Clinical Phenogroups in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: Detailed Phenotypes, Prognosis, and Response to Spironolactone.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess if clinical phenogroups differ in comprehensive biomarker profiles, cardiac and arterial structure/function, and responses to spironolactone therapy. BACKGROUND: Previous studies identified distinct subgroups (phenogroups) of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). METHODS: Among TOPCAT (Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist Trial) participants, we performed latent-class analysis to identify HFpEF phenogroups based on standard clinical features and assessed differences in multiple biomarkers measured from frozen plasma; cardiac and arterial structure/function measured with echocardiography and arterial tonometry; prognosis; and response to spironolactone. RESULTS: Three HFpEF phenogroups were identified. Phenogroup 1 (n = 1,214) exhibited younger age, higher prevalence of smoking, preserved functional class, and the least evidence of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy and arterial stiffness. Phenogroup 2 (n = 1,329) was older, with normotrophic concentric LV remodeling, atrial fibrillation, left atrial enlargement, large-artery stiffening, and biomarkers of innate immunity and vascular calcification. Phenogroup 3 (n = 899) demonstrated more functional impairment, obesity, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, concentric LV hypertrophy, high renin, and biomarkers of tumor necrosis factor-alpha-mediated inflammation, liver fibrosis, and tissue remodeling. Compared with phenogroup 1, phenogroup 3 exhibited the highest risk of the primary endpoint of cardiovascular death, heart failure hospitalization, or aborted cardiac arrest (hazard ratio [HR] 3.44; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.79 to 4.24); phenogroups 2 and 3 demonstrated similar all-cause mortality (phenotype 2 HR 2.36; 95% CI 1.89 to 2.95; phenotype 3 HR 2.26, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.87). Spironolactone randomized therapy was associated with a more pronounced reduction in the risk of the primary endpoint in phenogroup 3 (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.95; p for interaction = 0.016). Results were similar after excluding participants from Eastern Europe. CONCLUSIONS: We identified important differences in circulating biomarkers, cardiac/arterial characteristics, prognosis, and response to spironolactone across clinical HFpEF phenogroups. These findings suggest distinct underlying mechanisms across clinically identifiable phenogroups of HFpEF that may benefit from different targeted interventions.