Clinical Trial Inclusion and Impact on Early Adoption of Medical Innovation in Diverse Populations.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate inclusion in clinical trial enrollment may contribute to health inequities by evaluating interventions in cohorts that do not fully represent target populations. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine if characteristics of patients with heart failure (HF) enrolled in a pivotal trial are associated with who receives an intervention after approval. METHODS: Demographics from 2,017,107 Medicare patients hospitalized for HF were compared with those of the first 10,631 Medicare beneficiaries who received implantable pulmonary artery pressure sensors. Characteristics of the population studied in the pivotal CHAMPION (CardioMEMS Heart Sensor Allows Monitoring of Pressure to Improve Outcomes in NYHA Class III Heart Failure Patients) clinical trial (n = 550) were compared with those of both groups. All demographic data were analyzed nationally and in 4 U.S. regions. RESULTS: The Medicare HF cohort included 80.9% White, 13.3% African American, 1.9% Hispanic, 1.3% Asian, and 51.5% female patients. Medicare patients <65 years of age were more likely to be African American (33%) and male (58%), whereas older patients were mostly White (84%) and female (53%). Forty-one percent of U.S. HF hospitalizations occurred in the South; demographic characteristics varied significantly across all U.S. regions. The CHAMPION trial adequately represented African Americans (23% overall, 35% <65 years of age), Hispanic Americans (2%), and Asian Americans (1%) but underrepresented women (27%). The trial's population characteristics were similar to those of the first patients who received pulmonary artery sensors (82% White, 13% African American, 1% Asian, 1% Hispanic, and 29% female). CONCLUSIONS: Demographics of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services beneficiaries hospitalized with HF vary regionally and by age, which should be considered when defining "adequate" representation in clinical studies. Enrollment diversity in clinical trials may affect who receives early application of recently approved innovations.

Implantable Hemodynamic Monitors Improve Survival in Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Trials evaluating implantable hemodynamic monitors to manage patients with heart failure (HF) have shown reductions in HF hospitalizations but not mortality. Prior meta-analyses assessing mortality have been limited in construct because of an absence of patient-level data, short-term follow-up duration, and evaluation across the combined spectrum of ejection fractions. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine whether management with implantable hemodynamic monitors reduces mortality in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and to confirm the effect of hemodynamic-monitoring guided management on HF hospitalization reduction reported in previous studies. METHODS: The patient-level pooled meta-analysis used 3 randomized studies (GUIDE-HF [Hemodynamic-Guided Management of Heart Failure], CHAMPION [CardioMEMS Heart Sensor Allows Monitoring of Pressure to Improve Outcomes in NYHA Class III Heart Failure Patients], and LAPTOP-HF [Left Atrial Pressure Monitoring to Optimize Heart Failure Therapy]) of implantable hemodynamic monitors (2 measuring pulmonary artery pressures and 1 measuring left atrial pressure) to assess the effect on all-cause mortality and HF hospitalizations. RESULTS: A total of 1,350 patients with HFrEF were included. Hemodynamic-monitoring guided management significantly reduced overall mortality with an HR of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.57-0.99); P = 0.043. HF hospitalizations were significantly reduced with an HR of 0.64 (95% CI: 0.55-0.76); P < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: Management of patients with HFrEF using an implantable hemodynamic monitor significantly reduces both mortality and HF hospitalizations. The reduction in HF hospitalizations is seen early in the first year of monitoring and mortality benefits occur after the first year.

CS1, a controlled-release formulation of valproic acid, for the treatment of patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension: Rationale and design of a Phase 2 clinical trial.

Although rare, pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is associated with substantial morbidity and a median survival of approximately 7 years, even with treatment. Current medical therapies have a primarily vasodilatory effect and do not modify the underlying pathology of the disease. CS1 is a novel oral, controlled-release formulation of valproic acid, which exhibits a multi-targeted mode of action (pulmonary pressure reduction, reversal of vascular remodeling, anti-inflammatory, anti-fibrotic, and anti-thrombotic) and therefore potential for disease modification and right ventricular modeling in patients with PAH. A Phase 1 study conducted in healthy volunteers indicated favorable safety and tolerability, with no increased risk of bleeding and significant reduction of plasminogen activator inhibitor 1. In an ongoing randomized Phase 2 clinical trial, three doses of open-label CS1 administered for 12 weeks is evaluating the use of multiple outcome measures. The primary endpoint is safety and tolerability, as measured by the occurrence of adverse events. Secondary outcome measures include the use of the CardioMEMS™ HF System, which provides a noninvasive method of monitoring pulmonary artery pressure, as well as cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and echocardiography. Other outcomes include changes in risk stratification (using the REVEAL 2.0 and REVEAL Lite 2 tools), patient reported outcomes, functional capacity, 6-min walk distance, actigraphy, and biomarkers. The pharmacokinetic profile of CS1 will also be evaluated. Overall, the novel design and unique, extensive clinical phenotyping of participants in this trial will provide ample evidence to inform the design of any future Phase 3 studies with CS1.

Real-time pulmonary artery pressure monitoring in heart failure patients: an updated cost-effectiveness analysis.

AIMS: Previous cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that CardioMEMS is cost-effective compared with usual care for patients with persistent New York Heart Association class III symptoms and at least one heart failure (HF) hospitalization within 12 months. The aim of the paper is to perform an update of the cost-effectiveness analysis of CardioMEMS using the most recent data from the published literature. METHODS AND RESULTS: A Microsoft Excel Markov model from a previous UK cost-effectiveness study of CardioMEMS was updated using the clinical effectiveness of pulmonary artery pressure (PAP)-guided treatment derived from the pivotal trials. The model included the device costs (and the implantation procedure and related complications), costs of remote monitoring, costs of HF-related hospitalizations, and costs of usual care. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated based on utilities from pivotal trials and published literature. Cost-effectiveness results were estimated as incremental cost per QALY gained of CardioMEMS compared with usual care. Scenario analyses were also performed using data from real-world studies that showed a significant decrease in HF-related hospitalizations. In the base case analysis over a time horizon of 10 years, PAP-guided HF therapy increased cost compared with usual care by £6337 (i.e. from £22 770 in usual care to £29 107 in PAP-guided HF therapy) and the QALYs per patient for usual care and PAP-guided patients were 2.62 and 2.94, respectively, reflecting an increase of 0.32 QALYs with PAP-guided treatment. The resultant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), the ratio between incremental costs and the QALYs, is estimated at £19 761/QALY. Scenario analyses suggest that the ICER for CardioMEMS can range from being dominant to £27 910/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested that PAP-guided HF therapy has 81.9% probability of being cost-effective at a threshold of £30 000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Our model suggests that CardioMEMS is likely to be cost-effective in the United Kingdom, at the currently considered thresholds of £20 000-30 000/QALY.

Hemodynamic-Guided Heart Failure Management in Patients With Either Prior HF Hospitalization or Elevated Natriuretic Peptides.

BACKGROUND: In patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) and previous heart failure hospitalization (HFH), hemodynamic-guided HF management using a wireless pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) sensor reduces HFH, but it is unclear whether these benefits extend to patients who have not been recently hospitalized but remain at risk because of elevated natriuretic peptides (NPs). OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of hemodynamic-guided HF management in patients with elevated NPs but no recent HFH. METHODS: In the GUIDE-HF (Hemodynamic-Guided Management of Heart Failure) trial, 1,000 patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II to IV HF and either previous HFH or elevated NP levels were randomly assigned to hemodynamic-guided HF management or usual care. The authors evaluated the primary study composite of all-cause mortality and total HF events at 12 months according to treatment assignment and enrollment stratum (HFH vs elevated NPs) by using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Of 999 evaluable patients, 557 were enrolled on the basis of a previous HFH and 442 on the basis of elevated NPs alone. Those patients enrolled by NP criteria were older and more commonly White persons with lower body mass index, lower NYHA class, less diabetes, more atrial fibrillation, and lower baseline PAP. Event rates were lower among those patients in the NP group for both the full follow-up (40.9 per 100 patient-years vs 82.0 per 100 patient-years) and the pre-COVID-19 analysis (43.6 per 100 patient-years vs 88.0 per 100 patient-years). The effects of hemodynamic monitoring were consistent across enrollment strata for the primary endpoint over the full study duration (interaction P = 0.71) and the pre-COVID-19 analysis (interaction P = 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent effects of hemodynamic-guided HF management across enrollment strata in GUIDE-HF support consideration of hemodynamic monitoring in the expanded group of patients with chronic HF and elevated NPs without recent HFH. (Hemodynamic-Guided Management of Heart Failure [GUIDE-HF]; NCT03387813).

Pulmonary Artery Pressure-Guided Heart Failure Management Reduces Hospitalizations in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: Hemodynamic-guided heart failure management is a superior strategy to prevent decompensation leading to hospitalization compared with traditional clinical methods. It remains unstudied if hemodynamic-guided care is effective across severities of comorbid renal insufficiency or if this strategy impacts renal function over time. METHODS: In the CardioMEMS US PAS (Post-Approval Study), heart failure hospitalizations were compared from 1 year before and after pulmonary artery sensor implantation in 1200 patients with New York Heart Association class III symptoms and a previous hospitalization. Hospitalization rates were evaluated in all patients grouped into baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) quartiles. Chronic kidney disease progression was evaluated in patients with renal function follow-up data (n=911). RESULTS: Patients with stage 2 or greater chronic kidney disease at baseline exceeded 80%. Heart failure hospitalization risk was lower in all eGFR quartiles ranging from a hazard ratio of 0.35 (0.27-0.46; P<0.0001) in patients with eGFR >65 mL/min per 1.73 m2 to 0.53 (0.45-0.62; P<0.0001) in patients with eGFR ≤37 mL/min per 1.73 m2. Renal function was preserved or improved in most patients. Survival was different between quartiles and lower in quartiles with more advanced chronic kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: Hemodynamic-guided heart failure management using remotely obtained pulmonary artery pressures is associated with lower hospitalization rates and general preservation of renal function in all eGFR quartiles or chronic kidney disease stages.

Sustained Reduction in Pulmonary Artery Pressures and Hospitalizations During 2 Years of Ambulatory Monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Therapy guided by pulmonary artery (PA) pressure monitoring reduces PA pressures and heart failure hospitalizations (HFH) during the first year, but the durability of efficacy and safety through 2 years is not known. METHODS AND RESULTS: The CardioMEMS Post-Approval Study investigated whether benefit and safety were generalized and sustained. Enrollment at 104 centers in the United States included 1200 patients with NYHA Class III symptoms on recommended HF therapies with prior HFH. Therapy was adjusted toward PA diastolic pressure 8-20 mmHg. Intervention frequency and PA pressure reduction were most intense during first 90 days, with sustained reduction of PA diastolic pressure from baseline 24.7 mmHg to 21.0 at 1 year and 20.8 at 2 years for all patients. Patients completing two year follow-up (n = 710) showed similar 2-year reduction (23.9 to 20.8 mmHg), with reduction in PA mean pressure (33.7 to 29.4 mmHg) in patients with reduced left ventricular ejection. The HFH rate was 1.25 events/patient/year prior to sensor implant, 0.54 at 1 year, and 0.37 at 2 years, with 59% of patients free of HFH during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Reduction in PA pressures and hospitalizations were early and sustained during 2 years of PA pressure-guided management, with no signal of safety concerns regarding the implanted sensor.

Hemodynamically-Guided Management of Heart Failure Across the Ejection Fraction Spectrum: The GUIDE-HF Trial.

BACKGROUND: Hemodynamically-guided management using an implanted pulmonary artery pressure sensor is indicated to reduce heart failure (HF) hospitalizations in patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II-III with a prior HF hospitalization or those with elevated natriuretic peptides. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the effect of left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) on treatment outcomes in the GUIDE-HF (Hemodynamic-GUIDEd management of Heart Failure) randomized trial. METHODS: The GUIDE-HF randomized arm included 1,000 NYHA functional class II-IV patients (with HF hospitalization within the prior 12 months or elevated natriuretic peptides adjusted for EF and body mass index) implanted with a pulmonary artery pressure sensor, randomized 1:1 to a hemodynamically-guided management group (treatment) or a control group (control). The primary endpoint was the composite of HF hospitalizations, urgent HF visits, and all-cause mortality at 12 months. The authors assessed outcomes by EF in guideline-defined subgroups ≤40%, 41%-49%, and ≥50%, within the trial specified pre-COVID-19 period cohort. RESULTS: There were 177 primary events (0.553/patient-year) in the treatment group and 224 events (0.682/patient-year) in the control group (HR: 0.81 [95% CI: 0.66-1.00]; P = 0.049); HF hospitalization was lower in the treatment vs control group (HR: 0.72 [95% CI: 0.57-0.92]; P = 0.0072). Within each EF subgroup, primary endpoint and HF hospitalization rates were lower in the treatment group (HR <1.0 across the EF spectrum). Event rate reduction by EF in the treatment groups was correlated with reduction in pulmonary artery pressures and medication changes. CONCLUSIONS: Hemodynamically-guided HF management decreases HF-related endpoints across the EF spectrum in an expanded patient population of patients with HF. (Hemodynamic-GUIDEd Management of Heart Failure [GUIDE-HF]; NCT03387813).

Effects of remote haemodynamic-guided heart failure management in patients with different subtypes of pulmonary hypertension: insights from the MEMS-HF study.

AIM: The CardioMEMS European Monitoring Study for Heart Failure (MEMS-HF) investigated safety and efficacy of pulmonary artery pressure (PAP)-guided remote patient management (RPM) in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III outpatients with at least one heart failure hospitalization (HFH) during the previous 12 months. This pre-specified subgroup analysis investigated whether RPM effects depended on presence and subtype of pulmonary hypertension (PH). METHODS AND RESULTS: In 106/234 MEMS-HF participants, Swan-Ganz catheter tracings obtained during sensor implant were available for off-line manual analysis jointly performed by two experts. Patients were classified into subgroups according to current PH definitions. Isolated post-capillary PH (IpcPH) and combined post- and pre-capillary PH (CpcPH) were present in 38 and 36 patients, respectively, whereas 31 patients had no PH. Clinical characteristics were comparable between subgroups, but among patients with PH pulmonary vascular resistance was higher (p = 0.029) and pulmonary artery compliance lower (p = 0.003) in patients with CpcPH. During 12 months of PAP-guided RPM, all PAPs declined in IpcPH and CpcPH subgroups (all p < 0.05), whereas only mean and diastolic PAP decreased in patients without PH (both p < 0.05). Improvements in post- versus pre-implant HFH rates were similar in CpcPH (0.639 events/patient-year; hazard ratio [HR] 0.37) and IpcPH (0.72 events/patient-year; HR 0.45) patients. Participants without PH benefited most (0.26 events/patient-year; HR 0.17, p = 0.04 vs. IpcPH/CpcPH patients). Quality of life and NYHA class improved significantly in all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatients with NYHA class III symptoms with at least one HFH during 1 year pre-implant benefitted significantly from PAP-guided RPM during post-implant follow-up irrespective of presence or subtype of PH at baseline.

Improving Enrollment of Underrepresented Racial and Ethnic Populations in Heart Failure Trials: A Call to Action From the Heart Failure Collaboratory.

Importance: Despite bearing a disproportionate burden of heart failure (HF), Black and Hispanic individuals have been poorly represented in HF clinical trials. Underrepresentation in clinical trials limits the generalizability of the findings to these populations and may even introduce uncertainties and hesitancy when translating trial data to the care of people from underrepresented groups. The Heart Failure Collaboratory, a consortium of stakeholders convened to enhance HF therapeutic development, has been dedicated to improving recruitment strategies for patients from diverse and historically underrepresented groups. Observations: Despite federal policies from the US Food and Drug Administration and National Institutes of Health aimed at improving trial representation, gaps in trial enrollment proportionate to the racial and ethnic composition of the HF population have persisted. Increasing trial globalization with limited US enrollment is a major driver of these patterns. Additional barriers to representative enrollment include inequities in care access, logistical issues in participation, restrictive enrollment criteria, and English language requirements. Conclusions and Relevance: Strategies for improving diverse trial enrollment include methodical study design and site selection, diversification of research leadership and staff, broadening of eligibility criteria, community and patient engagement, and broad stakeholder commitment. In contemporary HF trials, diverse trial enrollment is not only feasible but can be efficiently achieved to improve the generalizability and translation of trial knowledge to clinical practice.

The GUIDE-HF trial of pulmonary artery pressure monitoring in heart failure: impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIMS: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, important changes in heart failure (HF) event rates have been widely reported, but few data address potential causes for these changes; several possibilities were examined in the GUIDE-HF study. METHODS AND RESULTS: From 15 March 2018 to 20 December 2019, patients were randomized to haemodynamic-guided management (treatment) vs. control for 12 months, with a primary endpoint of all-cause mortality plus HF events. Pre-COVID-19, the primary endpoint rate was 0.553 vs. 0.682 events/patient-year in the treatment vs. control group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.81, P = 0.049]. Treatment difference was no longer evident during COVID-19 (HR 1.11, P = 0.526), with a 21% decrease in the control group (0.536 events/patient-year) and no change in the treatment group (0.597 events/patient-year). Data reflecting provider-, disease-, and patient-dependent factors that might change the primary endpoint rate during COVID-19 were examined. Subject contact frequency was similar in the treatment vs. control group before and during COVID-19. During COVID-19, the monthly rate of medication changes fell 19.2% in the treatment vs. 10.7% in the control group to levels not different between groups (P = 0.362). COVID-19 was infrequent and not different between groups. Pulmonary artery pressure area under the curve decreased -98 mmHg-days in the treatment group vs. -100 mmHg-days in the controls (P = 0.867). Patient compliance with the study protocol was maintained during COVID-19 in both groups. CONCLUSION: During COVID-19, the primary event rate decreased in the controls and remained low in the treatment group, resulting in an effacement of group differences that were present pre-COVID-19. These outcomes did not result from changes in provider- or disease-dependent factors; pulmonary artery pressure decreased despite fewer medication changes, suggesting that patient-dependent factors played an important role in these outcomes. Clinical Trials.gov: NCT03387813.

Quantifying Benefit-Risk Preferences for Heart Failure Devices: A Stated-Preference Study.

BACKGROUND: Regulatory and clinical decisions involving health technologies require judgements about relative importance of their expected benefits and risks. We sought to quantify heart-failure patients' acceptance of therapeutic risks in exchange for improved effectiveness with implantable devices. METHODS: Individuals with heart failure recruited from a national web panel or academic medical center completed a web-based discrete-choice experiment survey in which they were randomized to one of 40 blocks of 8 experimentally controlled choice questions comprised of 2 device scenarios and a no-device scenario. Device scenarios offered an additional year of physical functioning equivalent to New York Heart Association class III or a year with improved (ie, class II) symptoms, or both, with 30-day mortality risks ranging from 0% to 15%, in-hospital complication risks ranging from 0% to 40%, and a remote adjustment device feature. Logit-based regression models fit participants' choices as a function of health outcomes, risks and remote adjustment. RESULTS: Latent-class analysis of 613 participants (mean age, 65; 49% female) revealed that two-thirds were best represented by a pro-device, more risk-tolerant class, accepting up to 9% (95% CI, 7%-11%) absolute risk of device-associated mortality for a one-year gain in improved functioning (New York Heart Association class II). Approximately 20% were best represented by a less risk-tolerant class, accepting a maximum device-associated mortality risk of 3% (95% CI, 1%-4%) for the same benefit. The remaining class had strong antidevice preferences, thus maximum-acceptable risk was not calculated. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative evidence on benefit-risk tradeoffs for implantable heart-failure device profiles may facilitate incorporating patients' views during product development, regulatory decision-making, and clinical practice.

Real-world evidence in a national health service: results of the UK CardioMEMS HF System Post-Market Study.

AIMS: The CardioMEMS HF System Post-Market Study (COAST) was designed to evaluate the safety, effectiveness, and feasibility of haemodynamic-guided heart failure (HF) management using a small sensor implanted in the pulmonary artery of New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class III HF patients in the UK, Europe, and Australia. METHODS AND RESULTS: COAST is a prospective, international, multicentre, open-label clinical study (NCT02954341). The primary clinical endpoint compares annualized HF hospitalization rates after 1 year of haemodynamic-guided management vs. the year prior to sensor implantation in patients with NYHA Class III symptoms and a previous HF hospitalization. The primary safety endpoints assess freedom from device/system-related complications and pressure sensor failure after 2 years. Results from the first 100 patients implanted at 14 out of the 15 participating centres in the UK are reported here. At baseline, all patients were in NYHA Class III, 70% were male, mean age was 69 ± 12 years, and 39% had an aetiology of ischaemic cardiomyopathy. The annualized HF hospitalization rate after 12 months was 82% lower [95% confidence interval 72-88%] than the previous 12 months (0.27 vs. 1.52 events/patient-year, respectively, P < 0.0001). Freedom from device/system-related complications and pressure sensor failure at 2 years was 100% and 99%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Remote haemodynamic-guided HF management, using frequent assessment of pulmonary artery pressures, was successfully implemented at 14 specialist centres in the UK. Haemodynamic-guided HF management was safe and significantly reduced hospitalization in a group of high-risk patients. These results support implementation of this innovative remote management strategy to improve outcome for patients with symptomatic HF. Clinical registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02954341.

Less loop diuretic use in patients on sacubitril/valsartan undergoing remote pulmonary artery pressure monitoring.

AIMS: Control of pulmonary pressures monitored remotely reduced heart failure hospitalizations mainly by lowering filling pressures through the use of loop diuretics. Sacubitril/valsartan improves heart failure outcomes and increases the kidney sensitivity for diuretics. We explored whether sacubitril/valsartan is associated with less utilization of loop diuretics in patients guided with haemodynamic monitoring in the CardioMEMS European Monitoring Study for Heart Failure (MEMS-HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: The MEMS-HF population (n = 239) was separated by the use of sacubitril/valsartan (n = 68) or no use of it (n = 164). Utilization of diuretics and their doses was prespecified in the protocol and was monitored in both groups. Multivariable regression, ANCOVA, and a generalized linear model were used to fit baseline covariates with furosemide equivalents and changes for 12 months. MEMS-HF participants (n = 239) were grouped in sacubitril/valsartan users [n = 68, 64 ± 11 years, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 25 ± 9%, cardiac index (CI) 1.89 ± 0.4 L/min/m2 ] vs. non-users (n = 164, 70 ± 10 years, LVEF 36 ± 16%, CI 2.11 ± 0.58 L/min/m2 , P = 0.0002, P < 0.0001, and P = 0.0015, respectively). In contrast, mean pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) values were comparable between groups (29 ± 11 vs. 31 ± 11 mmHg, P = 0.127). Utilization of loop diuretics was lower in patients taking sacubitril/valsartan compared with those without (P = 0.01). Significant predictor of loop diuretic use was a history of renal failure (P = 0.005) but not age (P = 0.091). After subjects were stratified by sacubitril/valsartan or other diuretic use, PAP was nominally, but not significantly lower in sacubitril/valsartan-treated patients (baseline: P = 0.52; 6 months: P = 0.07; 12 months: P = 0.53), while there was no difference in outcome or PAP changes. This difference was observed despite lower CI (P = 0.0015). Comparable changes were not observed for other non-loop diuretics (P = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: In patients whose treatment was guided by remote PAP monitoring, concomitant use of sacubitril/valsartan was associated with reduced utilization of loop diuretics, which could potentially be relevant for outcomes.

Pulmonary Artery Pressure Monitoring Effectively Guides Management to Reduce Heart Failure Hospitalizations in Obesity.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the impact of therapy guided by pulmonary artery (PA) pressure monitoring in patients with heart failure (HF) and obesity. BACKGROUND: Obesity is prevalent in HF and associated with volume retention, but it complicates clinical assessment of congestion. METHODS: The CardioMEMS Post Approval Study was a prospective, multicenter, open-label trial in 1,200 patients with New York Heart Association functional class III HF and prior HF hospitalization (HFH) within 12 months. Patients with a body mass index (BMI) >35 kg/m2 were required to have a chest circumference <65 inches. Therapy was guided by PA pressure monitoring at sites, and HFHs were adjudicated 1 year before implantation and throughout follow-up. This analysis stratified patients according to ejection fraction (EF) <40% or ≥40% and by BMI <35 kg/m2 or ≥35 kg/m2. RESULTS: Baseline PA diastolic pressure was higher in patients with BMI ≥35 kg/m2 regardless of EF, but all PA pressures were reduced at 12 months in each cohort (P < 0.0001). HFH rate was reduced by >50% in both cohorts for EF <40% (BMI <35 kg/m2 [HR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.41-0.55] and ≥35 kg/m2 [HR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.31-0.53]) and EF ≥40% (BMI <35 kg/m2 [HR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.35-0.52] and ≥35 kg/m2 [HR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.25-0.45]; P < 0.0001). There was a nonsignificant trend toward greater reduction with more obesity. The all-cause hospitalization rate was also significantly reduced during monitoring (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Management guided by PA pressure monitoring effectively reduced pressures, HFH, and all-cause hospitalization in patients with obesity regardless of EF. (CardioMEMS HF System Post Approval Study; NCT02279888).

Haemodynamic-guided management of heart failure (GUIDE-HF): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have suggested that haemodynamic-guided management using an implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitor reduces heart failure hospitalisations in patients with moderately symptomatic (New York Heart Association [NYHA] functional class III) chronic heart failure and a hospitalisation in the past year, irrespective of ejection fraction. It is unclear if these benefits extend to patients with mild (NYHA functional class II) or severe (NYHA functional class IV) symptoms of heart failure or to patients with elevated natriuretic peptides without a recent heart failure hospitalisation. This trial was designed to evaluate whether haemodynamic-guided management using remote pulmonary artery pressure monitoring could reduce heart failure events and mortality in patients with heart failure across the spectrum of symptom severity (NYHA funational class II-IV), including those with elevated natriuretic peptides but without a recent heart failure hospitalisation. METHODS: The randomised arm of the haemodynamic-GUIDEed management of Heart Failure (GUIDE-HF) trial was a multicentre, single-blind study at 118 centres in the USA and Canada. Following successful implantation of a pulmonary artery pressure monitor, patients with all ejection fractions, NYHA functional class II-IV chronic heart failure, and either a recent heart failure hospitalisation or elevated natriuretic peptides (based on a-priori thresholds) were randomly assigned (1:1) to either haemodynamic-guided heart failure management based on pulmonary artery pressure or a usual care control group. Patients were masked to their study group assignment. Investigators were aware of treatment assignment but did not have access to pulmonary artery pressure data for control patients. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality and total heart failure events (heart failure hospitalisations and urgent heart failure hospital visits) at 12 months assessed in all randomly assigned patients. Safety was assessed in all patients. A pre-COVID-19 impact analysis for the primary and secondary outcomes was prespecified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03387813. FINDINGS: Between March 15, 2018, and Dec 20, 2019, 1022 patients were enrolled, with 1000 patients implanted successfully, and follow-up was completed on Jan 8, 2021. There were 253 primary endpoint events (0·563 per patient-year) among 497 patients in the haemodynamic-guided management group (treatment group) and 289 (0·640 per patient-year) in 503 patients in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·88, 95% CI 0·74-1·05; p=0·16). A prespecified COVID-19 sensitivity analysis using a time-dependent variable to compare events before COVID-19 and during the pandemic suggested a treatment interaction (pinteraction=0·11) due to a change in the primary endpoint event rate during the pandemic phase of the trial, warranting a pre-COVID-19 impact analysis. In the pre-COVID-19 impact analysis, there were 177 primary events (0·553 per patient-year) in the intervention group and 224 events (0·682 per patient-year) in the control group (HR 0·81, 95% CI 0·66-1·00; p=0·049). This difference in primary events almost disappeared during COVID-19, with a 21% decrease in the control group (0·536 per patient-year) relative to pre-COVID-19, virtually no change in the treatment group (0·597 per patient-year), and no difference between groups (HR 1·11, 95% CI 0·80-1·55; p=0·53). The cumulative incidence of heart failure events was not reduced by haemodynamic-guided management (0·85, 0·70-1·03; p=0·096) in the overall study analysis but was significantly decreased in the pre-COVID-19 impact analysis (0·76, 0·61-0·95; p=0·014). 1014 (99%) of 1022 patients had freedom from device or system-related complications. INTERPRETATION: Haemodynamic-guided management of heart failure did not result in a lower composite endpoint rate of mortality and total heart failure events compared with the control group in the overall study analysis. However, a pre-COVID-19 impact analysis indicated a possible benefit of haemodynamic-guided management on the primary outcome in the pre-COVID-19 period, primarily driven by a lower heart failure hospitalisation rate compared with the control group. FUNDING: Abbott.

Remote Hemodynamic Monitoring Equally Reduces Heart Failure Hospitalizations in Women and Men in Clinical Practice: A Sex-Specific Analysis of the CardioMEMS Post-Approval Study.

BACKGROUND: Response to pharmacological and device-based therapy for heart failure (HF) may vary by sex. We examined sex differences in response to ambulatory hemodynamic monitoring in clinical practice using the CardioMEMS PAS (Post-Approval Study). METHODS: The CardioMEMS PAS was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter, open-label study of 1200 adults with New York Heart Association class III HF and at least 1 HF hospitalization (HFH) within 12 months who underwent pulmonary artery pressure sensor implantation between 2014 and 2017. Changes in pulmonary artery pressure over time were stratified by ejection fraction <40% and sex. Clinical outcomes including HFH rate at 12 months, 1-year mortality, and quality of life were examined in women and men. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-two women (38% of total) enrolled in the PAS were less likely to be White (78% versus 86%) and more likely to have nonischemic cardiomyopathy (44% versus 34%) and had significantly higher SBP (132 versus 124 mm Hg), mean ejection fraction (44% versus 36%), and pulmonary vascular resistance (3.2 versus 2.6 WU) than men (P<0.001 for all). There were similar reductions in pulmonary artery pressure from baseline to 12 months in both men and women for the whole cohort and for subgroups with HF with reduced ejection fraction and HF with preserved ejection fraction. Both sexes experienced significant decreases in HFH over 12 months (men: HR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.40-0.52]; women: HR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.33-0.46]). In adjusted models, there were no significant differences in change in HFH between men and women (interaction P=0.13) or all-cause mortality at 1 year (adjusted HR, 1.25 [95% CI, 0.88-1.77]). CONCLUSIONS: Women and men enrolled in the CardioMEMS PAS had similar reductions from baseline in pulmonary artery pressure over 1 year and experienced similar reductions in HFH. Hemodynamic monitoring provides similar benefit with regard to HF events in both women and men. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02279888.

Pulmonary Artery Proportional Pulse Pressure (PAPP) Index Identifies Patients With Improved Survival From the CardioMEMS Implantable Pulmonary Artery Pressure Monitor.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary artery proportional pulse pressure (PAPP) was recently shown to have prognostic value in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and pulmonary hypertension. We tested the hypothesis that PAPP would be predictive of adverse outcomes in patients with implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitor (CardioMEMS™ HF System, St. Jude Medical [now Abbott], Atlanta, GA, USA). METHODS: Survival analysis with Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate all-cause deaths and HF hospitalisation (HFH) in CHAMPION trial1 patients who received treatment with the CardioMEMS device based on the PAPP. RESULTS: Among 550 randomised patients, 274 had PAPP ≤ the median value of 0.583 while 276 had PAPP>0.583. Patients with PAPP≤0.583 (versus PAPP>0.583) had an increased risk of HFH (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.16-1.68, p=0.0004) and experienced a significant 46% reduction in annualised risk of death with CardioMEMS treatment (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31-0.92) during 2-3 years of follow-up. This survival benefit was attributable to the treatment benefit in patients with HFrEF and PAPP≤0.583 (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28-0.90, p<0.05). Patients with PAPP>0.583 or HF with preserved EF (HFpEF) had no significant survival benefit with treatment (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Lower PAPP in HFrEF patients with CardioMEMS constitutes a higher mortality risk status. More studies are needed to understand clinical applications of PAPP in implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitors.

Remote Hemodynamic-Guided Therapy of Patients With Recurrent Heart Failure Following Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy.

Background Patients with recurring heart failure (HF) following cardiac resynchronization therapy fare poorly. Their management is undecided. We tested remote hemodynamic-guided pharmacotherapy. Methods and Results We evaluated cardiac resynchronization therapy subjects included in the CHAMPION (CardioMEMS Heart Sensor Allows Monitoring of Pressure to Improve Outcomes in New York Heart Association Class III Heart Failure Patients) trial, which randomized patients with persistent New York Heart Association Class III symptoms and ≥1 HF hospitalization in the previous 12 months to remotely managed pulmonary artery (PA) pressure-guided management (treatment) or usual HF care (control). Diuretics and/or vasodilators were adjusted conventionally in control and included remote PA pressure information in treatment. Annualized HF hospitalization rates, changes in PA pressures over time (analyzed by area under the curve), changes in medications, and quality of life (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire scores) were assessed. Patients who had cardiac resynchronization therapy (n=190, median implant duration 755 days) at enrollment had poor hemodynamic function (cardiac index 2.00±0.59 L/min per m2), high comorbidity burden (67% had secondary pulmonary hypertension, 61% had estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min per 1.73 m2), and poor Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire scores (57±24). During 18 months randomized follow-up, HF hospitalizations were 30% lower in treatment (n=91, 62 events, 0.46 events/patient-year) versus control patients (n=99, 93 events, 0.68 events/patient-year) (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51-0.96; P=0.028). Treatment patients had more medication up-/down-titrations (847 versus 346 in control, P<0.001), mean PA pressure reduction (area under the curve -413.2±123.5 versus 60.1±88.0 in control, P=0.002), and quality of life improvement (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire decreased -13.5±23 versus -4.9±24.8 in control, P=0.006). Conclusions Remote hemodynamic-guided adjustment of medical therapies decreased PA pressures and the burden of HF symptoms and hospitalizations in patients with recurring Class III HF and hospitalizations, beyond the effect of cardiac resynchronization therapy. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00531661.

Prognostic value of brain natriuretic peptide vs history of heart failure hospitalization in a large real-world population.

BACKGROUND: In heart failure (HF) patients, both natriuretic peptides (NP) and previous HF hospitalization (pHFH) have been used to predict prognosis. HYPOTHESIS: In a large real-world population, both NP levels and pHFH have independent and interdependent predictive value for clinical outcomes of HFH and all-cause mortality. METHODS: Linked electronic health records and insurance claims data from Decision Resource Group were used to identify HF patients that had a BNP or NT-proBNP result between January 2012 and December 2016. NT-proBNP was converted into BNP equivalents by dividing by 4. Index event was defined as most recent NP on or after 1 January 2012. Patients with incomplete records or age < 18 years were excluded. During one-year follow up, HFH and mortality rates stratified by index BNP levels and pHFH are reported. RESULTS: Of 64 355 patients (74 ± 12 years old, 49% female) with available values, median BNP was 259 [IQR 101-642] pg/ml. The risk of both HFH and mortality was higher with increasing BNP levels. At each level of BNP, mortality was only slightly higher in patients with pHFH vs those without pHFH (RR 1.2 [95%CI 1.2,1.3], P < .001); however, at each BNP, HFH was markedly increased in patients with pHFH vs those without pHFH (RR 2.0 [95%CI 1.9,2.1], P < .001). CONCLUSION: In this large real-world heart failure population, higher BNP levels were associated with increased risk for both HFH and mortality. At any given level of BNP, pHFH added greater prognostic value for prediction of future HFH than for mortality.