen by rosuvastatin in adjusted analysis. CONCLUSIONS: A beneficial modification of outcome was observed with statin therapy in patients with low YKL-40 levels.

Effect of age and sex on efficacy and tolerability of ß blockers in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: individual patient data meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and tolerability of ß blockers in a broad age range of women and men with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) by pooling individual patient data from placebo controlled randomised trials. DESIGN: Prospectively designed meta-analysis of individual patient data from patients aged 40-85 in sinus rhythm at baseline, with left ventricular ejection fraction <0.45. PARTICIPANTS: 13,833 patients from 11 trials; median age 64; 24% women. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was all cause mortality; the major secondary outcome was admission to hospital for heart failure. Analysis was by intention to treat with an adjusted one stage Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, ß blockers were effective in reducing mortality across all ages: hazard ratios were 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.53 to 0.83) for the first quarter of age distribution (median age 50); 0.71 (0.58 to 0.87) for the second quarter (median age 60); 0.65 (0.53 to 0.78) for the third quarter (median age 68); and 0.77 (0.64 to 0.92) for the fourth quarter (median age 75). There was no significant interaction when age was modelled continuously (P=0.1), and the absolute reduction in mortality was 4.3% over a median follow-up of 1.3 years (number needed to treat 23). Admission to hospital for heart failure was significantly reduced by ß blockers, although this effect was attenuated at older ages (interaction P=0.05). There was no evidence of an interaction between treatment effect and sex in any age group. Drug discontinuation was similar regardless of treatment allocation, age, or sex (14.4% in those give ß blockers, 15.6% in those receiving placebo). CONCLUSION: Irrespective of age or sex, patients with HFrEF in sinus rhythm should receive ß blockers to reduce the risk of death and admission to hospital.Registration PROSPERO CRD42014010012; Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00832442.

Loop diuretics, renal function and clinical outcome in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.

AIM: We aimed to study the relationships of loop diuretic dose with renal function and clinical outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure (HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Loop diuretic dose at baseline was recorded in patients included in the Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure (CORONA). The relationship to change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) over time and to the first occurrence of the composite outcome of cardiovascular (CV) death or hospitalization owing to HF was examined in propensity score matched cohorts. Of the 5011 patients, 2550, 745, and 449 were receiving >80 mg (high), 41-80 mg (medium) and ≤40 mg (low) of loop diuretics in furosemide equivalent daily dosages, respectively, which were used to assemble 229, 385, and 1045 pairs of propensity-matched high, medium, and low dose cohorts. Compared with matched no loop diuretic groups, eGFR declined 0.3 ± 0.2, 0.3 ± 0.3 and 1.2 ± 0.5 mL/min/1.73 m(2) /year in the low-, medium-, and high-dose groups, respectively. Compared with matched no loop diuretic groups, hazard ratios (HR) (95% confidence intervals) for outcome associated with low-, medium- and high-dose groups were 1.71 (1.41-2.06), 1.99 (1.50-2.64), and 2.94 (1.95-4.41), respectively. Higher loop diuretic dose was particularly associated with increased risk for hospitalization owing to HF: HR 4.80 (2.75-8.37), P < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: The use of loop diuretics was associated with a slightly greater rate of decline in eGFR, which did not vary significantly by diuretic dose.Loop diuretic dose was associated with higher risks of (CV) mortality and predominantly hospitalization owing to HF, which appeared to be higher among those receiving higher daily doses.

Risk of Stroke in Chronic Heart Failure Patients Without Atrial Fibrillation: Analysis of the Controlled Rosuvastatin in Multinational Trial Heart Failure (CORONA) and the Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Insufficienza Cardiaca-Heart Failure (GISSI-HF) Trials.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to describe the incidence and predictors of stroke in patients who have heart failure without atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We pooled 2 contemporary heart failure trials, the Controlled Rosuvastatin in Multinational Trial Heart Failure (CORONA) and the Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Insufficienza cardiaca-Heart Failure trial (GISSI-HF). Of the 9585 total patients, 6054 did not have AF. Stroke occurred in 165 patients (4.7%) with AF and in 206 patients (3.4%) without AF (rates 16.8/1000 patient-years and 11.1/1000 patient-years, respectively). Using Cox proportional-hazards models, we identified the following independent predictors of stroke in patients without AF (ranked by χ(2) value): age (hazard ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.63 per 10 years), New York Heart Association class (1.60, 1.21-2.12 class III/IV versus II), diabetes mellitus treated with insulin (1.87, 1.22-2.88), body mass index (0.74, 0.60-0.91 per 5 kg/m(2) up to 30), and previous stroke (1.81, 1.19-2.74). N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (available in 2632 patients) was also an independent predictor of stroke (hazard ratio, 1.31; 1.11-1.57 per log unit) when added to this model. With the use of a risk score formulated from these predictors, we found that patients in the upper third of risk had a rate of stroke that approximated the risk in patients with AF. CONCLUSIONS: A small number of demographic and clinical variables identified a subset of patients who have heart failure without AF at a high risk of stroke.

Comparison of outcomes after hospitalization for worsening heart failure, myocardial infarction, and stroke in patients with heart failure and reduced and preserved ejection fraction.

AIMS: To investigate the prognostic significance of hospitalization for worsening heart failure (WHF), myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke in patients with chronic heart failure (HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 5011 patients with HF and reduced EF (HF-REF) in the CORONA trial and 4128 patients with HF and preserved EF (HF-PEF) in the I-Preserve trial. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for death were estimated for 0-30 days and ≥31 days after first post-randomization WHF, MI, or stroke used as a time-dependent variable, compared with patients with none of these events. In CORONA, 1616 patients (32%) had post-randomization first events (1223 WHF, 216 MI, 177 stroke), and the adjusted HR for mortality ≤30 days after an event was: WHF 7.21 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.05-25.40], MI 23.08 (95% CI 6.44-82.71), and stroke 32.15 (95% CI 8.93-115.83). The HR for mortality at >30 days was: WHF 3.62 (95% CI 3.11-4.21), MI 4.41 (95% CI 3.23-6.02), and stroke 3.19 (95% CI 2.21-4.61). In I-Preserve, 896 patients (22%) experienced a post-randomization event (638 WHF, 111 MI, 147 stroke). The HR for mortality ≤30 days was WHF 31.77 (95% CI 7.60-132.81), MI 154.77 (95% CI 34.21-700.17), and stroke 223.30 (95% CI 51.42-969.78); for >30 days it was WHF 3.36 (95% CI 2.79-4.05), MI 3.29 (95% CI 2.14-5.06), and stroke 5.13 (95% CI 3.61-7.29). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with both HF-REF and HF-PEF, hospitalization for WHF was associated with high early and late mortality. The early relative risk of death was not as great as following MI or stroke, but the longer term relative risk of death was similar following all three types of event. Numerically, more deaths occurred following WHF because it was a much more common event.

Do statins reduce the risk of myocardial infarction in patients with heart failure? A pooled individual-level reanalysis of CORONA and GISSI-HF.

AIMS: Current guidelines do not explicitly recommend statin use in heart failure (HF). Relatively low numbers of atherothrombotic events among HF patients, in the context of their elevated competing risks for non-atherothrombotic causes of death, may have prevented previous analyses of clinical trials from detecting a benefit for statins. We pooled data from two landmark trials of HF patients not on statin therapy randomized to rosuvastatin 10 mg daily vs. placebo, CORONA and GISSI-HF, in order to improve our power to detect statistically significant differences in atherothrombotic events. We also accounted for competing risks from other causes of death. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used competing risks analyses to evaluate atherothrombotic events in the context of death from other cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular causes. We also performed traditional Cox survival analyses of the same data with the intention that these statistical approaches would be complementary. CORONA participants (n = 5011, median follow-up 32.8 months) were older and sicker than GISSI-HF participants (n = 4574, median follow-up 46.9 months) by design. Rosuvastatin decreased risk for myocardial infarction (MI) among CORONA and GISSI-HF participants with ischaemic aetiology of HF (hazard ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.66-0.99, P < 0.05). There were no significant differences between rosuvastatin and placebo in risks for stroke or death from other causes. CONCLUSION: This individual-level reanalysis of two landmark trials demonstrates a small but statistically significant decreased risk for MI among patients with ischaemic HF randomized to rosuvastatin vs. placebo. Rosuvastatin appears to be effective in preventing MI in ischaemic HF patients not already on statins.

Telomere length and outcomes in ischaemic heart failure: data from the COntrolled ROsuvastatin multiNAtional Trial in Heart Failure (CORONA).

AIMS: Leucocyte telomere length is considered a marker of biological ageing and has been suggested to be shorter in patients with CAD and heart failure compared with healthy controls. The aim of this study was to determine whether telomere length is associated with clinical outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart failure and whether this association is superior to chronological age as defined by date of birth. METHODS AND RESULTS: We measured leucocyte telomere length in 3275 patients with chronic ischaemic systolic heart failure participating in the COntrolled ROsuvastatin multiNAtional Trial in Heart Failure (CORONA) study. The primary composite endpoint was cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke, which occurred in 575 patients during follow-up. We observed a significant association of leucocyte telomere lengths with the primary endpoint (hazard ratio 1.10; 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.20; P=0.03). However, this observation was not superior to age as defined by date of birth. The neutral effect of rosuvastatin treatment on clinical outcomes was not modified by baseline telomere length. CONCLUSION: Biological age as defined by leucocyte telomere length was associated with clinical outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart failure, but this association did not add prognostic information above age as defined by date of birth.

Novel extracellular matrix biomarkers as predictors of adverse outcome in chronic heart failure: association between biglycan and response to statin therapy in the CORONA trial.

BACKGROUND: The extracellular matrix (ECM) plays an important role in left ventricular remodeling and progression of heart failure (HF). Biglycan and mimecan are ECM proteins that are abundantly expressed in cardiac tissue but have not been evaluated as prognostic markers in HF. We investigated their interaction with statin treatment and association with adverse outcome in chronic HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: The association between serum levels of biglycan and mimecan and the primary end point (cardiovascular [CV] death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke), all-cause mortality, CV death, the composite of all-cause mortality/hospitalization for worsening of HF, and the coronary end point was evaluated in 1,390 patients >60 years of age with ischemic systolic HF in the Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in HF (CORONA) population, randomly assigned to 10 mg rosuvastatin or placebo. Serum biglycan and mimecan added no prognostic information beyond conventional risk factors, including N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide. However, statin treatment improved all outcomes except CV death in patients with low biglycan levels (ie, lower tertile), even after full multivariable adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Although circulating levels of mimecan and biglycan were of limited predictive value in patients with chronic HF, circulating biglycan could be a useful marker for targeting statin therapy in patients with HF.

International geographic variation in event rates in trials of heart failure with preserved and reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: International geographic differences in outcomes may exist for clinical trials of heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF), but there are few data for those with preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed outcomes by international geographic region in the Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved systolic function trial (I-Preserve), the Candesartan in Heart failure Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity (CHARM)-Preserved trial, the CHARM-Alternative and CHARM-Added HF-REF trials, and the Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in HF-REF (CORONA). Crude rates of heart failure hospitalization varied by geographic region, and more so for HF-PEF than for HF-REF. Rates in patients with HF-PEF were highest in the United States/Canada (HF hospitalization rate 7.6 per 100 patient-years in I-Preserve; 8.8 in CHARM-Preserved), intermediate in Western Europe (4.8/100 and 4.7/100), and lowest in Eastern Europe/Russia (3.3/100 and 2.8/100). The difference between the United States/Canada versus Eastern Europe/Russia persisted after adjustment for key prognostic variables: adjusted hazard ratios 1.34 (95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.74; P=0.04) in I-Preserve and 1.85 (95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.91; P=0.01) in CHARM-Preserved. In HF-REF, rates of HF hospitalization were slightly lower in Western Europe compared with other regions. For both HF-REF and HF-PEF, there were few regional differences in rates of all-cause or cardiovascular mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in event rates observed suggest there is international geographic variation in 1 or more of the definition and diagnosis of HF-PEF, the risk profile of patients enrolled, and the threshold for hospitalization, which has implications for the conduct of future global trials.

Predictive value of endostatin in chronic heart failure patients with poor kidney function.

OBJECTIVES: Increased circulating endostatin levels have been demonstrated in progressive cardiovascular (CV) and renal disorders. We investigated the predictive value of endostatin in patients with chronic heart failure (HF) and the association between endostatin and renal function. METHODS: The interaction between serum endostatin, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and predefined endpoints, including the primary endpoint (CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke; n = 397), all-cause mortality (n = 410), CV death (n = 335) or the coronary endpoint (n = 317), was evaluated in 1,390 patients >60 years of age with ischemic systolic HF in the Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in HF (CORONA) population, who were randomly assigned to 10 mg rosuvastatin or placebo. RESULTS: In the population as a whole, endostatin added no predictive information after full multivariable adjustment including eGFR and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide. Serum endostatin was strongly correlated with eGFR (r = 0.59, p < 0.001). After full multivariable adjustment, an association between high serum endostatin and increased risk of all-cause mortality and decreased risk of the primary and coronary endpoints was seen in HF patients with impaired and preserved renal function, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Endostatin added no predictive information regarding the adverse outcome in patients with chronic systolic HF of ischemic etiology. An increased risk of all-cause mortality was seen in patients with decreased renal function.

The impact of coronary artery disease risk loci on ischemic heart failure severity and prognosis: association analysis in the COntrolled ROsuvastatin multiNAtional trial in heart failure (CORONA).

BACKGROUND: Recent genome-wide association studies have identified multiple loci that are associated with an increased risk of developing coronary artery disease (CAD). The impact of these loci on the disease severity and prognosis of ischemic heart failure due to CAD is currently unknown. METHODS: We undertook association analysis of 7 single nucleotide polymorphism (rs599839, rs17465637, rs2972147, rs6922269, rs1333049, rs501120, and rs17228212) at 7 well established CAD risk loci (1p13.3, 1q41, 2q36.3, 6q25.1, 9p21.3, 10q11.21, and 15q22.33, respectively) in 3,320 subjects diagnosed with systolic heart failure of ischemic aetiology and participating in the COntrolled ROsuvastatin multiNAtional Trial in Heart Failure (CORONA) trial. The primary outcome was the composite of time to first event of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and non-fatal stroke, secondary outcomes included mortality and hospitalization due to worsening heart failure. RESULTS: None of the 7 loci were significantly associated with the primary composite endpoint of the CORONA trial (death from cardiovascular cases, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke). However, the 1p13.3 locus (rs599839) showed evidence for association with all-cause mortality (after adjustment for covariates; HR 0.74, 95%CI [0.61 to 0.90]; P = 0.0025) and we confirmed the 1p13.3 locus (rs599839) to be associated with lipid parameters (total cholesterol (P = 1.1x10(-4)), low-density lipoprotein levels (P = 3.5 × 10(-7)) and apolipoprotein B (P = 2.2 × 10(-10))). CONCLUSION: Genetic variants strongly associated with CAD risk are not associated with the severity and outcome of ischemic heart failure. The observed association of the 1p13.3 locus with all-cause mortality requires confirmation in further studies.

Relationship between angina pectoris and outcomes in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: an analysis of the Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure (CORONA).

AIM: Angina pectoris is common in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF) but its relationship with outcomes has not been well defined. This relationship was investigated further in a retrospective analysis of the Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure (CORONA). METHODS AND RESULTS: Four thousand, eight hundred and seventy-eight patients were divided into three categories: no history of angina and no chest pain at baseline (Group A; n = 1240), past history of angina but no chest pain at baseline (Group B; n = 1353) and both a history of angina and chest pain at baseline (Group C; n = 2285). Outcomes were examined using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression survival analysis. Compared with Group A, Group C had a higher risk of non-fatal myocardial infarction or unstable angina (HR: 2.36, 1.54-3.61; P < 0.001), this composite plus coronary revascularization (HR: 2.54, 1.76-3.68; P < 0.001), as well as HF hospitalization (HR: 1.35, 1.13-1.63; P = 0.001), over a median follow-up period of 33 months. There was no difference in cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. Group B had a smaller increase in risk of coronary events but not of heart failure hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Patients with HF-REF and ongoing angina are at an increased risk of acute coronary syndrome and HF hospitalization. Whether these patients would benefit from more aggressive medical therapy or percutaneous revascularization is not known and merits further investigation.

Effect of rosuvastatin on repeat heart failure hospitalizations: the CORONA Trial (Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure).

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.