Clinical Outcomes With Electronic Nudges to Increase Influenza Vaccination : A Prespecified Analysis of a Nationwide, Pragmatic, Registry-Based, Randomized Implementation Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the NUDGE-FLU (Nationwide Utilization of Danish Government Electronic letter system for increasing inFLUenza vaccine uptake) trial, electronic letters incorporating cardiovascular (CV) gain-framing and repeated messaging increased influenza vaccination by approximately 1 percentage point. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of the successful nudging interventions on downstream clinical outcomes. DESIGN: Prespecified exploratory analysis of a nationwide randomized implementation trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05542004). SETTING: The 2022 to 2023 influenza season. PARTICIPANTS: 964 870 Danish citizens aged 65 years or older. INTERVENTION: Usual care or 9 different electronically delivered behavioral nudging letters. MEASUREMENTS: Cardiovascular, respiratory, and other clinical end points during follow-up from intervention delivery (16 September 2022) through 31 May 2023. RESULTS: The analysis set included 691 820 participants. Hospitalization for pneumonia or influenza occurred in 3354 of 346 327 (1.0%) participants in the usual care group, 396 of 38 586 (1.0%) in the CV gain-framing group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.06 [95% CI, 0.95 to 1.18]; versus usual care), and 403 of 38 231 (1.1%) in the repeated letter group (HR, 1.09 [CI, 0.98 to 1.21]; versus usual care). In the usual care group, 44 682 (12.9%) participants were hospitalized for any cause, compared with 5002 (13.0%) in the CV gain-framing group (HR, 1.00 [CI, 0.97 to 1.03]; versus usual care) and 4965 (13.0%) in the repeated letter group (HR, 1.01 [CI, 0.98 to 1.04]; versus usual care). A total of 6341 (1.8%) participants died in the usual care group, compared with 721 (1.9%) in the CV gain-framing group (HR, 1.02 [CI, 0.94 to 1.10]; versus usual care) and 646 (1.7%) in the repeated letter group (HR, 0.92 [CI, 0.85 to 1.00]; versus usual care). LIMITATION: Prespecified but exploratory analysis, potential misclassification of events in routinely collected registry data, and results may not be generalizable to other health systems or countries with other racial compositions and/or cultural or societal norms. CONCLUSION: In a prespecified exploratory analysis, modest increases in influenza vaccination rates seen with electronic nudges did not translate into observable improvements in clinical outcomes. Seasonal influenza vaccination should remain strongly recommended. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Sanofi.

Effect of Electronic Nudges on Influenza Vaccination Rate in Older Adults With Cardiovascular Disease: Prespecified Analysis of the NUDGE-FLU Trial.

BACKGROUND: Influenza vaccines have been demonstrated to effectively reduce the incidence of influenza infection and potentially associated risks of cardiovascular events in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). Despite strong guideline and public health endorsements, global influenza vaccination rates in patients with CVD are highly variable. This prespecified analysis of NUDGE-FLU (Nationwide Utilization of Danish Government Electronic Letter System for Increasing Influenza Vaccine Uptake) examined the effect of digital behavioral nudges on influenza vaccine uptake based on the presence of CVD. METHODS: NUDGE-FLU was a randomized, pragmatic, nationwide, register-based trial that included Danish citizens 65 years of age or older during the 2022 to 2023 influenza season. Households were randomized in a 9:1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio to usual care or 9 electronic letters with designs based on behavioral concepts. Danish nationwide registers were used to collect baseline and outcome data. The primary end point was receipt of an influenza vaccine on or before January 1, 2023. The effects of the intervention letters were examined according to the presence of CVD and across cardiovascular subgroups that included heart failure, ischemic heart disease, and atrial fibrillation. RESULTS: Of 964 870 NUDGE-FLU participants from 691 820 households, 264 392 (27.4%) had CVD. During follow-up, 83.1% of participants with CVD versus 79.2% of participants without CVD received an influenza vaccination (P<0.001). Compared with usual care, a letter emphasizing the potential cardiovascular benefits of influenza vaccination increased vaccination rates; this effect was consistent in participants with CVD (absolute difference, +0.60 percentage points [99.55% CI, -0.48 to 1.68]) and without CVD (+0.98 percentage points [99.55% CI, 0.27-1.70; P for interaction=0.41). A repeated letter strategy with a reminder follow-up letter 14 days later was also effective in increasing influenza vaccination, irrespective of CVD (CVD: absolute difference, +0.80 percentage points [99.55% CI, -0.27 to 1.86]; no CVD: +0.67 percentage points [99.55% CI, -0.06 to 1.40]; P for interaction=0.77). Effectiveness of both nudging strategies was consistent across all major CVD subgroups. None of the other 7 nudging strategies were effective, regardless of CVD status. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic letter interventions emphasizing the potential cardiovascular benefits of influenza vaccination and using a reminder letter strategy were similarly beneficial in increasing influenza vaccination rates among older adults with and without CVD and across cardiovascular subgroups. Electronic nudges may improve influenza vaccine uptake in individuals with CVD. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT05542004.

Effect of the P-Selectin Inhibitor Crizanlizumab on Survival Free of Organ Support in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has been associated with endothelial injury, resultant microvascular inflammation and thrombosis. Activated endothelial cells release and express P-selectin and von Willebrand factor, both of which are elevated in severe COVID-19 and may be implicated in the disease pathophysiology. We hypothesized that crizanlizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody to P-selectin, would reduce morbidity and death in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. METHODS: An international, adaptive, randomized controlled platform trial, funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, randomly assigned 422 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 with moderate or severe illness to receive either a single infusion of the P-selectin inhibitor crizanlizumab (at a dose of 5 mg/kg) plus standard of care or standard of care alone in an open-label 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was organ support-free days, evaluated on an ordinal scale consisting of the number of days alive free of organ support through the first 21 days after trial entry. RESULTS: The study was stopped for futility by the data safety monitoring committee. Among 421 randomized patients with known 21-day outcomes, 163 patients (77%) randomized to the crizanlizumab plus standard-of-care arm did not require any respiratory or cardiovascular organ support compared with 169 (80%) in the standard-of-care-alone arm. The adjusted odds ratio for the effect of crizanlizumab on organ support-free days was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.43-1.16), where an odds ratio >1 indicates treatment benefit, yielding a posterior probability of futility (odds ratio <1.2) of 98% and a posterior probability of inferiority (odds ratio <1.0) of 91%. Overall, there were 37 deaths (17.5%) in the crizanlizumab arm and 27 deaths (12.8%) in the standard-of-care arm (hazard ratio, 1.33 [95% CrI, 0.85-2.21]; [probability of hazard ratio>1] = 0.879). CONCLUSIONS: Crizanlizumab, a P-selectin inhibitor, did not result in improvement in organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04505774.

Electronic nudges to increase influenza vaccination uptake in Denmark: a nationwide, pragmatic, registry-based, randomised implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Influenza vaccination rates remain suboptimal despite effectiveness in preventing influenza infection and related complications. We investigated whether behavioural nudges, delivered via a governmental electronic letter system, would increase influenza vaccination uptake among older adults in Denmark. METHODS: We did a nationwide, pragmatic, registry-based, cluster-randomised implementation trial during the 2022-23 influenza season in Denmark. All Danish citizens aged 65 years or older or turning 65 years by Jan 15, 2023 were included. We excluded individuals living in nursing homes and individuals who had an exemption from the Danish mandatory governmental electronic letter system. Households were randomly assigned (9:1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1:1) to usual care or nine different electronic letters designed on the basis of different behavioural nudging concepts. Data were sourced from nationwide Danish administrative health registries. The primary endpoint was receipt of influenza vaccination on or before Jan 1, 2023. The primary analysis assessed an analytical set of one randomly selected individual per household, and a sensitivity analysis included all randomly assigned individuals and accounted for within-household correlation. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05542004. FINDINGS: We identified 1 232 938 individuals aged 65 years or older in Denmark and excluded 56 436 (4·6%) individuals living in nursing homes and 211 632 (17·2%) with an exemption from the electronic letter system. We randomly assigned 964 870 (78·3%) participants across 691 820 households. Compared with usual care, influenza vaccination rates were higher in the group receiving an electronic letter highlighting potential cardiovascular benefits of vaccination (81·00% vs 80·12%; difference 0·89 percentage points [99·55% CI 0·29-1·48]; p<0·0001) and the group receiving repeated letters at randomisation and at day 14 (80·85% vs 80·12%; difference 0·73 percentage points [0·13-1·34]; p=0·0006). These strategies improved vaccination rates across major subgroups including those with and without established cardiovascular disease. The cardiovascular gain-framed letter was particularly effective among participants who had not been vaccinated for influenza in the previous season (pinteraction=0·0002). A sensitivity analysis of all randomly assigned individuals accounting for within-household clustering yielded similar findings. INTERPRETATION: Electronically delivered letters highlighting potential cardiovascular benefits of influenza vaccination or sent again as a reminder significantly increased vaccination uptake across Denmark. Although the magnitude of effectiveness was modest, the low-touch, inexpensive, and highly scalable nature of these electronic letters might be informative for future public health campaigns. FUNDING: Sanofi.

Rationale and design of NUDGE-FLU-CHRONIC and NUDGE-FLU-2: Two nationwide randomized trials of electronic nudges to increase influenza vaccination among patients with chronic diseases and older adults during the 2023/2024 influenza season.

BACKGROUND: Yearly influenza vaccination is strongly recommended for older adults and patients with chronic diseases including cardiovascular disease (CVD); however, vaccination rates remain suboptimal, particularly among younger patients. Electronic letters incorporating behavioral nudges are highly scalable public health interventions which can potentially increase vaccination, but further research is needed to determine the most effective strategies and to assess effectiveness across different populations. The purpose of NUDGE-FLU-CHRONIC and NUDGE-FLU-2 are to evaluate the effectiveness of electronic nudges delivered via the Danish governmental electronic letter system in increasing influenza vaccination among patients with chronic diseases and older adults, respectively. METHODS: Both trials are designed as pragmatic randomized implementation trials enrolling all Danish citizens in their respective target groups and conducted during the 2023/2024 influenza season. NUDGE-FLU-CHRONIC enrolls patients aged 18-64 years with chronic diseases. NUDGE-FLU-2 builds upon the NUDGE-FLU trial conducted in 2022/2023 and aims to expand the evidence by testing both previously successful and new nudges among adults ≥65 years during a subsequent influenza season. Persons with exemptions from the electronic letter system are excluded from both trials. In both trials, participants are randomized in a 2.45:1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio to either receive no electronic letter (usual care) or to receive one of 6 different behaviorally informed electronic letters. NUDGE-FLU-CHRONIC has randomized 299,881 participants with intervention letters delivered on September 24, 2023, while NUDGE-FLU-2 has randomized 881,373 participants and delivered intervention letters on September 13, 2023. Follow-up is currently ongoing. In both trials, the primary endpoint is receipt of influenza vaccination on or before January 1, 2024, and the secondary endpoint is time to vaccination. Clinical outcomes including respiratory and cardiovascular hospitalizations, all-cause hospitalization, and mortality are included as prespecified exploratory endpoints. Prespecified individual-level pooled analyses will be conducted across NUDGE-FLU, NUDGE-FLU-CHRONIC, and NUDGE-FLU-2. DISCUSSION: NUDGE-FLU-CHRONIC is the first nationwide randomized trial of electronic nudges to increase influenza vaccination conducted among 18-64-year-old high-risk patients with chronic diseases. NUDGE-FLU-2 will provide further evidence on the effectiveness of electronic nudges among older adults ≥65 years. Collectively, the NUDGE-FLU trials will provide an extensive evidence base for future public health communications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NUDGE-FLU-CHRONIC: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT06030739, registered September 11, 2023, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06030739. NUDGE-FLU-2: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT06030726, registered September 11, 2023, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06030726.

Uptake of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors in Hospitalized Patients With Heart Failure: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: The use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) in Veterans Affairs (VA) patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF) has not been reported previously. METHODS: VA electronic health record data were used to identify patients hospitalized for HF (primary or secondary diagnosis) from 01/2019-11/2022. Patients with SGLT2i allergy, advanced/end-stage chronic kidney disease (CKD) or advanced HF therapies were excluded. We identified factors associated with discharge SGLT2i prescriptions for patients hospitalized due to HF in 2022. We also compared SGLT2i and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) prescription rates. Hospital-level variations in SGLT2i prescriptions were assessed via the median odds ratio. RESULTS: A total of 69,680 patients were hospitalized due to HF; 10.3% were prescribed SGLT2i at discharge (4.4% newly prescribed, 5.9% continued preadmission therapy). SGLT2i prescription increased over time and was higher in patients with HFrEF and primary HF. Among 15,762 patients hospitalized in 2022, SGLT2i prescription was more likely in patients with diabetes (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.09-2.47) and ischemic heart disease (aOR 1.14; 95% CI: 1.03-1.26). Patients with increased age (aOR 0.77 per 10 years; 95% CI: 0.73-0.80) and lower systolic blood pressure (aOR 0.94 per 10 mmHg; 95% CI: 0.92-0.96) were less likely to be prescribed SGLT2i, and SGLT2i prescription was not more likely in patients with CKD (aOR 1.07; 95% CI 0.98-1.16). The adjusted median odds ratio suggested a 1.8-fold variation in the likelihood that similar patients at 2 random VA sites were prescribed SGLT2i (range 0-21.0%). In patients with EF ≤ 40%, 30.9% were prescribed SGLT2i while 26.9% were prescribed ARNI (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: One-tenth of VA patients hospitalized for HF were prescribed SGLT2i at discharge. Opportunities exist to reduce variation in SGLT2i prescription rates across hospitals and to promote its use in patients with CKD and older age.

Medical Therapy Before, During and After Hospitalization in Medicare Beneficiaries With Heart Failure and Diabetes: Get With The Guidelines - Heart Failure Registry.

BACKGROUND: Patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF) and diabetes mellitus (DM) are at risk for worsening clinical status. Little is known about the frequency of therapeutic changes during hospitalization. We characterized the use of medical therapies before, during and after hospitalization in patients with HF and DM. METHODS: We identified Medicare beneficiaries in Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure (GWTG-HF) hospitalized between July 2014 and September 2019 with Part D prescription coverage. We evaluated trends in the use of 7 classes of antihyperglycemic therapies (metformin, sulfonylureas, GLP-1RA, SGLT2-inhibitors, DPP-4 inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, and insulins) and 4 classes of HF therapies (evidence-based ß-blockers, ACEi or ARB, MRA, and ARNI). Medication fills were assessed at 6 and 3 months before hospitalization, at hospital discharge and at 3 months post-discharge. RESULTS: Among 35,165 Medicare beneficiaries, the median age was 77 years, 54% were women, and 76% were white; 11,660 (33%) had HFrEF (LVEF ≤ 40%), 3700 (11%) had HFmrEF (LVEF 41%-49%), and 19,805 (56%) had HFpEF (LVEF ≥ 50%). Overall, insulin was the most commonly prescribed antihyperglycemic after HF hospitalization (n = 12,919, 37%), followed by metformin (n = 7460, 21%) and sulfonylureas (n = 7030, 20%). GLP-1RA (n = 700, 2.0%) and SGLT2i (n = 287, 1.0%) use was low and did not improve over time. In patients with HFrEF, evidence-based beta-blocker, RASi, MRA, and ARNI fills during the 6 months preceding HF hospitalization were 63%, 62%, 19%, and 4%, respectively. Fills initially declined prior to hospitalization, but then rose from 3 months before hospitalization to discharge (beta-blocker: 56%-82%; RASi: 51%-57%, MRA: 15%-28%, ARNI: 3%-6%, triple therapy: 8%-20%; P < 0.01 for all). Prescription rates 3 months after hospitalization were similar to those at hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital optimization of medical therapy in patients with HF and DM is common in participating hospitals of a large US quality improvement registry.

Sex-Based Differences in the Epidemiology, Clinical Characteristics, and Outcomes Associated with Worsening Heart Failure Events in a Learning Health System.

BACKGROUND: Differences in demographics, risk factors, and clinical characteristics may contribute to variations in men and women in terms of the prevalence, clinical setting, and outcomes associated with worsening heart failure (WHF) events. We sought to describe sex-based differences in the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, and outcomes associated with WHF events across clinical settings. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined adults diagnosed with HF from 2010 to 2019 within a large, integrated health care delivery system. Electronic health record data were accessed for hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits and observation stays, and outpatient encounters. WHF was identified using validated natural language processing algorithms and defined as ≥1 symptom, ≥2 objective findings (including ≥1 sign), and ≥1 change in HF-related therapy. Incidence rates and associated outcomes for WHF were compared across care setting by sex. We identified 1,122,368 unique clinical encounters with a diagnosis code for HF, with 124,479 meeting WHF criteria. These WHF encounters existed among 102,116 patients, of whom 48,543 (47.5%) were women and 53,573 (52.5%) were men. Women experiencing WHF were older and more likely to have HF with preserved ejection fraction compared with men. The clinical settings of WHF were similar among women and men: hospitalizations (36.8% vs 37.7%), ED visits or observation stays (11.8% vs 13.4%), and outpatient encounters (4.4% vs 4.9%). Women had lower odds of 30-day mortality after an index hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.83-0.93) or ED visit or observation stay (adjusted odds ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.75-0.98) for WHF. CONCLUSIONS: Women and men contribute similarly to WHF events across diverse clinical settings despite marked differences in age and left ventricular ejection fraction.

Heart failure medical therapy prior to mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair: the STS/ACC Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) is recommended before mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (MTEER) in patients with heart failure (HF) and severe functional mitral regurgitation (FMR). Whether MTEER is being performed on the background of optimal GDMT in clinical practice is unknown. METHODS: Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% who underwent MTEER for FMR from 23 July 2019 to 31 March 2022 in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry were identified. Pre-procedure GDMT utilization was assessed. Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to evaluate associations between pre-MTEER therapy (no/single, double, or triple therapy) and risk of 1-year mortality or HF hospitalization (HFH). RESULTS: Among 4199 patients across 449 sites, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors were used in 85.1%, 44.4%, 28.6%, and 19.9% before MTEER, respectively. Triple therapy was prescribed for 19.2%, double therapy for 38.2%, single therapy for 36.0%, and 6.5% were on no GDMT. Significant centre-level variation in the proportion of patients on pre-intervention triple therapy was observed (0%-61%; adjusted median odds ratio 1.48 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-3.88]; P < .001). In patients eligible for 1-year follow-up (n = 2014; 341 sites), the composite rate of 1-year mortality or HFH was lowest in patients prescribed triple therapy (23.0%) compared with double (24.8%), single (35.7%), and no (41.1%) therapy (P < .01 comparing across groups). Associations persisted after accounting for relevant clinical characteristics, with lower risk in patients prescribed triple therapy [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.73, 95% CI .55-.97] and double therapy (aHR 0.69, 95% CI .56-.86) before MTEER compared with no/single therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Under one-fifth of patients with LVEF <50% who underwent MTEER for FMR in this US nationwide registry were prescribed comprehensive GDMT, with substantial variation across sites. Compared with no/single therapy, triple and double therapy before MTEER were independently associated with reduced risk of mortality or HFH 1 year after intervention.

Multi-marker risk assessment in patients hospitalized with COVID-19: Results from the American Heart Association COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry.

BACKGROUND: The pathobiology of inflammation, thrombosis, and myocardial injury associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) may be assessed by circulating biomarkers. However, their relative prognostic importance has been incompletely described. METHODS: We analyzed data from patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from January 2020, to April 2021, at 122 US hospitals in the American Heart Association (AHA) COVID-19 cardiovascular (CV) disease registry. Patients with data for D-dimer, C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, natriuretic peptides [NP], or cardiac troponin (cTn) at admission were included. cTn quintiles were indexed to the assay-specific 99th percentile reference limits. Using multivariable logistic regression, we assessed the association between each biomarker by quintile [Q] and odds of in-hospital death and a cardiovascular and thrombotic composite outcome. RESULTS: Of 32,636 registry patients, 26,424 (81%) had admission values for ≥1 of the key biomarkers, of which 4,527 (17%) had admission values for all 5 biomarkers. Each biomarker revealed a significant gradient for in-hospital mortality from Q1 to Q5: D-dimer 14% to 35%, CRP 11%-32%, ferritin 11% to 30%, cTn 13% to 43%, and NPs 7% to 35% (Ptrend for each <.001). After adjustment for other biomarkers and clinical variables, Q5 for NPs (OR:4.67, 95% CI: 3.05-7.14) retained the greatest relative odds for death; cTn (OR:2.68, 95% CI: 2.00-3.59) and NPs (OR:7.14, 95% CI: 4.92-10.37) were associated with the greatest odds of the CV composite. Q5 for D-dimer was associated with the highest risk of thrombotic events (OR: 9.02, 95% CI: 5.36-15.18). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, cTn and NPs identified patients at high risk for an in-hospital adverse cardiovascular outcome, while elevations in D-dimer identified patients at risk for thrombotic complications.

Nationwide Utilization of Danish Government Electronic letter system for increasing inFLUenza vaccine uptake (NUDGE-FLU): Study protocol for a nationwide randomized implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Annual influenza vaccination is widely recommended in older adults and other high-risk groups including patients with cardiovascular disease. The real-world effectiveness of influenza vaccination is limited by suboptimal uptake and effective strategies for increasing vaccination rates are therefore needed. The purpose of this trial is to investigate whether behavioral nudges digitally delivered via the Danish nationwide mandatory governmental electronic letter system can increase influenza vaccination uptake among older adults. METHODS: The NUDGE-FLU trial is a randomized implementation trial randomizing all Danish citizens aged 65 years and above without an exemption from the Danish mandatory governmental electronic letter system to receive no digitally delivered behavioral nudge (usual care arm) or to receive one of 9 electronic letters (intervention arms) each leveraging different behavioral science strategies. The trial has randomized 964,870 participants with randomization clustered at the household level (n = 691,820 households). Intervention letters were delivered on September 16, 2022, and follow-up is currently ongoing. All trial data are captured using the nationwide Danish administrative health registries. The primary end point is the receipt of an influenza vaccine on or before January 1, 2023. The secondary end point is time to vaccination. Exploratory end points include clinical events such as hospitalization for influenza or pneumonia, cardiovascular events, all-cause hospitalization, and all-cause mortality. DISCUSSION: The nationwide randomized NUDGE-FLU trial is one of the largest implementation trials ever conducted and will provide important insights into effective communication strategies to maximize vaccination uptake among high-risk groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05542004, registered September 15, 2022, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05542004.

Operational challenges and mitigation measures during the COVID-19 pandemic-Lessons from DELIVER.

BACKGROUND: Catastrophic disruptions in care delivery threaten the operational efficiency and potentially the validity of clinical research efforts, in particular randomized clinical trials. Most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic affected essentially all aspects of care delivery and clinical research conduct. While consensus statements and clinical guidance documents have detailed potential mitigation measures, few real-world experiences detailing clinical trial adaptations to the COVID-19 pandemic exist, particularly among, large, global registrational cardiovascular trials. METHODS: We outline the operational impact of COVID-19 and resultant mitigation measures in the Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the LIVEs of Patients with Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure (DELIVER) trial, one of the largest and most globally diverse experiences with COVID-19 of any cardiovascular clinical trial to date. Specifically, we address the needed coordination between academic investigators, trial leadership, clinical sites, and the supporting sponsor to ensure the safety of participants and trial staff, to maintain the fidelity of trial operations, and to prospectively adapt statistical analyses plans to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 and the pandemic at large on trial participants. These discussions included key operational issues such as ensuring delivery of study medications, adaptations to study visits, enhanced COVID-19 related endpoint adjudication, and protocol and analytical plan revisions. CONCLUSION: Our findings may have important implications for establishing consensus on prospective contingency planning in future clinical trials. CLINICALTRIAL: gov: NCT03619213. CLINICALTRIAL: GOV: NCT03619213.

Risk of Acute Kidney Injury Among Older Adults With Heart Failure and With Reduced Ejection Fraction Treated With Angiotensin-Neprilysin Inhibitor vs Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitor in Routine Clinical Care.

BACKGROUND: The acute hemodynamic effects of sacubitril/valsartan, an angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), may result in early changes in kidney function, raising concerns about acute kidney injury (AKI), particularly in those who are naïve to renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASis). METHODS: We conducted a cohort study using U.S. Medicare fee-for-service claims data (2014-2017). Patients with HFrEF ≥ 65 years newly initiating ARNI or RASi, with no prior use of either drug class, were included. The primary outcome was hospitalization due to AKI as the primary discharge diagnosis, and the secondary outcome included AKI as a primary or secondary discharge diagnosis. AKI risks were described under an as-treated follow-up approach, with censoring on treatment discontinuation, switch, insurance disenrollment, death, or administrative censoring as well as an intent-to-treat approach. Propensity-score-based fine-stratification weighting was used to account for potential confounding by 81 pre-exposure characteristics. Cumulative incidence functions were used to report absolute risks, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to provide hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: We included 27,166 patients with a mean (SD) age of 73 (7.3) years, and 4155 (15.3%) were initiating ARNI. After propensity score weighting, the 180-day cumulative incidence was 2.7% (2.4%-3.1%) among RASi initiators and 2.7% (2.2%-3.5%) among ARNI initiators for the primary outcome, and it was 6.5% (6.0%-7.1%) and 6.1% (5.2%-7.1%), respectively, for the secondary outcome under as-treated follow-up. HR (95% CI) comparing ARNI with RASi were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.72-1.16) for the primary outcome and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.79-1.08) for the secondary outcome. Similar results were observed in the intent-to-treat analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Among a large cohort of U.S. Medicare beneficiaries with HFrEF, ARNI treatment was not associated with higher rates of AKI than RASi treatment. These results provide reassurance for providers considering ARNI initiation in older patients who are RASi-naïve.

Association Between Participation in a Heart Failure Telemonitoring Program and Health Care Utilization and Death Within an Integrated Health Care Delivery System.

BACKGROUND: The clinical usefulness of remote telemonitoring to reduce postdischarge health care use and death in adults with heart failure (HF) remains controversial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Within a large integrated health care delivery system, we matched patients enrolled in a postdischarge telemonitoring intervention from 2015 to 2019 to patients not receiving telemonitoring at up to a 1:4 ratio on age, sex, and calipers of a propensity score. Primary outcomes were readmissions for worsening HF and all-cause death within 30, 90, and 365 days of the index discharge; secondary outcomes were all-cause readmissions and any outpatient diuretic dose adjustments. We matched 726 patients receiving telemonitoring to 1985 controls not receiving telemonitoring, with a mean age of 75 ± 11 years and 45% female. Patients receiving telemonitoring did not have a significant reduction in worsening HF hospitalizations (adjusted rate ratio [aRR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-1.33), all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.33-1.08), or all-cause hospitalization (aRR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65-1.05) at 30 days, but did have an increase in outpatient diuretic dose adjustments (aRR 1.84, 95% CI 1.44-2.36). All associations were similar at 90 and 365 days postdischarge. CONCLUSIONS: A postdischarge HF telemonitoring intervention was associated with more diuretic dose adjustments but was not significantly associated with HF-related morbidity and mortality.

Vaccines, Antibodies and Donors: Varying Attitudes and Policies Surrounding COVID-19 and Heart Transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: There are varied opinions in the United States regarding many aspects of care related to COVID-19. The purpose of this study was to examine the opinions of health care personnel and the policies of heart transplant centers concerning practices for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 in donors and recipients of heart transplants. METHODS: Two anonymous, electronic web-based surveys were developed: 1 was administered to health care personnel through a mailing list maintained by the Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA); another was administered to U.S. medical adult and pediatric heart transplant (HT) program directors. Individual and group e-mails were sent with an embedded link to the respective surveys in February 2022. RESULTS: A total of 176 individuals (8.6%) responded to the survey administered through the HFSA. Of medical directors of transplant programs, 78 (54% response rate) completed a separate survey on their centers' policies. Although 95% (n = 167) of individuals indicated vaccination against COVID-19 should be required prior to HT, only 67% (n = 52) of centers mandated that practice. Similarly, 61% of individuals thought vaccination should be required prior to HT for caregivers, but only 13% of transplant centers mandated caregiver vaccination. Of the centers, 63% reported considering donors despite histories of recent COVID-19 infection (within 3 months), and 47% considered donors with current positive polymerase chain reaction tests. Regarding post-transplant care, only 22% of programs routinely measured antibodies to COVID-19, and 71% used tixagevimab/cilgavimab (Evusheld) for pre-exposure prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: There were significant differences between individual preferences and centers' practices with respect to COVID-19 management of candidates for and recipients of HT. Additionally, there was wide variation in policies among centers, reflecting the need for further study to inform consistent guidance and recommendations across centers to optimize equitable care for this high-risk patient population.

Epidemiology of Acute Heart Failure in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: An Analysis From the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network.

BACKGROUND: Acute heart failure (HF) is an important complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has been hypothesized to relate to inflammatory activation. METHODS: We evaluated consecutive intensive care unit (ICU) admissions for COVID-19 across 6 centers in the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network, identifying patients with vs without acute HF. Acute HF was subclassified as de novo vs acute-on-chronic, based on the absence or presence of prior HF. Clinical features, biomarker profiles and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Of 901 admissions to an ICU due to COVID-19, 80 (8.9%) had acute HF, including 18 (2.0%) with classic cardiogenic shock (CS) and 37 (4.1%) with vasodilatory CS. The majority (n = 45) were de novo HF presentations. Compared to patients without acute HF, those with acute HF had higher cardiac troponin and natriuretic peptide levels and similar inflammatory biomarkers; patients with de novo HF had the highest cardiac troponin levels. Notably, among patients critically ill with COVID-19, illness severity (median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, 8 [IQR, 5-10] vs 6 [4-9]; P = 0.025) and mortality rates (43.8% vs 32.4%; P = 0.040) were modestly higher in patients with vs those without acute HF. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients critically ill with COVID-19, acute HF is distinguished more by biomarkers of myocardial injury and hemodynamic stress than by biomarkers of inflammation.

Influenza vaccination: a 'shot' at INVESTing in cardiovascular health.

The link between viral respiratory infection and non-pulmonary organ-specific injury, including cardiac injury, has become increasingly appreciated during the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Even prior to the pandemic, however, the association between acute infection with influenza and elevated cardiovascular risk was evident. The recently published results of the NHLBI-funded INfluenza Vaccine to Effectively Stop CardioThoracic Events and Decompensated (INVESTED) trial, a 5200 patient comparative effectiveness study of high-dose vs. standard-dose influenza vaccine to reduce cardiopulmonary events and mortality in a high-risk cardiovascular population, found no difference between strategies. However, the broader implications of influenza vaccine as a strategy to reduce morbidity in high-risk patients remain extremely important, with randomized controlled trial and observational data supporting vaccination in high-risk patients with cardiovascular disease. Given a favourable risk-benefit profile and widespread availability at generally low cost, we contend that influenza vaccination should remain a centrepiece of cardiovascular risk mitigation and describe the broader context of underutilization of this strategy. Few therapeutics in medicine offer seasonal efficacy from a single administration with generally mild, transient side effects, and exceedingly low rates of serious adverse effects. Infection control measures such as physical distancing, hand washing, and the use of masks during the COVID-19 pandemic have already been associated with substantially curtailed incidence of influenza outbreaks across the globe. Appending annual influenza vaccination to these measures represents an important public health and moral imperative.

Characteristics of clinical trials evaluating cardiovascular therapies for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: a cross sectional analysis.

Morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 has increased exponentially, and patients with cardiovascular (CV) disease are at risk for poor outcomes. Several lines of evidence suggest a potential role for CV therapies in COVID-19 treatment. Characteristics of clinical trials of CV therapies related to COVID-19 registered on ClinicalTrials.gov have not been described. METHODS: ClinicalTrials.gov was queried on August 7, 2020 for COVID-19 related trials. Studies evaluating established CV drugs, other fibrinolytics (defibrotide), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were included. Studies evaluating anti-microbial, convalescent plasma, non-colchicine anti-inflammatory, and other therapies were excluded. Trial characteristics were tabulated from study-specific entries. RESULTS: A total of 2,935 studies related to COVID-19 were registered as of August 7, 2020. Of these, 1,645 were interventional studies, and the final analytic cohort consisted of 114 studies evaluating 10 CV therapeutic categories. Antithrombotics (32.5%; n = 37) were most commonly evaluated, followed by pulmonary vasodilators (14.0%; n = 16), renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system-related therapies (12.3%; n = 14), and colchicine (8.8%; n = 10). Trials evaluating multiple CV therapy categories and CV therapies in combination with non-CV therapies encompassed 4.4% (n = 5) and 9.6% (n = 11) of studies, respectively. Most studies were designed for randomized allocation (87.7%; n = 100), enrollment of less than 1000 participants (86.8%; n = 99), single site implementation (55.3%; n = 63), and had a primary outcome of mortality or a composite including mortality (56.1%; n = 64). Most study populations consisted of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (81.6%; n = 93). At the time of database query, 28.9% (n = 33) of studies were not yet recruiting and the majority were estimated to be completed after December 2020 (67.8%; n = 78). Most lead sponsors were located in North America (43.9%; n = 50) or Europe (36.0%; n = 41). CONCLUSIONS: A minority (7%) of clinical trials related to COVID-19 registered on ClinicalTrials.gov plan to evaluate CV therapies. Of CV therapy studies, most were planned to be single center, enroll less than 1000 inpatients, sponsored by European or North American academic institutions, and estimated to complete after December 2020. Collectively, these findings underscore the need for a network of sites with a platform protocol for rapid evaluation of multiple therapies and generalizability to inform clinical care and health policy for COVID-19 moving forward.

De Novo vs Acute-on-Chronic Presentations of Heart Failure-Related Cardiogenic Shock: Insights from the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Registry.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure-related cardiogenic shock (HF-CS) accounts for an increasing proportion of cases of CS in contemporary cardiac intensive care units. Whether the chronicity of HF identifies distinct clinical profiles of HF-CS is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated admissions to cardiac intensive care units for HF-CS in 28 centers using data from the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network registry (2017-2020). HF-CS was defined as CS due to ventricular failure in the absence of acute myocardial infarction and was classified as de novo vs acute-on-chronic based on the absence or presence of a prior diagnosis of HF, respectively. Clinical features, resource use, and outcomes were compared among groups. Of 1405 admissions with HF-CS, 370 had de novo HF-CS (26.3%), and 1035 had acute-on-chronic HF-CS (73.7%). Patients with de novo HF-CS had a lower prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, and chronic kidney disease (all P < 0.01). Median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores were higher in those with de novo HF-CS (8; 25th-75th: 5-11) vs acute-on-chronic HF-CS (6; 25th-75th: 4-9, P < 0.01), as was the proportion of Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention (SCAI) shock stage E (46.1% vs 26.1%, P < 0.01). After adjustment for clinical covariates and preceding cardiac arrest, the risk of in-hospital mortality was higher in patients with de novo HF-CS than in those with acute-on-chronic HF-CS (adjusted hazard ratio 1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.05-1.75, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Despite having fewer comorbidities, patients with de novo HF-CS had more severe shock presentations and worse in-hospital outcomes. Whether HF disease chronicity is associated with time-dependent compensatory adaptations, unique pathobiological features and responses to treatment in patients presenting with HF-CS warrants further investigation.