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).

Cardiovascular and Renal Outcomes with Empagliflozin in Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure in patients regardless of the presence or absence of diabetes. More evidence is needed regarding the effects of these drugs in patients across the broad spectrum of heart failure, including those with a markedly reduced ejection fraction. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 3730 patients with class II, III, or IV heart failure and an ejection fraction of 40% or less to receive empagliflozin (10 mg once daily) or placebo, in addition to recommended therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for worsening heart failure. RESULTS: During a median of 16 months, a primary outcome event occurred in 361 of 1863 patients (19.4%) in the empagliflozin group and in 462 of 1867 patients (24.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.86; P<0.001). The effect of empagliflozin on the primary outcome was consistent in patients regardless of the presence or absence of diabetes. The total number of hospitalizations for heart failure was lower in the empagliflozin group than in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.85; P<0.001). The annual rate of decline in the estimated glomerular filtration rate was slower in the empagliflozin group than in the placebo group (-0.55 vs. -2.28 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area per year, P<0.001), and empagliflozin-treated patients had a lower risk of serious renal outcomes. Uncomplicated genital tract infection was reported more frequently with empagliflozin. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients receiving recommended therapy for heart failure, those in the empagliflozin group had a lower risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure than those in the placebo group, regardless of the presence or absence of diabetes. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly; EMPEROR-Reduced ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03057977.).

Effect of empagliflozin in patients with heart failure across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction.

AIMS: No therapy has shown to reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure across the entire range of ejection fractions seen in clinical practice. We assessed the influence of ejection fraction on the effect of the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin on heart failure outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: A pooled analysis was performed on both the EMPEROR-Reduced and EMPEROR-Preserved trials (9718 patients; 4860 empagliflozin and 4858 placebo), and patients were grouped based on ejection fraction: <25% (n = 999), 25-34% (n = 2230), 35-44% (n = 1272), 45-54% (n = 2260), 55-64% (n = 2092), and ≥65% (n = 865). Outcomes assessed included (i) time to first hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular mortality, (ii) time to first heart failure hospitalization, (iii) total (first and recurrent) hospitalizations for heart failure, and (iv) health status assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). The risk of cardiovascular death and hospitalization for heart failure declined progressively as ejection fraction increased from <25% to ≥65%. Empagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization, mainly by reducing heart failure hospitalizations. Empagliflozin reduced the risk of heart failure hospitalization by ≈30% in all ejection fraction subgroups, with an attenuated effect in patients with an ejection fraction ≥65%. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were: ejection fraction <25%: 0.73 (0.55-0.96); ejection fraction 25-34%: 0.63 (0.50-0.78); ejection fraction 35-44%: 0.72 (0.52-0.98); ejection fraction 45-54%: 0.66 (0.50-0.86); ejection fraction 55-64%: 0.70 (0.53-0.92); and ejection fraction ≥65%: 1.05 (0.70-1.58). Other heart failure outcomes and measures, including KCCQ, showed a similar response pattern. Sex did not influence the responses to empagliflozin. CONCLUSION: The magnitude of the effect of empagliflozin on heart failure outcomes was clinically meaningful and similar in patients with ejection fractions <25% to <65%, but was attenuated in patients with an ejection fraction ≥65%. KEY QUESTION: How does ejection fraction influence the effects of empagliflozin in patients with heart failure and either a reduced or a preserved ejection fraction? KEY FINDING: The magnitude of the effect of empagliflozin on heart failure outcomes and health status was similar in patients with ejection fractions <25% to <65%, but it was attenuated in patients with an ejection fraction ≥65%. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: The consistency of the response in patients with ejection fractions of <25% to <65% distinguishes the effects of empagliflozin from other drugs that have been evaluated across the full spectrum of ejection fractions in patients with heart failure.

Cardiac and Kidney Benefits of Empagliflozin in Heart Failure Across the Spectrum of Kidney Function: Insights From EMPEROR-Reduced.

BACKGROUND: In EMPEROR-Reduced (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction), empagliflozin reduced cardiovascular death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization and total HF hospitalizations, and slowed the progressive decline in kidney function in patients with HF and a reduced ejection fraction, with and without diabetes. We aim to study the effect of empagliflozin on cardiovascular and kidney outcomes across the spectrum of kidney function. METHODS: In this prespecified analysis, patients were categorized by the presence or absence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) at baseline (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 or albumin-to-creatine ratio >300 mg/g). The primary and key secondary outcomes were: (1) a composite of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization (primary outcome); (2) total HF hospitalizations; and (3) eGFR slope. The direct impact on kidney events was investigated by a prespecified composite kidney outcome (defined as a sustained profound decline in eGFR, chronic dialysis, or transplant). The median follow-up was 16 months. RESULTS: Of 3730 patients who were randomized to empagliflozin or placebo, 1978 (53%) had CKD. Empagliflozin reduced the primary outcome and total HF hospitalizations in patients with and without CKD: hazard ratio (HR)=0.78 (95% CI, 0.65-0.93) and HR=0.72 (95% CI, 0.58-0.90), respectively (interaction P=0.63). Empagliflozin slowed the slope of eGFR decline by 1.11 (0.23-1.98) ml/min/1.73 m2/yr in patients with CKD and by 2.41 (1.49-3.32) ml/min/1.73 m2/yr in patients without CKD. The risk of the composite kidney outcome was reduced similarly in patients with and without CKD: HR=0.53 (95% CI, 0.31-0.91) and HR=0.46 (95% CI, 0.22-0.99), respectively. The effect of empagliflozin on the primary composite outcome and key secondary outcomes was consistent across a broad range of baseline kidney function, measured by clinically relevant eGFR subgroups or by albuminuria, including patients with eGFR as low as 20 ml/min/1.73 m2. Empagliflozin was well tolerated in CKD patients. CONCLUSIONS: In EMPEROR-Reduced, empagliflozin had a beneficial effect on the key efficacy outcomes and slowed the rate of kidney function decline in patients with and without CKD, and regardless of the severity of kidney impairment at baseline. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03057977.

Effect of Empagliflozin on Worsening Heart Failure Events in Patients With Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction: EMPEROR-Preserved Trial.

BACKGROUND: Empagliflozin reduces the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, but additional data are needed about its effect on inpatient and outpatient heart failure events. METHODS: We randomly assigned 5988 patients with class II through IV heart failure with an ejection fraction of >40% to double-blind treatment with placebo or empagliflozin (10 mg once daily), in addition to usual therapy, for a median of 26 months. We prospectively collected information on inpatient and outpatient events reflecting worsening heart failure and prespecified their analysis in individual and composite end points. RESULTS: Empagliflozin reduced the combined risk of cardiovascular death, hospitalization for heart failure, or an emergency or urgent heart failure visit requiring intravenous treatment (432 versus 546 patients [empagliflozin versus placebo, respectively]; hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.67-0.87]; P<0.0001). This benefit reached statistical significance at 18 days after randomization. Empagliflozin reduced the total number of heart failure hospitalizations that required intensive care (hazard ratio, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.52-0.96]; P=0.028) and the total number of all hospitalizations that required a vasopressor or positive inotropic drug (hazard ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.55-0.97]; P=0.033). Compared with patients in the placebo group, fewer patients in the empagliflozin group reported outpatient intensification of diuretics (482 versus 610; hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.67-0.86]; P<0.0001), and patients assigned to empagliflozin were 20% to 50% more likely to have a better New York Heart Association functional class, with significant effects at 12 weeks that were maintained for at least 2 years. The benefit on total heart failure hospitalizations was similar in patients with an ejection fraction of >40% to <50% and 50% to <60%, but was attenuated at higher ejection fractions. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, empagliflozin produced a meaningful, early, and sustained reduction in the risk and severity of a broad range of inpatient and outpatient worsening heart failure events. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03057977.

Influence of neprilysin inhibition on the efficacy and safety of empagliflozin in patients with chronic heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction: the EMPEROR-Reduced trial.

AIMS: We evaluated the influence of sacubitril/valsartan on the effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibition with empagliflozin in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction. METHODS AND RESULTS: The EMPEROR-Reduced trial randomized 3730 patients with heart failure and an ejection fraction ≤40% to placebo or empagliflozin (10 mg/day), in addition to recommended treatment for heart failure, for a median of 16 months. A total of 727 patients (19.5%) received sacubitril/valsartan at baseline. Analysis of the effect of neprilysin inhibition was 1 of 12 pre-specified subgroups. Patients receiving a neprilysin inhibitor were particularly well-treated, as evidenced by lower systolic pressures, heart rates, N-terminal prohormone B-type natriuretic peptide, and greater use of cardiac devices (all P < 0.001) when compared with those not receiving sacubitril/valsartan. Nevertheless, when compared with placebo, empagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure in patients receiving or not receiving sacubitril/valsartan [hazard ratio 0.64 (95% CI 0.45-0.89), P = 0.009 and hazard ratio 0.77 (95% CI 0.66-0.90), P = 0.0008, respectively, interaction P = 0.31]. Empagliflozin slowed the rate of decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate by 1.92 ± 0.80 mL/min/1.73 m2/year in patients taking a neprilysin inhibitor (P = 0.016) and by 1.71 ± 0.35 mL/min/1.73 m2/year in patients not taking a neprilysin inhibitor (P < 0.0001), interaction P = 0.81. Combined inhibition of SGLT2 and neprilysin was well-tolerated. CONCLUSION: The effects on empagliflozin to reduce the risk of heart failure and renal events are not diminished in intensively treated patients who are receiving sacubitril/valsartan. Combined treatment with both SGLT2 and neprilysin inhibitors can be expected to yield substantial additional benefits.

Regional and ethnic influences on the response to empagliflozin in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction: the EMPEROR-Reduced trial.

AIMS: The aim of this article is to explore the influence of region and race/ethnicity on the effects of empagliflozin in the Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure and a Reduced Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Reduced) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 3730 patients, 1353 (36.3%) were enrolled in Europe, 1286 (34.5%) in Latin America, 425 (11.4%) in North America, and 493 (13.2%) in Asia; 2629 (70.5%) were White, 257 (6.9%) Black, and 672 (18.0%) Asian. Placebo event rates (per 100 patient-years) for cardiovascular death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization varied by region (Asia 27.7, North America 26.4, Latin America 21.4, and Europe 17.5) and race/ethnicity (Black 34.4, Asian 24.3, and White 18.7); driven by differences in HF hospitalization. The ratio of total HF hospitalization to cardiovascular death varied from 5.4 in Asia and 4.8 in North America to 2.1 in Europe; and from 4.8 in Black and 4.2 in Asian to 2.2 in White patients. Groups with the highest ratio had the greatest reduction in the primary outcome with empagliflozin. Inclusion of outpatient worsening HF episodes added more events in Europe vs. other regions; enhanced the placebo event rates in Europe vs. other regions; and increased the relative risk reduction with empagliflozin in Europe from 6% to 26%. CONCLUSIONS: There were notable differences in the placebo event rates for major HF events across diverse regions and race/ethnic groups. The benefit of empagliflozin was most pronounced in groups with the highest ratio of HF hospitalization to cardiovascular death. Regional differences were attenuated when the definition of HF events was expanded to include outpatient worsening HF events.

Comparison of Investigator-Reported and Centrally Adjudicated Heart Failure Outcomes in the EMPEROR-Reduced Trial.

BACKGROUND: There is limited published information on outcome adjudication in heart failure (HF). OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to compare investigator reports (IRs) to a Clinical Events Committee (CEC) and the impact of SCTI (Standardized Clinical Trial Initiative) criteria. METHODS: In the EMPEROR-Reduced trial, the authors compared IRs to the CEC for concordance; treatment effect on primary composite outcome events; and the components first event hospitalization primarily for HF or cardiovascular mortality (CVM), prognosis after hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), total HHFs, and trial duration with and without SCTI criteria. RESULTS: The CEC confirmed 76.3% of IR events for the primary outcome (CVM: 89.1%; HHF: 73.7%). The HR for treatment effect did not differ between adjudication methods for the primary outcome (IR: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.66-0.85]; CEC: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.65-0.86]), its components, or total HHFs. The prognosis after first HHF for all-cause mortality and CVM also did not differ between IR or CEC. Interestingly, IR primary HHF with different CEC primary cause had the highest subsequent fatal event rate. Full SCTI criteria were present in 90% of CEC HHFs-with a similar treatment effect to non-SCTI. The IR primary event reached the protocol target number (841) 3 months earlier than CEC (4 months with full SCTI criteria). CONCLUSIONS: Investigator adjudication is an alternative to a CEC with similar accuracy and faster event accumulation. The use of granular (SCTI) criteria did not improve trial performance. Finally, our data suggest that consideration be given to broadening the HHF definition to include "for or with" worsening disease. (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction [EMPEROR-Reduced]; NCT03057977).

Dabigatran versus warfarin in the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: The direct oral thrombin inhibitor dabigatran has a predictable anticoagulant effect and may be an alternative therapy to warfarin for patients who have acute venous thromboembolism. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial involving patients with acute venous thromboembolism who were initially given parenteral anticoagulation therapy for a median of 9 days (interquartile range, 8 to 11), we compared oral dabigatran, administered at a dose of 150 mg twice daily, with warfarin that was dose-adjusted to achieve an international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.0. The primary outcome was the 6-month incidence of recurrent symptomatic, objectively confirmed venous thromboembolism and related deaths. Safety end points included bleeding events, acute coronary syndromes, other adverse events, and results of liver-function tests. RESULTS: A total of 30 of the 1274 patients randomly assigned to receive dabigatran (2.4%), as compared with 27 of the 1265 patients randomly assigned to warfarin (2.1%), had recurrent venous thromboembolism; the difference in risk was 0.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.8 to 1.5; P<0.001 for the prespecified noninferiority margin). The hazard ratio with dabigatran was 1.10 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.84). Major bleeding episodes occurred in 20 patients assigned to dabigatran (1.6%) and in 24 patients assigned to warfarin (1.9%) (hazard ratio with dabigatran, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.45 to 1.48), and episodes of any bleeding were observed in 205 patients assigned to dabigatran (16.1%) and 277 patients assigned to warfarin (21.9%; hazard ratio with dabigatran, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.85). The numbers of deaths, acute coronary syndromes, and abnormal liver-function tests were similar in the two groups. Adverse events leading to discontinuation of the study drug occurred in 9.0% of patients assigned to dabigatran and in 6.8% of patients assigned to warfarin (P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism, a fixed dose of dabigatran is as effective as warfarin, has a safety profile that is similar to that of warfarin, and does not require laboratory monitoring. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00291330.)

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.

Prognostic Importance of NT-proBNP and Effect of Empagliflozin in the EMPEROR-Reduced Trial.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between the benefits of empagliflozin in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) has not been reported. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the relationship between NT-proBNP and empagliflozin effects in EMPEROR-Reduced (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction). METHODS: Patients with HFrEF were randomly assigned to placebo or empagliflozin 10 mg daily. NT-proBNP was measured at baseline, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, 52 weeks, and 100 weeks. Patients were divided into quartiles of baseline NT-proBNP. RESULTS: Incidence rates for each study outcome were 4- to 6-fold higher among those in the highest versus lowest NT-proBNP quartiles (≥3,480 vs <1,115 pg/mL). Study participants with higher NT-proBNP had 2- to 3-fold total hospitalizations higher than the lowest NT-proBNP quartile. Empagliflozin reduced risk for major cardiorenal events without heterogeneity across NT-proBNP quartiles (primary endpoint Pinteraction = 0.94; renal composite endpoint Pinteraction = 0.71). Empagliflozin treatment significantly reduced NT-proBNP at all timepoints examined; by 52 weeks, the adjusted mean difference from placebo was 13% (P < 0.001). An NT-proBNP in the lowest quartile (<1,115 pg/mL) 12 weeks after randomization was associated with lower risk for subsequent cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization regardless of baseline concentration. Treatment with empagliflozin resulted in 27% higher adjusted odds of an NT-proBNP concentration of <1,115 pg/mL by 12 weeks compared with placebo (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In EMPEROR-Reduced, higher baseline NT-proBNP concentrations were associated with greater risk for adverse heart failure or renal outcomes, but empagliflozin reduced risk regardless of baseline NT-proBNP concentration. The NT-proBNP concentration after treatment with empagliflozin better informs subsequent prognosis than pretreatment concentrations. (Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction [EMPEROR-Reduced]; NCT03057977).

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.

Oral thrombin inhibitor dabigatran etexilate vs North American enoxaparin regimen for prevention of venous thromboembolism after knee arthroplasty surgery.

Dabigatran, an oral once-daily unmonitored thrombin inhibitor, has been tested elsewhere using enoxaparin 40 mg once daily. We used the North American enoxaparin 30 mg BID regimen as the comparator. This was a double-blind, centrally randomized trial. Unilateral total knee arthroplasty patients were randomized to receive oral dabigatran etexilate 220 or 150 mg once daily, or enoxaparin 30 mg SC BID after surgery, blinded. Dosing stopped at contrast venography, 12 to 15 days after surgery. Among 1896 patients, dabigatran 220 and 110 mg showed inferior efficacy to enoxaparin (venous thromboembolism rates of 31% [P = .02 vs enoxaparin], 34% [P < .001 vs enoxaparin], and 25%, respectively). Bleeding rates were similar, and no drug-related hepatic illness was recognized. Dabigatran, effective compared to once-daily enoxaparin, showed inferior efficacy to the twice-daily North American enoxaparin regimen, probably because of the latter's more intense and prolonged dosing.

Evaluation of the effects of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibition with empagliflozin on morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction: rationale for and design of the EMPEROR-Preserved Trial.

BACKGROUND: The principal biological processes that characterize heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are systemic inflammation, epicardial adipose tissue accumulation, coronary microcirculatory rarefaction, myocardial fibrosis and vascular stiffness; the resulting impairment of left ventricular and aortic distensibility (especially when accompanied by impaired glomerular function and sodium retention) causes increases in cardiac filling pressures and exertional dyspnoea despite the relative preservation of left ventricular ejection fraction. Independently of their actions on blood glucose, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors exert a broad range of biological effects (including actions to inhibit cardiac inflammation and fibrosis, antagonize sodium retention and improve glomerular function) that can ameliorate the pathophysiological derangements in HFpEF. Such SGLT2 inhibitors exert favourable effects in experimental models of HFpEF and have been found in large-scale trials to reduce the risk for serious heart failure events in patients with type 2 diabetes, many of whom were retrospectively identified as having HFpEF. STUDY DESIGN: The EMPEROR-Preserved Trial is enrolling ≈5750 patients with HFpEF (ejection fraction >40%), with and without type 2 diabetes, who are randomized to receive placebo or empagliflozin 10 mg/day, which is added to all appropriate treatments for HFpEF and co-morbidities. STUDY AIMS: The primary endpoint is the time-to-first-event analysis of the combined risk for cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure. The trial will also evaluate the effects of empagliflozin on renal function, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality and recurrent hospitalization events, and will assess a wide range of biomarkers that reflect important pathophysiological mechanisms that may drive the evolution of HFpEF. The EMPEROR-Preserved Trial is well positioned to determine if empagliflozin can have a meaningful impact on the course of HFpEF, a disorder for which there are currently few therapeutic options.

Evaluation of the effect of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibition with empagliflozin on morbidity and mortality of patients with chronic heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction: rationale for and design of the EMPEROR-Reduced trial.

Drugs that inhibit the sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) have been shown to reduce the risk of hospitalizations for heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes. In populations that largely did not have heart failure at the time of enrolment, empagliflozin, canagliflozin and dapagliflozin decreased the risk of serious new-onset heart failure events by ≈30%. In addition, in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial, empagliflozin reduced the risk of both pump failure and sudden deaths, the two most common modes of death among patients with heart failure. In none of the three trials could the benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors on heart failure be explained by the actions of these drugs as diuretics or anti-hyperglycaemic agents. These observations raise the possibility that SGLT2 inhibitors could reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with established heart failure, including those without diabetes. The EMPEROR-Reduced trial is enrolling ≈3600 patients with heart failure and a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (≤ 40%), half of whom are expected not to have diabetes. Patients are being randomized to placebo or empagliflozin 10 mg daily, which is added to all appropriate treatment with inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin system and neprilysin, beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. The primary endpoint is the time-to-first event analysis of the combined risk of cardiovascular death and hospitalization for heart failure, but the trial will also evaluate the effects of empagliflozin on renal function, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and recurrent hospitalization events. By adjusting eligibility based on natriuretic peptide levels to the baseline ejection fraction, the trial will preferentially enrol high-risk patients. A large proportion of the participants is expected to have an ejection fraction < 30%, and the estimated annual event rate is expected to be at least 15%. The EMPEROR-Reduced trial is well-positioned to determine if the addition of empagliflozin can add meaningfully to current approaches that have established benefits in the treatment of chronic heart failure with left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

Dabigatran etexilate versus enoxaparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after total hip replacement: a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: After hip replacement surgery, prophylaxis following discharge from hospital is recommended to reduce the risk of venous thromboembolism. Our aim was to assess the oral, direct thrombin inhibitor dabigatran etexilate for such prophylaxis. METHODS: In this double-blind study, we randomised 3494 patients undergoing total hip replacement to treatment for 28-35 days with dabigatran etexilate 220 mg (n=1157) or 150 mg (1174) once daily, starting with a half-dose 1-4 h after surgery, or subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg once daily (1162), starting the evening before surgery. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of total venous thromboembolism (venographic or symptomatic) and death from all causes during treatment. On the basis of the absolute difference in rates of venous thromboembolism with enoxaparin versus placebo, the non-inferiority margin for the difference in rates of thromboembolism was defined as 7.7%. Efficacy analyses were done by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00168818. FINDINGS: Median treatment duration was 33 days. 880 patients in the dabigatran etexilate 220 mg group, 874 in the dabigatran etexilate 150 mg group, and 897 in the enoxaparin group were available for the primary efficacy outcome analysis; the main reasons for exclusion in all three groups were the lack of adequate venographic data. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 60 (6.7%) of 897 individuals in the enoxaparin group versus 53 (6.0%) of 880 patients in the dabigatran etexilate 220 mg group (absolute difference -0.7%, 95% CI -2.9 to 1.6%) and 75 (8.6%) of 874 people in the 150 mg group (1.9%, -0.6 to 4.4%). Both doses were thus non-inferior to enoxaparin. There was no significant difference in major bleeding rates with either dose of dabigatran etexilate compared with enoxaparin (p=0.44 for 220 mg, p=0.60 for 150 mg). The frequency of increases in liver enzyme concentrations and of acute coronary events during the study did not differ significantly between the groups. INTERPRETATION: Oral dabigatran etexilate was as effective as enoxaparin in reducing the risk of venous thromboembolism after total hip replacement surgery, with a similar safety profile.

Osteopontin modulates angiotensin II-induced fibrosis in the intact murine heart.

OBJECTIVES: Osteopontin (OPN) is upregulated in left ventricular hypertrophy and is stimulated by angiotensin II (AngII). Our objective was to determine whether mice deficient in OPN would be protected from AngII-induced cardiac fibrosis. BACKGROUND: Interstitial fibrosis can lead to myocardial dysfunction and ultimately heart failure. Osteopontin activates integrins that regulate cell adhesion, migration, and growth, thus implicating OPN in the process of cardiac fibrosis. METHODS: Osteopontin null (OPN(-/-)) mice (n = 18) and wild-type controls (n = 20) were infused with AngII (2.5 or 3.0 microg/kg/min) for four days or three weeks via osmotic mini-pumps. Hearts were assessed morphometrically and histologically, including quantitative assessment of fibrosis via optical microscopic imaging analysis. Cardiac fibroblasts derived from these mice were evaluated for adhesion and proliferation. Cardiac transcript expression for cytokines, extracellular matrix (ECM), integrin, and atrial natriuretic peptide were assessed. RESULTS: Osteopontin(-/-) mice exhibited less cardiac fibrosis (0.7%) than wild-type mice (8.0%) (p < 0.01) and lowered heart/body weight ratios (0.10% vs. 0.23%) (p < 0.01) after three weeks of AngII infusion. Expression of transforming growth factor-beta, fibronectin, and collagen was not different between OPN(-/-) and wild-type mice, despite the decrease in ECM accumulation in the OPN(-/-) mice. Adhesion to ECM substrates decreased by 30% to 50% in cardiac fibroblasts of OPN(-/-) mice but was restored in OPN(-/-) cells by the addition of recombinant osteopontin. CONCLUSIONS: Osteopontin mediates cardiac fibrosis, probably through the modulation of cellular adhesion and proliferation. Because OPN is increased in cardiac hypertrophy and its lack attenuates fibrosis, understanding of OPN function is essential to extend our knowledge about molecular determinants of cardiac hypertrophy and failure.

A comparison of the safety and effectiveness of dabigatran and warfarin in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients in a large healthcare system.

Dabigatran is approved for stroke risk reduction in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Data from diverse clinical practice settings will help establish whether the risk:benefit ratio seen in clinical trials is comparable with routine clinical care. This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of dabigatran and warfarin in clinical practice. We undertook a propensity score-matched (PSM) cohort study (N=12,793 per group; mean age 74) comparing treatment with dabigatran or warfarin in the US Department of Defense claims database, October 2009 to July 2013. Treatment-naïve patients with first prescription claim for dabigatran (either FDA-approved dose) or warfarin between October 2010 and July 2012 (index) and a diagnosis of NVAF during the 12 months before index date were included. Primary outcomes were stroke and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke, major gastrointestinal (GI), urogenital or other bleeding, myocardial infarction (MI) and death. Time-to-event was investigated using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. Outcomes comparisons were made utilising Cox-proportional hazards models of PSM groups. Dabigatran users experienced fewer strokes (adjusted hazard ratio [95 % confidence intervals] 0.73 [0.55-0.97]), major intracranial (0.49 [0.30-0.79]), urogenital (0.36 [0.18-0.74]) and other (0.38 [0.22-0.66]) bleeding, MI (0.65 [0.45-0.95]) and deaths (0.64 [0.55-0.74]) than the warfarin group. Major bleeding (0.87 [0.74-1.03]) and major GI bleeding (1.13 [0.94-1.37]) was similar between groups and major lower GI bleeding events were more frequent (1.30 [1.04-1.62]) with dabigatran. In conclusion, compared with warfarin, dabigatran treatment was associated with a lower risk of stroke and most outcomes measured, but increased incidence of major lower GI bleeding.

Characteristics of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation using dabigatran or warfarin in the US.

OBJECTIVE: In order to understand characteristics of atrial fibrillation patients in the era of new oral anticoagulants (NOACs), this study explores differences in characteristics between patients treated with dabigatran etexilate (DE) and warfarin (W) that may be due to patient channeling in 'real-world' clinical practice. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Medco claims data were used to characterize 41,805 non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients from the US with a DE (N = 7055) or W (N = 34,750) prescription between February 2011 and April 2012. The first prescription for each treatment in this period defined the index date. The treatment groups were stratified by newly diagnosed or warfarin-experienced patients. Characteristics, comedications, and comorbidities in the 12 month period prior to index date were assessed. RESULTS: Newly diagnosed patients initiating DE had overall lower use of comedications compared to W patients. In contrast, warfarin-experienced patients switching from W to DE showed higher use of antibiotics, beta blockers, gastrointestinal drugs and NSAIDs compared to patients remaining on W. Newly diagnosed NVAF patients initiating DE showed lower proportions for comorbidities such as myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and renal disease. This was also reflected in the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) (mean DE 2.1 vs. W 3.0) and the CHA2DS2-VASc score (mean DE 3.4 vs. W 4.0). For warfarin-experienced NVAF patients, these differences were not seen. Interpretation of results is limited by the fact that administrative claims data are not gathered for scientific research. Underreporting of non-serious conditions might occur and life-style variables, laboratory values and over-the-counter medication were not available. CONCLUSIONS: As also seen for other newly marketed drugs, differences in baseline characteristics, comedication, and comorbidities were detected between DE and W in newly diagnosed patients, as well as in warfarin-experienced patients. This channeling may have significant impact on comparative outcome studies if not properly addressed in study design and analysis.

Evaluation of the acute coronary syndrome safety profile of dabigatran etexilate in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery: findings from four Phase 3 trials.

INTRODUCTION: Several anticoagulants have been associated with a 'rebound effect' that potentially increases the risk of thrombosis and cardiovascular events following discontinuation. Four Phase 3 trials of dabigatran etexilate in major orthopedic surgery incorporated measures to assess the risk of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) events during and after treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients in RE-MOBILIZE®, RE-MODEL™, RE-NOVATE®, and RENOVATE® II were randomized to dabigatran etexilate (150 mg or 220mg once daily) or enoxaparin for 6-35 days, and followed for up to 90 days. ACS data were tabulated from investigator-reported serious adverse events using ACS-specific Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Authorities (MedDRA) lower-level terms. To ensure that all ACS events were identified in the initial three studies, RE-MOBILIZE®, RE-MODEL™, and RE-NOVATE®, a broader list of MedDRA terms was prespecified that would trigger treatment-blinded adjudication. RESULTS: When pooling the four trials, patients receiving dabigatran etexilate 220 mg had the fewest treatment-emergent, investigator-reported ACS events (6 [0.16%] vs 14 [0.51%] for dabigatran 150 mg and 13 [0.35%] for enoxaparin). Corresponding post-treatment rates were 2 (0.06%), 1 (0.04%), and 4 (0.11%). Similarly, treatment-emergent centrally adjudicated definite or likely ACS events in the first three trials were fewer in patients on dabigatran 220 mg (16 [0.60%]) than dabigatran 150 mg (26 [0.95%]) and enoxaparin (20 [0.74%]). The corresponding numbers post treatment were 2, 2, and 7. None of these between-group differences were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: No increased ACS signal was detected with dabigatran etexilate compared with enoxaparin during or after treatment.