Factors Impacting Physician Prognostic Accuracy in Heart Failure Patients With Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: A recent study showed that the accuracy of heart failure (HF) cardiologists and family doctors to predict mortality in outpatients with HF proved suboptimal, performing less well than models. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate patient and physician factors associated with physician accuracy. METHODS: The authors included outpatients with HF from 11 HF clinics. Family doctors and HF cardiologists estimated patient 1-year mortality. They calculated predicted mortality using the Seattle HF Model and followed patients for 1 year to record mortality (or urgent heart transplant or ventricular assist device implant as mortality-equivalent events). Using multivariable logistic regression, the authors evaluated associations among physician experience and confidence in estimates, duration of patient-physician relationship, patient-physician sex concordance, patient race, and predicted risk, with concordant results between physician and model predictions. RESULTS: Among 1,643 patients, 1-year event rate was 10% (95% CI: 8%-12%). One-half of the estimates showed discrepant results between model and physician predictions, mainly owing to physician risk overestimation. Discrepancies were more frequent with increasing patient risk from 38% in low-risk to ∼75% in high-risk patients. When making predictions on male patients, female HF cardiologists were 26% more likely to have discrepant predictions (OR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.58-0.94). HF cardiologist estimates in Black patients were 33% more likely to be discrepant (OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.45-0.99). Low confidence in predictions was associated with discrepancy. Analyses restricted to high-confidence estimates showed inferior calibration to the model, with risk overestimation across risk groups. CONCLUSIONS: Discrepant physician and model predictions were more frequent in cases with perceived increased risk. Model predictions outperform physicians even when they are confident in their predictions. (Predicted Prognosis in Heart Failure [INTUITION]; NCT04009798).

Recurrent giant cell myocarditis following orthotopic heart transplant resulting in urgent redo orthotopic heart transplantation: a case report.

Background: Giant cell myocarditis (GCM) is a severe and rapidly progressing condition that can lead to end-stage heart failure. We present a case of a 51-year-old male with a history of orthotopic heart transplantation (OHTx) for GCM, who experienced recurrent GCM in the allograft, leading to progressive heart failure and the need for a second heart transplant. Case summary: A 51-year-old male with a history of OHTx for GCM presented with rapidly worsening heart failure symptoms. Despite initial stability, he deteriorated to cardiogenic shock and required intensive support. His clinical course was complicated by recurrent COVID-19 infections, worsened left ventricular ejection fraction, and withdrawal of guideline-directed medical therapy. Imaging showed extensive scar burden, and subsequent investigations ruled out coronary artery disease. With declining functional status and worsening cardiogenic shock, he was re-listed for OHTx and successfully underwent a second heart transplant. Discussion: Giant cell myocarditis poses challenges due to its aggressive nature. Early, aggressive immunosuppression and mechanical circulatory support are crucial. The recurrence rate of GCM post-OHTx is notable, often within the first year, and the optimal immunosuppressive regimen remains uncertain. In this case, GCM recurrence following OHTx led to continued deterioration despite treatment, necessitating a second heart transplant. This unique case emphasizes the complexity of managing recurrent GCM post-OHTx.

Measuring Single-Cell Calcium Dynamics Using a Myofilament-Localized Optical Biosensor in hiPSC-CMs Derived from DCM Patients.

Synchronized contractions of cardiomyocytes within the heart are tightly coupled to electrical stimulation known as excitation-contraction coupling. Calcium plays a key role in this process and dysregulated calcium handling can significantly impair cardiac function and lead to the development of cardiomyopathies and heart failure. Here, we describe a method and analytical technique to study myofilament-localized calcium signaling using the intensity-based fluorescent biosensor, RGECO-TnT. Dilated cardiomyopathy is a heart muscle disease that negatively impacts the heart's contractile function following dilatation of the left ventricle. We demonstrate how this biosensor can be used to characterize 2D hiPSC-CMs monolayers generated from a healthy control subject compared to two patients diagnosed with dilated cardiomyopathy. Lastly, we provide a step-by-step guide for single-cell data analysis and describe a custom Transient Analysis application, specifically designed to quantify features of calcium transients. All in all, we explain how this analytical approach can be applied to phenotype hiPSC-CM behaviours and stratify patient responses to identify perturbations in calcium signaling.

Predicting 1-Year Mortality in Outpatients With Heart Failure With Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction: Do Empiric Models Outperform Physician Intuitive Estimates? A Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have demonstrated that physicians often err in estimating patient prognosis. No studies have directly compared physician to model predictive performance in heart failure (HF). We aimed to compare the accuracy of physician versus model predictions of 1-year mortality. METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study on 11 HF clinics in 5 provinces in Canada included consecutive consented outpatients with HF with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (<40%). By collecting clinical data, we calculated predicted 1-year mortality using the Seattle HF Model (SHFM), the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic HF score, and the HF Meta-Score. HF cardiologists and family doctors, blinded to model predictions, estimated patient 1-year mortality. During 1-year follow-up, we recorded the composite end point of mortality, urgent ventricular assist device implant, or heart transplant. We compared physicians and model discrimination (C statistic), calibration (observed versus predicted event rate), and risk reclassification. RESULTS: The study included 1643 patients with ambulatory HF with a mean age of 65 years, 24% female, and mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 28%. Over 1-year follow-up, 9% had an event. The SHFM had the best discrimination (SHFM C statistic 0.76; HF Meta-Score 0.73; Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure 0.70) and calibration. Physicians' discrimination differed little (0.75 for HF cardiologists and 0.73 for family doctors) but both physician groups substantially overestimated risk by >10% in both low- and high-risk patients (poor calibration). In risk reclassification analysis, among patients without events, the SHFM better classified 51% in comparison to HF cardiologists and 43% in comparison to family doctors. In patients with events, the SHFM erroneously assigned lower risk to 44% in comparison to HF cardiologists and 34% in comparison to family doctors. CONCLUSIONS: Family doctors and HF cardiologists showed adequate risk discrimination, with however substantial overestimation of absolute risk. Predictive models showed higher accuracy. Incorporating models in family and HF cardiology practices may improve patient care and resource use in HF with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT04009798.

Comparison of Questionnaire and Performance-Based Physical Frailty Scales to Predict Survival and Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Heart Failure.

Background Frailty is prevalent in older adults with heart failure and is associated with poor outcomes; however, there remains uncertainty on how to measure frailty in clinical practice. Methods and Results A multicentric prospective cohort study was assembled at 4 heart failure clinics to compare the prognostic value of 3 physical frailty scales in ambulatory patients with heart failure. Outcomes were all-cause death or hospitalization and health-related quality of life using the 36-Item Short Form survey questionnaire (SF-36) at 3 months. Multivariable regression was adjusted for age, sex, Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure score, and baseline SF-36 score. The cohort included 215 patients (mean age 77.6 years). All 3 frailty scales were independently associated with death or hospitalization at 3 months; the adjusted odds ratios standardized per 1 SD worsening of the Short Physical Performance Battery; Fried, and strength, assistance with walking, rising from a chair, climbing stairs, and falls scales were 1.67 (95% CI, 1.09-2.55), 1.60 (95% CI, 1.04-2.46), and 1.55 (95% CI, 1.03-2.35), respectively, with C statistics of 0.77 to 0.78. All 3 frailty scales were independently associated with worsening SF-36 scores, especially the Short Physical Performance Battery, for which 1 SD worsening of frailty translated to a decrement of -5.86 (-8.55 to -3.17) and -5.51 (-7.82 to -3.21) points in the Physical Component Score and Mental Component Score. Conclusions All 3 physical frailty scales were associated with death, hospitalization, and reduced health-related quality of life in ambulatory patients with heart failure. Questionnaire or performance-based physical frailty scales can be used to offer prognostic value and a therapeutic target in this vulnerable population. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03887351.

Efficacy of empagliflozin in heart failure with preserved versus mid-range ejection fraction: a pre-specified analysis of EMPEROR-Preserved.

The EMPEROR-Preserved trial showed that the sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin significantly reduces the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) in heart failure patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) > 40%. Here, we report the results of a pre-specified analysis that separately evaluates these patients stratified by LVEF: preserved (≥ 50%) (n = 4,005; 66.9%) or mid-range (41-49%). In patients with LVEF ≥ 50%, empagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or HHF (the primary endpoint) by 17% versus placebo (hazard ratio (HR) 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.71-0.98, P = 0.024). For the key secondary endpoint, the HR for total HHF was 0.83 (95%CI: 0.66-1.04, P = 0.11). For patients with an LVEF of 41-49%, the HR for empagliflozin versus placebo was 0.71 (95%CI: 0.57-0.88, P = 0.002) for the primary outcome (Pinteraction = 0.27), and 0.57 (95%CI: 0.42-0.79, P < 0.001) for total HHF (Pinteraction = 0.06). These results, together with those from the EMPEROR-Reduced trial in patients with LVEF < 40%, support the use of empagliflozin across the full spectrum of LVEF in heart failure.

Effects of Empagliflozin in Women and Men With Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Women and men with heart failure (HF) and preserved ejection fraction may differ in their clinical characteristics and their response to therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of sex on the effects of empagliflozin in patients with HF and preserved ejection fraction enrolled in the EMPEROR-Preserved trial (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction). METHODS: The effects of empagliflozin on the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for HF and on secondary outcomes (including total HF hospitalization, cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores) were compared in women and men in the overall cohort and in subgroups defined by left ventricular ejection fraction (41%-49%, 50%-59%, and ≥60%). The effects of empagliflozin on physiological measures, including changes in systolic blood pressure, uric acid, hemoglobin, body weight, and natriuretic peptide levels, were also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 5988 patients randomized, 2676 (44.7%) were women. In the placebo arm, women tended to have lower risk for adverse outcomes, including a lower risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.56, 0.84]). Compared with placebo, empagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for HF to a similar degree in both sexes (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.69, 0.96] for men; and hazard ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.61, 0.92] for women; Pinteraction=0.54). Sex did not modify the relationship between empagliflozin and outcomes across ejection fraction groups. Similar results were seen for secondary outcomes and physiological measures. Compared with placebo, empagliflozin improved the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score to a similar extent in both sexes (1.38 for men versus 1.63 for women at 52 weeks; Pinteraction=0.77); the results were similar for Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score and total summary score. CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin produced similar benefits on outcomes and health status in women and men with HF and preserved ejection fraction. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT03057951.

Clinical Prediction Models for Heart Failure Hospitalization in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background Clinical prediction models have been developed for hospitalization for heart failure in type 2 diabetes. However, a systematic evaluation of these models' performance, applicability, and clinical impact is absent. Methods and Results We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Tufts' clinical prediction registry through February 2021. Studies needed to report the development, validation, clinical impact, or update of a prediction model for hospitalization for heart failure in type 2 diabetes with measures of model performance and sufficient information for clinical use. Model assessment was done with the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, and meta-analyses of model discrimination were performed. We included 15 model development and 3 external validation studies with data from 999 167 people with type 2 diabetes. Of the 15 models, 6 had undergone external validation and only 1 had low concern for risk of bias and applicability (Risk Equations for Complications of Type 2 Diabetes). Seven models were presented in a clinically useful manner (eg, risk score, online calculator) and 2 models were classified as the most suitable for clinical use based on study design, external validity, and point-of-care usability. These were Risk Equations for Complications of Type 2 Diabetes (meta-analyzed c-statistic, 0.76) and the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Heart Failure in Diabetes (meta-analyzed c-statistic, 0.78), which was the simplest model with only 5 variables. No studies reported clinical impact. Conclusions Most prediction models for hospitalization for heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes have potential concerns with risk of bias or applicability, and uncertain external validity and clinical impact. Future research is needed to address these knowledge gaps.

A randomized controlled trial of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor management in patients admitted in hospital with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Renin-angiotensin aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) are commonly used among patients hospitalized with a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We evaluated whether continuation versus discontinuation of RAASi were associated with short term clinical or biochemical outcomes. METHODS: The RAAS-COVID-19 trial was a randomized, open label study in adult patients previously treated with RAASi who are hospitalized with COVID-19 (NCT04508985). Participants were randomized 1:1 to discontinue or continue RAASi. The primary outcome was a global rank score calculated from baseline to day 7 (or discharge) incorporating clinical events and biomarker changes. Global rank scores were compared between groups using the Wilcoxon test statistic and the negative binomial test (using incident rate ratio [IRR]) and the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Overall, 46 participants were enrolled; 21 participants were randomized to discontinue RAASi and 25 to continue. Patients' mean age was 71.5 years and 43.5% were female. Discontinuation of RAASi, versus continuation, resulted in a non-statistically different mean global rank score (discontinuation 6 [standard deviation [SD] 6.3] vs continuation 3.8 (SD 2.5); P = .60). The negative binomial analysis identified that discontinuation increased the risk of adverse outcomes (IRR 1.67 [95% CI 1.06-2.62]; P = .027); RAASi discontinuation increased brain natriuretic peptide levels (% change from baseline: +16.7% vs -27.5%; P = .024) and the incidence of acute heart failure (33% vs 4.2%, P = .016). CONCLUSION: RAASi continuation in participants hospitalized with COVID-19 appears safe; discontinuation increased brain natriuretic peptide levels and may increase risk of acute heart failure; where possible, RAASi should be continued.

Insights Into Myocardial Oxygenation and Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Tissue Biomarkers in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: The pathophysiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction is not well understood, but evidence strongly suggests involvement of microvascular dysfunction. We studied the myocardial oxygenation reserve as a direct marker of coronary vascular function and its relation to myocardial deformation and tissue characteristics by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). METHODS: In a dual-center case-control study, patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (>50%) and healthy controls older than 50 years underwent quantitative CMR for ventricular volumes and functional assessment with feature tracking, as well as tissue characterization (T1, T2, extracellular volume). Coronary vascular function was measured by oxygenation-sensitive (OS)-CMR of the myocardial oxygenation response to a vasoactive breathing maneuver. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients completed the CMR exam. Compared with cutoffs derived from 12 control subjects, circumferential peak strain was attenuated in 97% of patients. Native T1 was elevated in 93%, extracellular volume was elevated in 83%. Sixty-six percent of patients revealed either regional or global myocardial edema, defined by an increased myocardial T2. An attenuated global myocardial oxygenation reserve (<4.4%) was observed in 96% of the patients (1.7±3.9% versus 9.1±5.3% in controls, P<0.001). This was correlated with septal wall thickness (r=-0.54, P=0.003), edema (myocardial T2; ß=-0.26% oxygenation-sensitive/ms [95% CI, -0.49 to -0.03], P=0.029), and reduced diastolic strain rate (ß=1.50% oxygenation-sensitive/s-1 [95% CI, 0.06-2.90], P=0.042). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with clinical heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, vascular dysfunction as measured by an attenuated myocardial oxygenation reserve is associated with myocardial edema, a thicker septum, and diastolic dysfunction. A quantitative comprehensive CMR exam including oxygenation-sensitive-CMR allows for comprehensive imaging-based phenotyping of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

Clinical Phenotypes in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Characteristics, Cardiovascular Outcomes and Treatment Strategies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: With recent advances in the pharmacological management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), there is a growing need to understand which patients optimally benefit from these novel therapies. Various clinical clustering methodologies have emerged that utilise data-agnostic strategies to categorise patients that have similar clinical characteristics and outcomes; broadly, this characterisation is termed phenotyping. In patients with T2DM, we aimed to describe patient characteristics from phenotype studies, their cardiovascular risk profiles and the impact of antihyperglycemic treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: Numerous phenotypic studies have been undertaken that have utilised a combination of clinical, biochemical, imaging and genetic variables. Each of these has produced phenotypes that display a spectrum of cardiovascular risk. Studies that aimed to describe pathophysiological phenotypes generally identified five phenotypes: autoimmune phenotype, insulin-related phenotypes (including permutations of insulin deficiency and resistance), obesity phenotype, ageing phenotype, and a sex-related phenotype. Studies examining risk profiles have demonstrated that across such phenotypes there is a spectrum of risk for diabetic complications. Few studies have examined treatment effects across these phenotypes, and thus provide little insights towards making phenotype-guided treatment decisions Clustering analyses in patients with T2DM have identified distinct phenotypes with unique risk profiles. Further studies are needed that harness the use of clinical, biochemical, imaging and genetic data to explore therapeutic heterogeneity and response to antihyperglycemic treatment across the spectrum of patient phenotypes.

Empagliflozin in Heart Failure with a Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, but their effects in patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction are uncertain. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 5988 patients with class II-IV heart failure and an ejection fraction of more than 40% to receive empagliflozin (10 mg once daily) or placebo, in addition to usual therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure. RESULTS: Over a median of 26.2 months, a primary outcome event occurred in 415 of 2997 patients (13.8%) in the empagliflozin group and in 511 of 2991 patients (17.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 0.90; P<0.001). This effect was mainly related to a lower risk of hospitalization for heart failure in the empagliflozin group. The effects of empagliflozin appeared consistent in patients with or without diabetes. The total number of hospitalizations for heart failure was lower in the empagliflozin group than in the placebo group (407 with empagliflozin and 541 with placebo; hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.88; P<0.001). Uncomplicated genital and urinary tract infections and hypotension were reported more frequently with empagliflozin. CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin reduced the combined risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure in patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction, regardless of the presence or absence of diabetes. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly; EMPEROR-Preserved ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03057951).

CCS/CHFS Heart Failure Guidelines Update: Defining a New Pharmacologic Standard of Care for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

In this update of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society heart failure (HF) guidelines, we provide comprehensive recommendations and practical tips for the pharmacologic management of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Since the 2017 comprehensive update of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society guidelines for the management of HF, substantial new evidence has emerged that has informed the care of these patients. In particular, we focus on the role of novel pharmacologic therapies for HFrEF including angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, sinus node inhibitors, sodium glucose transport 2 inhibitors, and soluble guanylate cyclase stimulators in conjunction with other long established HFrEF therapies. Updated recommendations are also provided in the context of the clinical setting for which each of these agents might be prescribed; the potential value of each therapy is reviewed, where relevant, for chronic HF, new onset HF, and for HF hospitalization. We define a new standard of pharmacologic care for HFrEF that incorporates 4 key therapeutic drug classes as standard therapy for most patients: an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (as first-line therapy or after angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker titration); a ß-blocker; a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist; and a sodium glucose transport 2 inhibitor. Additionally, many patients with HFrEF will have clinical characteristics for which we recommended other key therapies to improve HF outcomes, including sinus node inhibitors, soluble guanylate cyclase stimulators, hydralazine/nitrates in combination, and/or digoxin. Finally, an approach to management that integrates prioritized pharmacologic with nonpharmacologic and invasive therapies after a diagnosis of HFrEF is highlighted.

Management of Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System blockade in patients admitted to hospital with confirmed coronavirus disease (COVID-19) infection (The McGill RAAS-COVID- 19): A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the RAAS-COVID-19 randomized control trial is to evaluate whether an upfront strategy of temporary discontinuation of renin angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibition versus continuation of RAAS inhibition among patients admitted with established COVID-19 infection has an impact on short term clinical and biomarker outcomes. We hypothesize that continuation of RAAS inhibition will be superior to temporary discontinuation with regards to the primary endpoint of a global rank sum score. The global rank sum score has been successfully used in previous cardiovascular clinical trials. TRIAL DESIGN: This is an open label parallel two arm (1,1 ratio) randomized control superiority trial of approximately 40 COVID-19 patients who are on chronic RAAS inhibitor therapy. PARTICIPANTS: Adults who are admitted to hospital within the McGill University Health Centre systems (MUHC) including Royal Victoria Hospital (RVH), Montreal General Hospital (MGH) and Jewish General Hospital (JGH) and who are within 96 hours of COVID-19 diagnosis (confirmed via PCR on any biological sample) will be considered for the trial. Of note, the initial protocol to screen and enrol within 48 hours of COVID-19 diagnosis was extended through an amendment, to 96 hours to increase feasibility. Participants have to be 18 years or older and would have to be on RAAS inhibitors for at least a month to be considered eligible for the study. Additionally, RAAS inhibitors should not have been held for more than 48 hours before randomization. A list of inclusion and exclusion criteria can be found in the full protocol document. In order to prevent heart failure exacerbation, patients with reduced ejection fraction were excluded from the trial. Once a patient is admitted on the ward with a diagnosis of COVID-19, we will confirm with the treating physician if the participant is suitable for the RAAS-COVID trial and meets all the inclusion and exclusion criteria. If the patient is eligible and informed consent has been obtained we will collect data on sex, age, ethnicity, past medical history and list of medications (e.g. other anti-hypertensives or anticoagulants), for further analysis. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: All the study participants will be randomized to a strategy of temporarily holding the RAAS inhibitor [intervention] versus continuing the RAAS inhibitor [continued standard of care]. Among participants who are randomized to the intervention arm, alternative guide-line directed anti-hypertensive medication will be provided to the treating physician team (detail in study protocol). In the intervention arm RAAS inhibitor will be withheld for a total of 7 days with the possibility of the withdrawn medication being initiated at any point after day 7 or on the day of discharge. The recommendation for re-initiating the withdrawn medication will be made to the treating physician. The re-initiation of these therapies are according to standard convention and follow-up as per Canadian guidelines. Additionally, the date of restarting the withdrawn medication or whether the medication was re-prescribed on discharge or not, will be collected. This will be used to conduct a sensitivity analysis. Furthermore, biomarkers such as troponin, c-reactive protein (CRP) and lymphocyte count will be assessed during the same time period. Samples will be collected on randomization, day 4 and day 7. MAIN OUTCOMES: PRIMARY ENDPOINT: In this study the primary end point is a global rank score calculated for all participants, regardless of treatment assignment ( score from 0 to 7). Please refer to table 4 in the full protocol. In the context of the current trial, it is estimated that death is the most meaningful endpoint, and therefore has the highest score ( score of 7). This is followed by admission to ICU, the need for mechanical ventilation etc. The lowest scores ( score of 1) are assigned to biomarker changes (e.g. change in troponin, change in CRP). This strategy has been used successfully in cardiovascular disease trials and therefore is applicable to the current trial. The primary endpoint for the present trial is assessed from baseline to day 7 (or discharge). Participants are ranked across the clinical and biomarker domains. Lower values indicate better health (or stability). Participants who died during the 7th day of the study will be ranked based on all events occurring before their death and also including the fatal event in the score. Next, participants who did not die but were transferred to ICU for invasive ventilation will be ranked based on all the events occurring before the ICU entry and also including the ICU admission in the score. Those participants who did not die were not transferred to ICU for invasive ventilation, will be ranked based on the subsequent outcomes. The mean rank score will then be compared between groups. In this scheme, a lower mean rank score indicates greater overall stability for participants. Secondary endpoints : The key secondary endpoints are the individual components of the primary components and include the following: death, transfer to ICU primarily for invasive ventilation, transfer to ICU for other indication, non-fatal MACE ( any of following, MI, stroke, acute HF, new onset Afib), length of stay > 4 days, development of acute kidney injury ( > 40% decline in eGFR or doubling of serum creatinine), urgent intravenous treatment for high blood pressure, 30% increase in baseline high sensitivity troponin, 30% increase in baseline BNP, increase in CRP to > 30% in 48 hours and lymphocyte count drop> 30%. We will also look at the World Health Organization (WHO) ordinal scale for clinical improvement (in COVID-19) in our data. In this scale death will be assigned the highest score of 8. Patients with no limitation of activity will be assigned a score of 1 which indicates overall more stability (3). Additionally, we will evaluate the potential effects of discontinuing RAAS inhibition on alternative schedules (longer/shorter than 7 days, intermittent discontinuation) using a mechanistic mathematical model of COVID-19 immunopathology calibrated to data collected from our patient cohort. In particular, we will assess the impact of alternative schedules on primary and secondary endpoints including increases to baseline CRP and lymphocyte counts. RANDOMIZATION: Participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio. Randomization will be performed within an electronic database system at the time of enrolment using a random number generator, an approach that has been successfully used in other clinical trials. Neither participant, study team, or treating team will be blinded to the intervention arm. BLINDING: This is an open label study with no blinding. NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): The approximate number of participants required for this trial is 40 patients (randomized 1:1 to continuation versus discontinuation of RAAS inhibitors). This number was calculated based on previous rates of outcomes for COVID-19 in the literature (e.g. death, ICU transfer) and statistical power calculations. TRIAL STATUS: Protocol number: MP-37-2021-6641, Version 4: 01-10-2020. Trial start date September 1st 2020 and currently enrolling participants. Estimated end date for recruitment of participants : July 2021. Estimated end date for study completion: September 1st 2021. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration: ClincalTrials.gov : NCT04508985 , date of registration: August 11th , 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Empagliflozin and health-related quality of life outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: the EMPEROR-Reduced trial.

AIMS: In this secondary analysis of the EMPEROR-Reduced trial, we sought to evaluate whether the benefits of empagliflozin varied by baseline health status and how empagliflozin impacted patient-reported outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. METHODS AND RESULTS: Health status was assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaires-clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS). The influence of baseline KCCQ-CSS (analyzed by tertiles) on the effect of empagliflozin on major outcomes was examined using Cox proportional hazards models. Responder analyses were performed to assess the odds of improvement and deterioration in KCCQ scores related to treatment with empagliflozin. Empagliflozin reduced the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization regardless of baseline KCCQ-CSS tertiles [hazard ratio (HR) 0.83 (0.68-1.02), HR 0.74 (0.58-0.94), and HR 0.61 (0.46-0.82) for <62.5, 62.6-85.4, and ≥85.4 score tertiles, respectively; P-trend = 0.10]. Empagliflozin improved KCCQ-CSS, total symptom score, and overall summary score at 3, 8, and 12 months. More patients on empagliflozin had ≥5-point [odds ratio (OR) 1.20 (1.05-1.37)], 10-point [OR 1.26 (1.10-1.44)], and 15-point [OR 1.29 (1.12-1.48)] improvement and fewer had ≥5-point [OR 0.75 (0.64-0.87)] deterioration in KCCQ-CSS at 3 months. These benefits were sustained at 8 and 12 months and were similar for other KCCQ domains. CONCLUSION: Empagliflozin improved cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization risk across the range of baseline health status. Empagliflozin improved health status across various domains, and this benefit was sustained during long-term follow-up. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03057977.

Voice-based screening for SARS-CoV-2 exposure in cardiovascular clinics.

Aims: Artificial intelligence (A.I) driven voice-based assistants may facilitate data capture in clinical care and trials; however, the feasibility and accuracy of using such devices in a healthcare environment are unknown. We explored the feasibility of using the Amazon Alexa ('Alexa') A.I. voice-assistant to screen for risk factors or symptoms relating to SARS-CoV-2 exposure in quaternary care cardiovascular clinics. Methods and results: We enrolled participants to be screened for signs and symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 exposure by a healthcare provider and then subsequently by the Alexa. Our primary outcome was interrater reliability of Alexa to healthcare provider screening using Cohen's Kappa statistic. Participants rated the Alexa in a post-study survey (scale of 1 to 5 with 5 reflecting strongly agree). This study was approved by the McGill University Health Centre ethics board. We prospectively enrolled 215 participants. The mean age was 46 years [17.7 years standard deviation (SD)], 55% were female, and 31% were French speakers (others were English). In total, 645 screening questions were delivered by Alexa. The Alexa mis-identified one response. The simple and weighted Cohen's kappa statistic between Alexa and healthcare provider screening was 0.989 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.982-0.997] and 0.992 (955 CI 0.985-0.999), respectively. The participants gave an overall mean rating of 4.4 (out of 5, 0.9 SD). Conclusion: Our study demonstrates the feasibility of an A.I. driven multilingual voice-based assistant to collect data in the context of SARS-CoV-2 exposure screening. Future studies integrating such devices in cardiovascular healthcare delivery and clinical trials are warranted. Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04508972.

Prediction of heart failure outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Validation of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Heart Failure in Diabetes (TRS-HFDM ) in patients in the ACCORD trial.

AIM: To investigate the ability of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Heart Failure in Diabetes (TRS-HFDM ) to stratify patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and high cardiovascular risk for heart failure (HF) hospitalization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used data from the control group of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Study Group (ACCORD) trial (n = 5123; mean follow-up 4.8 years). The TRS-HFDM includes: prior HF (2 points), atrial fibrillation (1 point), coronary artery disease (1 point), estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (1 point), and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (>300 mg/g: 2 points; 30-300 mg/g: 1 point). We evaluated the discrimination (Harrell's C-index) and calibration (Nam-D'Agostino calibration statistic) of the TRS-HFDM with regard to time to HF hospitalization or death due to HF. RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 62.8 ± 6.6 years, and 38% were women. The prevalences of TRS-HFDM 0, 1, 2, 3 and ≥4 were 42.1%, 34.9%, 14.6%, 6.0% and 2.5%, respectively. Increasing TRS-HFDM corresponded to an increasing HF risk: 1.3 per 1000 person-years for a TRS-HFDM of 0 to 64.7 per 1000 person-years for TRS-HFDM of ≥4. The TRS-HFDM demonstrated robust discrimination of HF outcomes (C-index 0.78). Furthermore, the score was well calibrated for HF outcomes (calibration statistic P = 0.13). Similar results were seen in participants without baseline HF (C-index 0.75). CONCLUSION: The TRS-HFDM discriminates HF-specific risk among people with T2DM. The use of TRS-HFDM to identify those who would maximally benefit from therapies that reduce HF risk warrants evaluation.

Baseline characteristics of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in the EMPEROR-Preserved trial.

AIMS: EMPEROR-Preserved is an ongoing trial evaluating the effect of empagliflozin in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This report describes the baseline characteristics of the EMPEROR-Preserved cohort and compares them with patients enrolled in prior HFpEF trials. METHODS AND RESULTS: EMPEROR-Preserved is a phase III randomized, international, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial in which 5988 symptomatic HFpEF patients [left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >40%] with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have been enrolled. Patients were required to have elevated N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentrations (i.e. >300 pg/mL in patients without and >900 pg/mL in patients with atrial fibrillation) along with evidence of structural changes in the heart or documented history of heart failure hospitalization. Among patients enrolled from various regions (45% Europe, 11% Asia, 25% Latin America, 12% North America), the mean age was 72 ± 9 years, 45% were women. Almost all patients had New York Heart Association class II or III symptoms (99.6%), and 23% had prior heart failure hospitalization within 12 months. Thirty-three percent of the patients had baseline LVEF of 41-50%. The mean LVEF (54 ± 9%) was slightly lower while the median NT-proBNP [974 (499-1731) pg/mL] was higher compared with previous HFpEF trials. Presence of comorbidities such as diabetes (49%) and chronic kidney disease (50%) were common. The majority of the patients were on angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (80%) and beta-blockers (86%), and 37% of patients were on mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. CONCLUSION: When compared with prior trials in HFpEF, the EMPEROR-Preserved cohort has a somewhat higher burden of comorbidities, lower LVEF, higher median NT-proBNP and greater use of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists at baseline. Results of the EMPEROR-Preserved trial will be available in 2021.