Natriuretic Peptides, Kidney Function, and Clinical Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptides (NT-proBNPs) are guideline-recommended biomarkers for risk stratification in patients with heart failure. However, NT-proBNP levels are often elevated in chronic kidney disease, introducing uncertainty about their prognostic relevance in persons across a broad range of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the association of NT-proBNP with cardiovascular and mortality outcomes in patients with heart failure and mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, stratified by baseline kidney function. METHODS: A pooled analysis was conducted of participants with NT-proBNP and eGFR measured at baseline in the I-PRESERVE (Irbesartan in Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction), TOPCAT (Americas region) (Aldosterone Antagonist Therapy for Adults With Heart Failure and Preserved Systolic Function), PARAGON (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ARB Global Outcomes in HF With Preserved Ejection Fraction), and DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the LIVEs of Patients With PReserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure) trials. The relationship between NT-proBNP and eGFR was assessed using piecewise linear regression. Using multivariable Cox and Poisson regression models, the association of NT-proBNP with outcomes across a range of eGFR was evaluated. The primary outcome was hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: Among 14,831 participants (mean age: 72.1 years; 50.3% female; mean eGFR: 63.3 mL/min/1.73 m2, and median NT-proBNP: 840 pg/mL) followed up for a median 33.5 months, there were 3,092 primary outcomes. NT-proBNP levels increased by 9%, 8%, and 23% per 10 mL/min/1.73 m2 lower eGFR in patients with baseline eGFR ≥60, 45-<60, and <45 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively (P for nonlinearity < 0.001). Each doubling in NT-proBNP was associated with a 37% relative increase in the primary outcome (HR: 1.37; 95% CI: 1.34-1.41), consistent across different eGFR categories (P for interaction = 0.42). For the same incidence of the primary outcome, NT-proBNP levels were approximately 2.5- to 3.5-fold lower in patients with eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73 m2, compared with patients with eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Similar patterns were observed across all outcomes studied, including cardiovascular and noncardiovascular death. CONCLUSIONS: The same NT-proBNP concentration predicts a substantially higher absolute risk of adverse outcomes for people with heart failure and reduced kidney function, compared with those with preserved kidney function. These data call into question proposals for higher NT-proBNP references ranges in people with CKD, and suggest that reduced kidney function per se should not be a reason to disregard higher NT-proBNP levels.

Sacubitril/valsartan reduces incident anaemia and iron therapy utilization in heart failure: The PARAGON-HF trial.

AIMS: Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) have been shown to lower haemoglobin levels, potentially related to reductions in erythropoietin levels and haematopoiesis. We examined whether sacubitril/valsartan might attenuate this effect of RASi alone on incident anaemia in patients with heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: PARAGON-HF was a global, multicentre randomized clinical trial of sacubitril/valsartan versus the RASi valsartan in patients with HF and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥45%. We evaluated haemoglobin trajectory and risks of incident anaemia and new iron therapy initiation during follow-up. Among 4795 participants, 1111 (23.2%) had anaemia at randomization and 5.6% were treated with iron at baseline. Over a median follow-up of 2.9 years, patients with anaemia were at significantly higher risk for total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death, compared with those without anaemia (21.6 vs. 11.5 per 100 patient-years; adjusted rate ratio 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.54; p = 0.001). Sacubitril/valsartan slightly slowed the decline in haemoglobin levels by 0.1 g/dl (95% CI 0.0-0.2 g/dl; p = 0.005). Participants treated with sacubitril/valsartan were at significantly lower risk of developing anaemia (30.3% vs. 37.6%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.76; 95% CI 0.68-0.85; p < 0.001) and starting iron therapy (8.1% vs. 10.0%; HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.67-0.97; p = 0.026). Treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan versus valsartan on total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death were consistent among patients across the haemoglobin spectrum (pinteraction = 0.60). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF, treatment with sacubitril/valsartan resulted in modestly smaller declines in haemoglobin, lower rates of incident anaemia, and fewer new initiations of iron therapy compared with RASi. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01920711.

Sacubitril/Valsartan in Patients With Heart Failure and Deterioration in eGFR to <30 mL/min/1.73 m2.

BACKGROUND: Sacubitril/valsartan is a foundational therapy for patients with heart failure. Although current U.S. Food and Drug Administration labeling does not provide guidance regarding initiation or continuation of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with worsening kidney function, guidelines identify estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 as a contraindication to therapy. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of continuing sacubitril/valsartan in patients with deterioration of kidney function below an eGFR of 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. METHODS: The association between a deterioration in eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2, efficacy and safety outcomes, and treatment with sacubitril/valsartan vs renin-angiotensin system inhibitor were evaluated using time updated Cox models in a post hoc parallel trial analyses of PARADIGM-HF and PARAGON-HF. RESULTS: Among 8,346 randomized patients in PARADIGM-HF and 4,746 in PARAGON-HF, 691 (8.3%) and 613 (12.9%), respectively, had an eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 at least once in follow-up. Patients experiencing such deterioration were at higher risk of the primary outcome in both PARADIGM-HF and PARAGON-HF. However, the incidence of the primary outcome remained lower with sacubitril/valsartan vs renin-angiotensin system inhibitor, regardless of deterioration in kidney function in both PARADIGM-HF (Pinteraction = 0.50) and PARAGON-HF (Pinteraction = 0.64). Rates of key safety outcomes were higher among patients experiencing eGFR deterioration; however, rates were similar between treatment groups including among those who remained on treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Patients experiencing deterioration of kidney function to a value below eGFR 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 faced high risk of cardiovascular and kidney disease outcomes. Continuation of sacubitril/valsartan was associated with persistent clinical benefit and no incremental safety risk. These data support continuation of sacubitril/valsartan for heart failure treatment even when eGFR declines below this threshold (PARADIGM-HF [Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure], NCT01035255; and PARAGON-HF [Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ARB Global Outcomes in HF with Preserved Ejection Fraction], NCT01920711).

Effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan on Cognitive Function in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Prespecified Analysis of PARAGON-HF.

BACKGROUND: A hypothetical concern has been raised that sacubitril/valsartan might cause cognitive impairment because neprilysin is one of several enzymes degrading amyloid-ß peptides in the brain, some of which are neurotoxic and linked to Alzheimer-type dementia. To address this, we examined the effect of sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan on cognitive function in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in a prespecified substudy of PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction). METHODS: In PARAGON-HF, serial assessment of cognitive function was conducted in a subset of patients with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE; score range, 0-30, with lower scores reflecting worse cognitive function). The prespecified primary analysis of this substudy was the change from baseline in MMSE score at 96 weeks. Other post hoc analyses included cognitive decline (fall in MMSE score of ≥3 points), cognitive impairment (MMSE score <24), or the occurrence of dementia-related adverse events. RESULTS: Among 2895 patients included in the MMSE substudy with baseline MMSE score measured, 1453 patients were assigned to sacubitril/valsartan and 1442 to valsartan. Their mean age was 73 years, and the median follow-up was 32 months. The mean±SD MMSE score at randomization was 27.4±3.0 in the sacubitril/valsartan group, with 10% having an MMSE score <24; the corresponding numbers were nearly identical in the valsartan group. The mean change from baseline to 96 weeks in the sacubitril/valsartan group was -0.05 (SE, 0.07); the corresponding change in the valsartan group was -0.04 (0.07). The mean between-treatment difference at week 96 was -0.01 (95% CI, -0.20 to 0.19; P=0.95). Analyses of a ≥3-point decline in MMSE, decrease to a score <24, dementia-related adverse events, and combinations of these showed no difference between sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan. No difference was found in the subgroup of patients tested for apolipoprotein E ε4 allele genotype. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in PARAGON-HF had relatively low baseline MMSE scores. Cognitive change, measured by MMSE, did not differ between treatment with sacubitril/valsartan and treatment with valsartan in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01920711.

In vivo fluid dynamics of the Ventura interatrial shunt device in patients with heart failure.

AIMS: Interatrial shunts are under evaluation as a treatment for heart failure (HF); however, their in vivo flow performance has not been quantitatively studied. We aimed to investigate the fluid dynamics properties of the 0.51 cm orifice diameter Ventura shunt and assess its lumen integrity with serial transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). METHODS AND RESULTS: Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and bench flow tests were used to establish the flow-pressure relationship of the shunt. Open-label patients from the RELIEVE-HF trial underwent TEE at shunt implant and at 6 and 12 month follow-up. Shunt effective diameter (Deff) was derived from the vena contracta, and flow was determined by the continuity equation. CFD and bench studies independently validated that the shunt's discharge coefficient was 0.88 to 0.89. The device was successfully implanted in all 97 enrolled patients; mean age was 70 ± 11 years, 97% were NYHA class III, and 51% had LVEF ≤40%. Patency was confirmed in all instances, except for one stenotic shunt at 6 months. Deff remained unchanged from baseline at 12 months (0.47 ± 0.01 cm, P = 0.376), as did the trans-shunt mean pressure gradient (5.1 ± 3.9 mmHg, P = 0.316) and flow (1137 ± 463 mL/min, P = 0.384). TEE measured flow versus pressure closely correlated (R2 ≥ 0.98) with a fluid dynamics model. At 12 months, the pulmonary/systemic flow Qp/Qs ratio was 1.22 ± 0.12. CONCLUSIONS: When implanted in patients with advanced HF, this small interatrial shunt demonstrated predictable and durable patency and performance.

Effects of sacubitril/valsartan according to polypharmacy status in PARAGON-HF.

AIMS: Patients with heart failure (HF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have a particularly high prevalence of comorbidities, often necessitating treatment with many medications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between polypharmacy status and outcomes in PARAGON-HF. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this post hoc analysis, baseline medication status was available in 4793 of 4796 patients included in the primary analysis of PARAGON-HF. The effects of sacubitril/valsartan, compared with valsartan, were assessed according to the number of medications at baseline: 683 non-polypharmacy (<5 medications); 2750 polypharmacy (5-9 medications), and 1360 hyper-polypharmacy (≥10 medications). The primary outcome was total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular deaths. Patients with hyper-polypharmacy were older, had more severe limitations due to HF (worse New York Heart Association class and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores), and had greater comorbidity. The non-adjusted risk of the primary outcome was significantly higher in patients taking more medications, and similar trends were seen for HF hospitalization and cardiovascular and all-cause death. The effect of sacubitril/valsartan versus valsartan on the primary outcome from the lowest to highest polypharmacy category was (as a rate ratio): 1.19 (0.76-1.85), 0.94 (0.77-1.15), and 0.77 (0.61-0.96) (pinteraction = 0.16). Treatment-related adverse events were more common in patients in the higher polypharmacy categories but not more common with sacubitril/valsartan, versus valsartan, in any polypharmacy category. CONCLUSIONS: Polypharmacy is very common in patients with HFpEF, and those with polypharmacy have worse clinical status and a higher rate of non-fatal and fatal outcomes. The benefit of sacubitril/valsartan was not diminished in patients taking a larger number of medications at baseline.

Role of macrophages in regression of myocardial fibrosis following alleviation of left ventricular pressure overload.

Sustained hemodynamic pressure overload (PO) produced by murine transverse aortic constriction (TAC) causes myocardial fibrosis; removal of TAC (unTAC) returns left ventricle (LV) hemodynamic load to normal and results in significant, but incomplete regression of myocardial fibrosis. However, the cellular mechanisms that result in these outcomes have not been defined. The objective was to determine temporal changes in myocardial macrophage phenotype in TAC and unTAC and determine whether macrophage depletion alters collagen degradation after unTAC. Myocardial macrophage abundance and phenotype were assessed by immunohistochemistry, flow cytometry, and gene expression by RT-PCR in control (non-TAC), 2 wk, 4 wk TAC, and 2 wk, 4 wk, and 6 wk unTAC. Myocardial cytokine profiles and collagen-degrading enzymes were determined by immunoassay and immunoblots. Initial collagen degradation was detected with collagen-hybridizing peptide (CHP). At unTAC, macrophages were depleted with clodronate liposomes, and endpoints were measured at 2 wk unTAC. Macrophage number had a defined temporal pattern: increased in 2 wk and 4 wk TAC, followed by increases at 2 wk unTAC (over 4 wk TAC) that then decreased at 4 wk and 6 wk unTAC. At 2 wk unTAC, macrophage area was significantly increased and was regionally associated with CHP reactivity. Cytokine profiles in unTAC reflected a proinflammatory milieu versus the TAC-induced profibrotic milieu. Single-cell sequencing analysis of 2 wk TAC versus 2 and 6 wk unTAC revealed distinct macrophage gene expression profiles at each time point demonstrating unique macrophage populations in unTAC versus TAC myocardium. Clodronate liposome depletion at unTAC reduced CHP reactivity and decreased cathepsin K and proMMP2. We conclude that temporal changes in number and phenotype of macrophages play a critical role in both TAC-induced development and unTAC-mediated partial, but incomplete, regression of myocardial fibrosis.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Our novel findings highlight the dynamic changes in myocardial macrophage populations that occur in response to PO and after alleviation of PO. Our data demonstrated, for the first time, a potential benefit of macrophages in contributing to collagen degradation and the partial regression of interstitial fibrosis following normalization of hemodynamic load.

Left Ventricular Gene Expression in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction-Profibrotic and Proinflammatory Pathways and Genes.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is increasingly prevalent and has few treatments. The molecular mechanisms and resultant signaling pathways that underlie the development of HFpEF are poorly defined. It has been proposed that activation of proinflammatory pathways plays a role in the development of cardiac fibrosis. The signature of gene expression (transcriptome) of previously validated left ventricular biopsies obtained from patients with HFpEF and matched referent controls allows for an unbiased assessment of proinflammatory and profibrotic signaling pathways and genes. METHODS: Epicardial left ventricular biopsies from stringently selected HFpEF patients (HFpEF, n=16) and referent control patients (CTR, n=14) were obtained during aortocoronary bypass surgery. The subepicardial myocardium was flash-frozen to build a repository that was parallel-processed for RNA sequencing to allow for an unsupervised in-depth comparison of the left ventricular transcriptome. RESULTS: The average patient age was 67±10 years. When compared with controls, patients with HFpEF were hypertensive with a higher body mass index (kg/m2: 30±5 versus 37±6; P<0.01) and elevated NT-proBNP levels (pg/mL: 155 [89-328] versus 1554 [888-2178]; P<0.001). The transcriptome analysis revealed differential expression of 477 genes many of which were involved in profibrotic pathways including extracellular matrix production and posttranslational modification but no proinflammatory signature. CONCLUSIONS: The transcriptome analysis of left ventricular myocardial samples from patients with HFpEF confirms an overabundant extracellular matrix gene expression, the basis of myocardial fibrosis, without a signature of activated proinflammatory pathways or genes.

Changes in mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin during treatment with sacubitril/valsartan.

AIMS: Adrenomedullin is a vasodilatory peptide with a role in microcirculatory and endothelial homeostasis. Adrenomedullin is a substrate for neprilysin and may therefore play a role in beneficial effects of sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val) treatment. METHODS AND RESULTS: Mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proADM) was measured in 156 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) treated with Sac/Val and 264 patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) randomized to treatment with Sac/Val or valsartan. Echocardiography and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire results were collected at baseline and after 6 and 12 months in the HFrEF cohort. Median (Q1-Q3) baseline MR-proADM concentrations were 0.80 (0.59-0.99) nmol/L in HFrEF and 0.88 (0.68-1.20) nmol/L in HFpEF. After 12 weeks of treatment with Sac/Val, MR-proADM increased by median 49% in HFrEF and 60% in HFpEF, while there were no significant changes in valsartan-treated patients (median 2%). Greater increases in MR-proADM were associated with higher Sac/Val doses. Changes in MR-proADM correlated weakly with changes in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, cardiac troponin T and urinary cyclic guanosine monophosphate. Increases in MR-proADM were associated with decreases in blood pressure, but not significantly associated with changes in echocardiographic parameters or health status. CONCLUSIONS: MR-proAD concentrations rise substantially following treatment with Sac/Val, in contrast to no change from valsartan. Change in MR-proADM from neprilysin inhibition did not correlate with improvements in cardiac structure and function or health status. More data are needed regarding the role of adrenomedullin and its related peptides in the treatment of heart failure. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROVE-HF ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02887183, PARAMOUNT ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00887588.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure: Are There Thresholds and Inflection Points in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Thresholds Justifying a Clinical Classification?

BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines proposed a classification for heart failure (HF) on the basis of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), although it remains unclear whether the divisions chosen were biologically rational. Using patients spanning the full range of LVEF, we examined whether there was evidence of LVEF thresholds in patient characteristics or inflection points in clinical outcomes. METHODS: Using patient-level information, we created a merged dataset of 33 699 participants who had been enrolled in 6 randomized controlled HF trials including patients with reduced and preserved ejection fraction. The relationship between the incidence of all-cause death (and specific causes of death) and HF hospitalization, and LVEF, was evaluated using Poisson regression models. RESULTS: As LVEF increased, age, the proportion of women, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, and prevalence of atrial fibrillation and diabetes increased, whereas ischemic pathogenesis, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) decreased. As LVEF increased >50%, age and the proportion of women continued to increase, and ischemic pathogenesis and NT-proBNP decreased, but other characteristics did not change meaningfully. The incidence of most clinical outcomes (except noncardiovascular death) decreased as LVEF increased, with a LVEF inflection point of around 50% for all-cause death and cardiovascular death, around 40% for pump failure death, and around 35% for HF hospitalization. Higher than those thresholds, there was little further decline in the incidence rate. There was no evidence of a J-shaped relationship between LVEF and death; no evidence of worse outcomes in patients with high-normal ("supranormal") LVEF. Similarly, in a subset of patients with echocardiographic data, there were no structural differences in patients with a high-normal LVEF suggestive of amyloidosis, and NT-proBNP levels were consistent with this conclusion. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HF, there was a LVEF threshold of around 40% to 50% where the pattern of patient characteristics changed, and event rates began to increase compared with higher LVEF values. Our findings provide evidence to support current upper LVEF thresholds defining HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction on the basis of prognosis. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifiers: NCT00634309, NCT00634400, NCT00634712, NCT00095238, NCT01035255, NCT00094302, NCT00853658, and NCT01920711.

Incremental prognostic value of biomarkers in PARADIGM-HF.

AIMS: It is uncertain how much candidate biomarkers improve risk prediction when added to comprehensive models including routinely collected clinical and laboratory variables in heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: Aldosterone, cystatin C, high-sensitivity troponin T (hs-TnT), galectin-3, growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15), kidney injury molecule-1, matrix metalloproteinase-2 and -9, soluble suppression of tumourigenicity-2, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 (TIMP-1) and urinary albumin to creatinine ratio were measured in 1559 of PARADIGM-HF participants. We tested whether these biomarkers, individually or collectively, improved the performance of the PREDICT-HF prognostic model, which includes clinical, routine laboratory, and natriuretic peptide data, for the primary endpoint and cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. The mean age of participants was 67.3 ± 9.9 years, 1254 (80.4%) were men and 1103 (71%) were in New York Heart Association class II. During a mean follow-up of 30.7 months, 300 patients experienced the primary outcome and 197 died. Added individually, only four biomarkers were independently associated with all outcomes: hs-TnT, GDF-15, cystatin C and TIMP-1. When all biomarkers were added simultaneously to the PREDICT-HF models, only hs-TnT remained an independent predictor of all three endpoints. GDF-15 also remained predictive of the primary endpoint; TIMP-1 was the only other predictor of both cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. Individually or in combination, these biomarkers did not lead to significant improvements in discrimination or reclassification. CONCLUSIONS: None of the biomarkers studied individually or collectively led to a meaningful improvement in the prediction of outcomes over what is provided by clinical, routine laboratory, and natriuretic peptide variables.

Importance of cystatin C in estimating glomerular filtration rate: the PARADIGM-HF trial.

AIMS: The 2021 Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation combining creatinine and cystatin C provides a better estimation of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) compared to the creatinine-only equation. METHODS AND RESULTS: CKD-EPI creatinine-cystatin C equation (creatinine-cystatin) was compared to creatinine-only (creatinine) equation in a subpopulation of Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF). Patients were categorized according to difference in eGFR using the two equations: Group 1 (<-10 mL/min/1.73 m2, i.e. creatinine-cystatin more than 10 mL/min lower than creatinine), Group 2 (>-10 and <10 mL/min/1.73 m2), and Group 3 (>10 mL/min/1.73 m2, i.e. creatinine-cystatin more than 10 mL/min higher than creatinine). Cystatin C and creatinine were available in 1966 patients at randomization. Median (interquartile range) eGFR difference was -0.7 (-6.4-4.8) mL/min/1.73 m2. Compared to creatinine, creatinine-cystatin led to a substantial reclassification of chronic kidney disease stages. Overall, 212 (11%) and 355 (18%) patients were reallocated to a better and worse eGFR category, respectively. Compared to patients in Group 2, those in Group 1 (lower eGFR with creatinine-cystatin) had higher mortality and those in Group 3 (higher eGFR with creatinine-cystatin) had lower mortality. Increasing difference in eGFR (due to lower eGFR with creatinine-cystatin compared to creatinine) was associated with increasing elevation of biomarkers (including N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and troponin) and worsening Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score. The reason why the equations diverged with increasing severity of heart failure was that creatinine did not rise as steeply as cystatin C. CONCLUSION: The CKD-EPI creatinine-only equation may overestimate GFR in sicker patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique Identifier: NCT01035255.

Diastolic Dysfunction With Preserved Ejection Fraction After the Fontan Procedure.

Background Heart failure phenotyping in single-ventricle Fontan patients is challenging, particularly in patients with normal ejection fraction (EF). The objective of this study was to identify Fontan patients with abnormal diastolic function, who are high risk for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), and characterize their cardiac mechanics, exercise function, and functional health status. Methods and Results Data were obtained from the Pediatric Heart Network Fontan Cross-sectional Study database. EF was considered abnormal if <50%. Diastolic function was defined as abnormal if the diastolic pressure:volume quotient (lateral E:e'/end-diastolic volume) was >90th percentile (≥0.26 mL-1). Patients were divided into: controls=normal EF and diastolic function; systolic dysfunction (SD) = abnormal EF with normal diastolic function; diastolic dysfunction (DD) = normal EF with abnormal diastolic pressure:volume quotient. Exercise function was quantified as percent predicted peak VO2. Physical Functioning Summary Score (FSS) was reported from the Child Health Questionnaire. A total of 239 patients were included, 177 (74%) control, 36 (15%) SD, and 26 (11%) DD. Median age was 12.2 (5.4) years. Arterial elastance, a measure of arterial stiffness, was higher in DD (3.6±1.1 mm Hg/mL) compared with controls (2.5±0.8 mm Hg/mL), P<0.01. DD patients had lower predicted peak VO2 compared with controls (52% [20] versus 67% [23], P<0.01). Physical FSS was lower in DD (45±13) and SD (44±13) compared with controls (50±7), P<0.01. Conclusions Fontan patients with abnormal diastolic function and normal EF have decreased exercise tolerance, decreased functional health status, and elevated arterial stiffness. Identification of patients at high risk for HFpEF is feasible and should be considered when evaluating Fontan patients.

Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition and renal outcomes across the spectrum of ejection fraction in heart failure.

AIMS: Patients with heart failure are at higher risk of progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD), regardless of ejection fraction (EF). We assessed the renal effects of angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition in a pooled analysis of 13 195 patients with heart failure with reduced and preserved EF. METHODS AND RESULTS: We combined data from PARADIGM-HF (EF ≤40%; n = 8399) and PARAGON-HF (EF ≥45%; n = 4796) in a pre-specified pooled analysis. We assessed the effect of treatment (sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril or valsartan) on a composite of either ≥50% reduction in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), ESRD, or death from renal causes, in addition to changes in eGFR slope. We assessed whether baseline renal function or EF modified the effect of therapy on renal outcomes. At randomization, eGFR was 68 ± 20 ml/min/1.73 m2 in PARADIGM-HF and 63 ± 19 ml/min/1.73 m2 in PARAGON-HF. The composite renal outcome occurred in 70 of 6594 patients (1.1%) in the sacubitril/valsartan group and in 123 of 6601 patients (1.9%) in the valsartan or enalapril group (hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-0.75; p < 0.001). The mean eGFR change was -1.8 (95% CI -1.9 to -1.7) ml/min/1.73 m2 /year for the sacubitril/valsartan group, compared with -2.4 (95% CI -2.5 to -2.2) ml/min/1.73 m2 /year for the valsartan or enalapril group. The treatment effect on the composite renal endpoint was not modified by categories of baseline eGFR (p-interaction = 0.64), but was most pronounced in those with baseline EF between 30% and 60% (p-interaction = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure, sacubitril/valsartan reduced the risk of serious adverse renal outcomes and slowed decline in eGFR, compared with valsartan or enalapril, independent of baseline renal function.

Sacubitril-valsartan as a treatment for apparent resistant hypertension in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction.

AIMS: Patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) frequently have difficult-to-control hypertension. We examined the effect of neprilysin inhibition on 'apparent resistant hypertension' in patients with HFpEF in the PARAGON-HF trial, which compared the effect of sacubitril-valsartan with valsartan. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this post hoc analysis, patients were categorized according to systolic blood pressure at the end of the valsartan run-in (n = 4795). 'Apparent resistant hypertension' was defined as systolic blood pressure ≥140 mmHg (≥135 mmHg if diabetes) despite treatment with valsartan, a calcium channel blocker, and a diuretic. 'Apparent mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA)-resistant' hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure ≥140 mmHg (≥135 mmHg if diabetes) despite the above treatments and an MRA. The primary outcome in the PARAGON-HF trial was a composite of total hospitalizations for heart failure and death from cardiovascular causes. We examined clinical endpoints and the safety of sacubitril-valsartan according to the hypertension category. We also examined reductions in blood pressure from the end of valsartan run-in to Weeks 4 and 16 after randomization. Overall, 731 patients (15.2%) had apparent resistant hypertension and 135 (2.8%) had apparent MRA-resistant hypertension. The rate of the primary outcome was higher in patients with apparent resistant hypertension [17.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 15.6-19.1 per 100 person-years] compared to those with a controlled systolic blood pressure (13.4; 12.7-14.3 per 100 person-years), with an adjusted rate ratio of 1.28 (95% CI 1.05-1.57). The reduction in systolic blood pressure at Weeks 4 and 16, respectively, was greater with sacubitril-valsartan vs. valsartan in patients with apparent resistant hypertension [-4.8 (-7.0 to -2.5) and 3.9 (-6.6 to -1.3) mmHg] and apparent MRA-resistant hypertension [-8.8 (-14.0 to -3.5) and -6.3 (-12.5 to -0.1) mmHg]. The proportion of patients with apparent resistant hypertension achieving a controlled systolic blood pressure by Week 16 was 47.9% in the sacubitril-valsartan group and 34.3% in the valsartan group [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.78, 95% CI 1.30-2.43]. In patients with apparent MRA-resistant hypertension, the respective proportions were 43.6% vs. 28.4% (adjusted OR 2.63, 95% CI 1.18-5.89). CONCLUSION: Sacubitril-valsartan may be useful in treating apparent resistant hypertension in patients with HFpEF, even in those who continue to have an elevated blood pressure despite treatment with at least four antihypertensive drug classes, including an MRA. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: PARAGON-HF: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01920711.

Development and external validation of prognostic models to predict sudden and pump-failure death in patients with HFrEF from PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE.

BACKGROUND: Sudden death (SD) and pump failure death (PFD) are the two leading causes of death in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). OBJECTIVE: Identifying patients at higher risk for mode-specific death would allow better targeting of individual patients for relevant device and other therapies. METHODS: We developed models in 7156 patients with HFrEF from the Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) trial, using Fine-Gray regressions counting other deaths as competing risks. The derived models were externally validated in the Aliskiren Trial to Minimize Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure (ATMOSPHERE) trial. RESULTS: NYHA class and NT-proBNP were independent predictors for both modes of death. The SD model additionally included male sex, Asian or Black race, prior CABG or PCI, cancer history, MI history, treatment with LCZ696 vs. enalapril, QRS duration and ECG left ventricular hypertrophy. While LVEF, ischemic etiology, systolic blood pressure, HF duration, ECG bundle branch block, and serum albumin, chloride and creatinine were included in the PFD model. Model discrimination was good for SD and excellent for PFD with Harrell's C of 0.67 and 0.78 after correction for optimism, respectively. The observed and predicted incidences were similar in each quartile of risk scores at 3 years in each model. The performance of both models remained robust in ATMOSPHERE. CONCLUSION: We developed and validated models which separately predict SD and PFD in patients with HFrEF. These models may help clinicians and patients consider therapies targeted at these modes of death. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PARADIGM-HF: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01035255, ATMOSPHERE: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00853658.

Global Differences in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: The PARAGON-HF Trial.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a global public health problem with important regional differences. We investigated these differences in the PARAGON-HF trial (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Global Outcomes in HFpEF), the largest and most inclusive global HFpEF trial. METHODS: We studied differences in clinical characteristics, outcomes, and treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan in 4796 patients with HFpEF from the PARAGON-HF trial, grouped according to geographic region. RESULTS: Regional differences in patient characteristics and comorbidities were observed: patients from Western Europe were oldest (mean 75±7 years) with the highest prevalence of atrial fibrillation/flutter (36%); Central/Eastern European patients were youngest (mean 71±8 years) with the highest prevalence of coronary artery disease (50%); North American patients had the highest prevalence of obesity (65%) and diabetes (49%); Latin American patients were younger (73±9 years) and had a high prevalence of obesity (53%); and Asia-Pacific patients had a high prevalence of diabetes (44%), despite a low prevalence of obesity (26%). Rates of the primary composite end point of total hospitalizations for HF and death from cardiovascular causes were lower in patients from Central Europe (9 per 100 patient-years) and highest in patients from North America (28 per 100 patient-years), which was primarily driven by a greater number of total hospitalizations for HF. The effect of treatment with sacubitril-valsartan was not modified by region (interaction P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with HFpEF recruited worldwide in PARAGON-HF, there were important regional differences in clinical characteristics and outcomes, which may have implications for the design of future clinical trials. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01920711.

Incidence and Outcomes of Pneumonia in Patients With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of pneumonia and subsequent outcomes has not been compared in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to examine the rate and impact of pneumonia in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) and PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ARB Global Outcomes in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction) trials. METHODS: The authors analyzed the incidence of investigator-reported pneumonia and the rates of HF hospitalization, cardiovascular death, and all-cause death before and after the occurrence of pneumonia, and estimated risk after the first occurrence of pneumonia in unadjusted and adjusted analyses (the latter including N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide). RESULTS: In PARADIGM-HF, 528 patients (6.3%) developed pneumonia after randomization, giving an incidence rate of 29 (95% CI: 27 to 32) per 1,000 patient-years. In PARAGON-HF, 510 patients (10.6%) developed pneumonia, giving an incidence rate of 39 (95% CI: 36 to 42) per 1,000 patient-years. The subsequent risk of all trial outcomes was elevated after the occurrence of pneumonia. In PARADIGM-HF, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for the risk of death from any cause was 4.34 (95% CI: 3.73 to 5.05). The corresponding adjusted HR in PARAGON-HF was 3.76 (95% CI: 3.09 to 4.58). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of pneumonia was high in patients with HF, especially HFpEF, at around 3 times the expected rate. A first episode of pneumonia was associated with 4-fold higher mortality. (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure [PARADIGM-HF], NCT01035255; Prospective Comparison of ARNI [Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor] With ARB [Angiotensin Receptor Blocker] Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction [PARAGON-HF], NCT01920711).

Cardiac and Noncardiac Disease Burden and Treatment Effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan: Insights From a Combined PARAGON-HF and PARADIGM-HF Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The net clinical benefit of cardiac disease-modifying drugs might be influenced by the interaction of different domains of disease burden. We assessed the relative contribution of cardiac, comorbid, and demographic factors in heart failure (HF) and how their interplay might influence HF prognosis and efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction. METHODS: We combined data from 2 global trials that evaluated the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan compared with a renin-angiotensin antagonist in symptomatic HF patients (PARADIGM-HF [Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With an Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure; n=8399] and PARAGON-HF [Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor With Angiotensin Receptors Blockers Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction; n=4796]). We decomposed the previously validated Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure risk score into cardiac (left ventricular ejection fraction, New York Heart Association class, blood pressure, time since HF diagnosis, HF medications), noncardiac comorbid (body mass index, creatinine, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, smoking), and demographic (age, gender) categories. Based on these domains, an index representing the balance of cardiac to noncardiac comorbid burden was created (cardiac-comorbid index). Clinical outcomes were time to first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular deaths and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Higher scores of the cardiac domain were observed in PARADIGM-HF (10 [7-13] versus 5 [3-6], P<0.001) and higher scores of the demographic domain in PARAGON-HF (10 [8-13] versus 5 [2-9], P<0.001). In PARADIGM-HF, the contribution of the cardiac domain to clinical outcomes was greater than the noncardiac domain (P<0.001), while in PARAGON-HF the attributable risk of the comorbid and demographic categories predominated. Individual scores from each sub-domain were linearly associated with the risk of clinical outcomes (P<0.001). Beneficial effects of sacubitril/valsartan were observed in patients with preponderance of cardiac over noncardiac comorbid burden (cardiac-comorbid index >5 points), suggesting a significant treatment effect modification (interaction P<0.05 for both outcomes). CONCLUSIONS: Domains of disease burden are clinically relevant features that influence the prognosis and treatment of patients with HF. The therapeutic benefits of sacubitril/valsartan vary according to the balance of components of disease burden, across different ranges of left ventricular ejection fraction.

Acute pulmonary pressure change after transition to sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure reduced ejection fraction.

AIMS: Sacubitril/valsartan combines renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibition with amplification of natriuretic peptides. In addition to well-described effects, natriuretic peptides exert direct effects on pulmonary vasculature. The effect of sacubitril/valsartan on pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) has not been fully defined. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a retrospective case-series of PAP changes following transition from angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) to sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure reduced ejection fraction and a previously implanted CardioMEMS™ sensor. Pre-sacubitril/valsartan and post-sacubitril/valsartan PAPs were compared for each patient by examining averaged consecutive daily pressure readings from 1 to 5 days before and after sacubitril/valsartan exposure. PAP changes were also compared between patients based on elevated trans-pulmonary gradients (trans-pulmonary gradient ≥ 12 mmHg) at time of CardioMEMS™ sensor implantation. The cohort included 18 patients, 72% male, mean age 60.1 ± 13.6 years. There was a significant decrease in PAPs associated with transition from ACEI/ARB to sacubitril/valsartan. The median (interquartile range) pre-treatment and post-treatment change in mean, systolic and diastolic PAPs were -3.6 (-9.8, -0.7) mmHg (P < 0.001), -6.5 (-15.0, -2.0) mmHg (P = 0.001), and -2.5 (-5.7, -0.7) (P = 0.001), respectively. The decrease in PAPs was independent of trans-pulmonary gradient (F(1,16) = 0.49, P = 0.49). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective case series, transition from ACEI/ARB to sacubitril/valsartan was associated with an early and significant decrease in PAPs.