Cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin for patients with heart failure across the spectrum of ejection fraction: A pooled analysis of DAPA-HF and DELIVER data.

AIM: To assess the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin in addition to usual care, compared with usual care alone, in a large population of patients with heart failure (HF), spanning the full range of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patient-level data were pooled from HF trials (DAPA-HF, DELIVER) to generate a population including HF with reduced, mildly reduced and preserved LVEF, to increase statistical power and enable exploration of interactions among LVEF, renal function and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels, as they are relevant determinants of health status in this population. Survival and HF recurrent event risk equations were derived and applied to a lifetime horizon Markov model with health states defined by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score quartiles; costs and utilities were in the UK setting. The base case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £6470 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, well below the UK willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of £20 000/QALY gained. In interaction sensitivity analyses, the highest ICER was observed for elderly patients with preserved LVEF (£16 624/QALY gained), and ranged to a region of dominance (increased QALYs, decreased costs) for patients with poorer renal function and reduced/mildly reduced LVEF. Results across the patient characteristic interaction plane were mostly between £5000 and £10 000/QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin plus usual care, versus usual care alone, yielded results well below the WTP threshold for the UK across a heterogeneous population of patients with HF including the full spectrum of LVEF, and is likely a cost-effective intervention.

Cost Effectiveness of Dapagliflozin for Heart Failure Across the Spectrum of Ejection Fraction: An Economic Evaluation Based on Pooled, Individual Participant Data From the DELIVER and DAPA-HF Trials.

BACKGROUND: The sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors are guideline-recommended to treat heart failure across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction; however, economic evaluations of adding sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors to standard of care in chronic heart failure across a broad left ventricular ejection fraction range are lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a US-based cost-effectiveness analysis of dapagliflozin added to standard of care in a chronic heart failure population using pooled, participant data from the DAPA-HF (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure) and DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure) trials. The 3-state Markov model used estimates of transitional probabilities, effectiveness of dapagliflozin, and utilities from the pooled trials. Costs estimates were obtained from published sources, including published rebates in dapagliflozin cost. Adding dapagliflozin to standard of care was estimated to produce an additional 0.53 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with standard of care alone. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios were $85 554/QALY when using the publicly reported full (undiscounted) Medicare cost ($515/month) and $40 081/QALY, at a published nearly 50% rebate ($263/month). The addition of dapagliflozin to standard of care would be of at least intermediate value (<$150 000/QALY) at a cost of <$872.58/month, of high value (<$50 000/QALY) at <$317.66/month, and cost saving at <$40.25/month. Dapagliflozin was of at least intermediate value in 92% of simulations when using the full (undiscounted) Medicare list cost in probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Cost effectiveness was most sensitive to the dapagliflozin cost and the effect on cardiovascular death. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of dapagliflozin to standard of care in patients with heart failure across the spectrum of ejection fraction was at least of intermediate value at the undiscounted Medicare cost and may be potentially of higher value on the basis of the level of discount, rebates, and price negotiations offered. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01035255 & NCT01920711.

Health and Economic Evaluation of Sacubitril-Valsartan for Heart Failure Management.

Importance: The US Food and Drug Administration expanded labeling of sacubitril-valsartan from the treatment of patients with chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (EF) to all patients with HF, noting the greatest benefits in those with below-normal EF. However, the upper bound of below normal is not clearly defined, and value determinations across a broader EF range are unknown. Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril-valsartan vs renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASis) across various upper-level cutoffs of EF. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation included participant-level data from the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) and the PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNi with ARB Global Outcomes in HF With Preserved Ejection Fraction) trials. PARADIGM-HF was conducted between 2009 and 2014, PARAGON-HF was conducted between 2014 and 2019, and this analysis was conducted between 2021 and 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: A 5-state Markov model used risk reductions for all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization from PARADIGM-HF and PARAGON-HF. Quality-of-life differences were estimated from EuroQol-5D scores. Hospitalization and medication costs were obtained from published national sources; the wholesale acquisition cost of sacubitril-valsartan was $7092 per year. Risk estimates and treatment effects were generated in consecutive 5% EF increments up to 60% and applied to an EF distribution of US patients with HF from the Get With the Guidelines-Heart Failure registry. The base case included a lifetime horizon from a health care sector perspective. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated at EFs of 60% or less (base case) and at various upper-level EF cutoffs. Results: Among 13 264 total patients whose data were analyzed, for those with EFs of 60% or less, sacubitril-valsartan was projected to add 0.53 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at an incremental lifetime cost of $40 892 compared with RASi, yielding an ICER of $76 852 per QALY. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 95% of the values of the ICER occurred between $71 516 and $82 970 per QALY. Among patients with chronic HF and an EF of 60% or less, treatment with sacubitril-valsartan vs RASis would be at least of economic intermediate value (ICER <$180 000 per QALY) at a sacubitril-valsartan cost of $10 242 or less per year, of high economic value (ICER <$60 000 per QALY) at a cost of $3673 or less per year, and cost-saving at a cost of $338 or less per year. The ICERs were $67 331 per QALY, $59 614 per QALY, and $56 786 per QALY at EFs of 55% or less, 50% or less, and 45% or less, respectively. Treatment with sacubitril-valsartan in only those with EFs of 45% or greater (up to ≤60%) yielded an ICER of $127 172 per QALY gained; treatment was more cost-effective in those at the lower end of this range (ICER of $100 388 per QALY gained for those with EFs of 45%-55%; ICER of $84 291 per QALY gained for those with EFs of 45%-50%). Conclusions and Relevance: Cost-effectiveness modeling provided an ICER for treatment with sacubitril-valsartan vs RASis consistent with high economic value for patients with reduced and mildly reduced EFs (≤50%) and at least intermediate value at the current undiscounted wholesale acquisition cost price at an EF of 60% or less. Treatment was more cost-effective at lower EF ranges. These findings may have implications for coverage decisions and value assessments in contemporary clinical practice guidelines.

The cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin in heart failure with preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction: A European health-economic analysis of the DELIVER trial.

AIMS: To determine the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin, added to usual care, in patients with heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction for the UK, German and Spanish payers using detailed patient-level data from the Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the LIVEs of Patients with Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure (DELIVER) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: A lifetime Markov state-transition cohort model was developed. Quartiles of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score (KCCQ-TSS) defined health states and monthly transition count data informed transition probabilities. Multivariable generalized estimating equations captured the incidence of HF hospitalizations and urgent HF visits, while cardiovascular deaths and all-cause mortality were estimated using adjusted parametric survival models. Health state costs were assigned to KCCQ-TSS quartiles (2021 British pound [GBP]/Euro) and patient-reported outcomes were sourced from DELIVER. Future values of costs and effects were discounted according to country-specific rates. In the UK, dapagliflozin treatment was predicted to increase quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and life-years by 0.231 and 0.354, respectively, and extend the time spent in the best quartile of KCCQ-TSS by 4.2 months. Comparable outcomes were projected for Germany and Spain. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were £7761, €9540 and €5343/QALY in the UK, Germany and Spain, respectively. According to regional willingness-to-pay thresholds, 91%, 89% and 92% of simulations in the UK, Germany and Spain, respectively, were cost-effective following probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Dapagliflozin, added to usual care, is very likely cost-effective for HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction in several European countries.

Global Variations in Heart Failure Etiology, Management, and Outcomes.

Importance: Most epidemiological studies of heart failure (HF) have been conducted in high-income countries with limited comparable data from middle- or low-income countries. Objective: To examine differences in HF etiology, treatment, and outcomes between groups of countries at different levels of economic development. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multinational HF registry of 23 341 participants in 40 high-income, upper-middle-income, lower-middle-income, and low-income countries, followed up for a median period of 2.0 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: HF cause, HF medication use, hospitalization, and death. Results: Mean (SD) age of participants was 63.1 (14.9) years, and 9119 (39.1%) were female. The most common cause of HF was ischemic heart disease (38.1%) followed by hypertension (20.2%). The proportion of participants with HF with reduced ejection fraction taking the combination of a ß-blocker, renin-angiotensin system inhibitor, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist was highest in upper-middle-income (61.9%) and high-income countries (51.1%), and it was lowest in low-income (45.7%) and lower-middle-income countries (39.5%) (P < .001). The age- and sex- standardized mortality rate per 100 person-years was lowest in high-income countries (7.8 [95% CI, 7.5-8.2]), 9.3 (95% CI, 8.8-9.9) in upper-middle-income countries, 15.7 (95% CI, 15.0-16.4) in lower-middle-income countries, and it was highest in low-income countries (19.1 [95% CI, 17.6-20.7]). Hospitalization rates were more frequent than death rates in high-income countries (ratio = 3.8) and in upper-middle-income countries (ratio = 2.4), similar in lower-middle-income countries (ratio = 1.1), and less frequent in low-income countries (ratio = 0.6). The 30-day case-fatality rate after first hospital admission was lowest in high-income countries (6.7%), followed by upper-middle-income countries (9.7%), then lower-middle-income countries (21.1%), and highest in low-income countries (31.6%). The proportional risk of death within 30 days of a first hospital admission was 3- to 5-fold higher in lower-middle-income countries and low-income countries compared with high-income countries after adjusting for patient characteristics and use of long-term HF therapies. Conclusions and Relevance: This study of HF patients from 40 different countries and derived from 4 different economic levels demonstrated differences in HF etiologies, management, and outcomes. These data may be useful in planning approaches to improve HF prevention and treatment globally.

Optimizing outcomes in heart failure: 2022 and beyond.

Although the development of therapies and tools for the improved management of heart failure (HF) continues apace, day-to-day management in clinical practice is often far from ideal. A Cardiovascular Round Table workshop was convened by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) to identify barriers to the optimal implementation of therapies and guidelines and to consider mitigation strategies to improve patient outcomes in the future. Key challenges identified included the complexity of HF itself and its treatment, financial constraints and the perception of HF treatments as costly, failure to meet the needs of patients, suboptimal outpatient management, and the fragmented nature of healthcare systems. It was discussed that ongoing initiatives may help to address some of these barriers, such as changes incorporated into the 2021 ESC HF guideline, ESC Heart Failure Association quality indicators, quality improvement registries (e.g. EuroHeart), new ESC guidelines for patients, and the universal definition of HF. Additional priority action points discussed to promote further improvements included revised definitions of HF 'phenotypes' based on trial data, the development of implementation strategies, improved affordability, greater regulator/payer involvement, increased patient education, further development of patient-reported outcomes, better incorporation of guidelines into primary care systems, and targeted education for primary care practitioners. Finally, it was concluded that overarching changes are needed to improve current HF care models, such as the development of a standardized pathway, with a common adaptable digital backbone, decision-making support, and data integration, to ensure that the model 'learns' as the management of HF continues to evolve.

Cost-effectiveness of immediate initiation of dapagliflozin in patients with a history of heart failure.

AIMS: To compare the cost-effectiveness of immediate and 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin treatment in patients with a history of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) from the UK, Canadian, German, and Spanish healthcare perspectives. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cost-utility analysis was conducted using a decision-analytic Markov model with health states defined by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores, type 2 diabetes mellitus status and incidence of heart failure (HF) events. Patient-level data for patients with prior HHF from the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF) trial were used to inform the model inputs on clinical events and utility values. Healthcare costs were sourced from the relevant national reference databases and the published literature. Compared to standard therapy, immediate initiation of dapagliflozin decreased HHF (187 events), urgent HF visits (32 events) and cardiovascular mortality (18 events). Standard therapy was associated with lifetime costs of £13 224 and 4.02 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Twelve-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin was associated with total discounted lifetime costs and QALYs of £16 660 and 4.61, respectively, compared to £16 912 and 4.66, respectively, for immediate initiation. Compared to standard therapy, immediate and 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £5779 and £5821, respectively. Compared to 12-month delayed initiation, immediate initiation of dapagliflozin had an ICER of £5263. Results were similar from the Canadian, German, and Spanish healthcare perspectives. CONCLUSION: Both immediate and 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin are cost-effective. However, immediate initiation provides greater clinical benefits, with almost 10% additional QALYs gain, compared to 12-month delayed initiation of dapagliflozin and should be considered standard of care.

Cost-Effectiveness of Dapagliflozin as a Treatment for Chronic Kidney Disease: A Health-Economic Analysis of DAPA-CKD.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: CKD imposes a significant burden on patients and health care providers, particularly upon reaching kidney failure when patients may require KRT. The Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in CKD (DAPA-CKD) trial demonstrated that dapagliflozin, with standard therapy, reduced CKD progression and KRT requirement. The study objective was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin for the treatment of CKD from payer perspectives in the United Kingdom, Germany, and Spain. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We constructed a lifetime Markov model to characterize outcomes in patients with CKD on the basis of the DAPA-CKD trial. Health states were defined by eGFR level and KRT type. Direct health care costs and utility values were sourced from published literature and the DAPA-CKD trial, respectively. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum in the United Kingdom and 3% in Germany and Spain. RESULTS: In patients eligible for the DAPA-CKD trial, treatment with dapagliflozin was predicted to reduce rates of CKD progression, with patients predicted to spend 1.7 (95% credibility interval, 0.8 to 2.4) more years in the eGFR range 15-89 ml/min per 1.73 m2 versus standard therapy alone (12.1; 95% credibility interval, 8.9 to 14.1 versus 10.4; 95% credibility interval, 7.7 to 12.4 years). Life expectancy (undiscounted) was correspondingly predicted to increase by 1.7 (95% credibility interval, 0.7 to 2.5) years (15.5; 95% credibility interval, 11.1 to 18.2 versus 13.8; 95% credibility interval, 9.9 to 16.5 years). This in addition to reduced incidence of adverse clinical outcomes, including hospitalization for heart failure, resulted in modeled quality-adjusted life year (discounted) gains between 0.82 (95% credibility interval, 0.38 to 1.18) and 1.00 (95% credibility interval, 0.46 to 1.41). These gains translated to incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $8280, $17,623, and $11,687 in the United Kingdom, Germany, and Spain, respectively, indicating cost-effectiveness at willingness-to-pay thresholds (United Kingdom: $27,510 per quality-adjusted life year; Germany and Spain: $35,503 per quality-adjusted life year). CONCLUSIONS: In patients meeting the eligibility requirements for the DAPA-CKD trial, dapagliflozin is likely to be a cost-effective treatment within the UK, German, and Spanish health care systems. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in CKD (DAPA-CKD), NCT03036150.

Serial Assessment of High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin and the Effect of Dapagliflozin in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: An Analysis of the DAPA-HF Trial.

BACKGROUND: Circulating high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hsTnT) predominantly reflects myocardial injury, and higher levels are associated with a higher risk of worsening heart failure and death in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Less is known about the prognostic significance of changes in hsTnT over time, the effects of dapagliflozin on clinical outcomes in relation to baseline hsTnT levels, and the effect of dapagliflozin on hsTnT levels. METHODS: DAPA-HF (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of dapagliflozin (10 mg daily) in patients with New York Heart Association class II to IV symptoms and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% (median follow-up, 18.2 months). hsTnT (Roche Diagnostics) was measured at baseline in 3112 patients and at 1 year in 2506 patients. The primary end point was adjudicated worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death. Clinical end points were analyzed according to baseline hsTnT and change in hsTnT from baseline to 1 year. Comparative treatment effects on clinical end points with dapagliflozin versus placebo were assessed by baseline hsTnT. The effect of dapagliflozin on hsTnT was explored. RESULTS: Median baseline hsTnT concentration was 20.0 (25th-75th percentile, 13.7-30.2) ng/L. Over 1 year, 67.9% of patients had a ≥10% relative increase or decrease in hsTnT concentrations, and 43.5% had a ≥20% relative change. A stepwise gradient of higher risk for the primary end point was observed across increasing quartiles of baseline hsTnT concentration (adjusted hazard ratio Q4 versus Q1, 3.44 [95% CI, 2.46-4.82]). Relative and absolute increases in hsTnT over 1 year were associated with higher subsequent risk of the primary end point. The relative reduction in the primary end point with dapagliflozin was consistent across quartiles of baseline hsTnT (P-interaction=0.55), but patients in the top quartile tended to have the greatest absolute risk reduction (absolute risk difference, 7.5% [95% CI, 1.0%-14.0%]). Dapagliflozin tended to attenuate the increase in hsTnT over time compared with placebo (relative least squares mean reduction, -3% [-6% to 0%]; P=0.076). CONCLUSIONS: Higher baseline hsTnT and greater increase in hsTnT over 1 year are associated with worse clinical outcomes. Dapagliflozin consistently reduced the risk of the primary end point, irrespective of baseline hsTnT levels. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03036124.

Assessment of Omecamtiv Mecarbil for the Treatment of Patients With Severe Heart Failure: A Post Hoc Analysis of Data From the GALACTIC-HF Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is a progressive clinical syndrome, and many patients' condition worsen over time despite treatment. Patients with more severe disease are often intolerant of available medical therapies. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of omecamtiv mecarbil for the treatment of patients with severe heart failure (HF) enrolled in the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac Outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC-HF) randomized clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: The GALACTIC-HF study was a global double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 randomized clinical trial that was conducted at multiple centers between January 2017 and August 2020. A total of 8232 patients with symptomatic HF (defined as New York Heart Association symptom class II-IV) and left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less were randomized to receive omecamtiv mecarbil or placebo and followed up for a median of 21.8 months (range, 15.4-28.6 months). The current post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of omecamtiv mecarbil therapy among patients classified as having severe HF compared with patients without severe HF. Severe HF was defined as the presence of all of the following criteria: New York Heart Association symptom class III to IV, left ventricular ejection fraction of 30% or less, and hospitalization for HF within the previous 6 months. Interventions: Participants were randomized at a 1:1 ratio to receive either omecamtiv mecarbil or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was time to first HF event or cardiovascular (CV) death. Secondary end points included time to CV death and safety and tolerability. Results: Among 8232 patients enrolled in the GALACTIC-HF clinical trial, 2258 patients (27.4%; mean [SD] age, 64.5 [11.6] years; 1781 men [78.9%]) met the specified criteria for severe HF. Of those, 1106 patients were randomized to the omecamtiv mecarbil group and 1152 to the placebo group. Patients with severe HF who received omecamtiv mecarbil experienced a significant treatment benefit for the primary end point (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.90), whereas patients without severe HF had no significant treatment benefit (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.91-1.08; P = .005 for interaction). For CV death, the results were similar (HR for patients with vs without severe HF: 0.88 [95% CI, 0.75-1.03] vs 1.10 [95% CI, 0.97-1.25]; P = .03 for interaction). Omecamtiv mecarbil therapy was well tolerated in patients with severe HF, with no significant changes in blood pressure, kidney function, or potassium level compared with placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: In this post hoc analysis of data from the GALACTIC-HF clinical trial, omecamtiv mecarbil therapy may have provided a clinically meaningful reduction in the composite end point of time to first HF event or CV death among patients with severe HF. These data support a potential role of omecamtiv mecarbil therapy among patients for whom current treatment options are limited. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02929329.

Cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin as a treatment for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a multinational health-economic analysis of DAPA-HF.

AIM: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin added to standard therapy, vs. standard therapy only, in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), from the perspective of UK, German, and Spanish payers. METHODS AND RESULTS: A lifetime Markov model was built to estimate outcomes in patients with HFrEF. Health states were defined by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score, type 2 diabetes and worsening HF events. The incidence of worsening HF and all-cause mortality was estimated using negative binomial regression models and parametric survival analysis, respectively. Direct healthcare costs (2019 British pounds/Euro) and patient-reported outcomes (EQ-5D) were sourced from the existing literature and the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure trial (DAPA-HF), respectively; the median duration of follow-up in DAPA-HF was 18.2 months (range: 0-27.8). Future costs and effects were discounted at 3.0% for the Spanish and German analyses and 3.5% for the UK analysis. In the UK setting, treatment with dapagliflozin was estimated to increase life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) from 5.62 to 6.20 (+0.58) and 4.13 to 4.61 (+0.48), respectively, and reduce lifetime hospitalizations for HF (925 and 820 events per 1000 patients for placebo and dapagliflozin, respectively). Similar results were obtained for Germany and Spain. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were £5822, €5379 and €9406/QALY in the UK, Germany and Spain, respectively. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, more than 90% of simulations were cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000/QALY in UK and €20 000/QALY in Germany and Spain. CONCLUSION: Dapagliflozin is likely to be a cost-effective treatment for HFrEF in the UK, German and Spanish healthcare systems.

Sex-Related Differences in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: To describe characteristics and outcomes in women and men with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. METHODS: Baseline characteristics (including biomarkers and quality of life) and outcomes (primary outcome: composite of first heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death) were compared in 4458 women and 4010 men enrolled in CHARM-Preserved (Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity) (EF≥45%), I-Preserve (Irbesartan in heart failure with Preserved ejection fraction), and TOPCAT-Americas (Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist trial). RESULTS: Women were older and more often obese and hypertensive but less likely to have coronary artery disease or atrial fibrillation. Women had more symptoms and signs of congestion and worse quality of life. Despite this, the risk of the primary outcome was lower in women (hazard ratio, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.73-0.88]), as was the risk of cardiovascular death (hazard ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.62-0.80]), but there was no difference in the rate for first hospitalization for heart failure (hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.82-1.02]). The lower risk of cardiovascular death in women, compared with men, was in part explained by a substantially lower risk of sudden death (hazard ratio, 0.53 [0.43-0.65]; P<0.001). E/A ratio was lower in women (1.1 versus 1.2). CONCLUSIONS: There are significant differences between women and men with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Despite worse symptoms, more congestion, and lower quality of life, women had similar rates of hospitalization and better survival than men. Their risk of sudden death was half that of men. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00853658, NCT01035255.

Income level and inequality as complement to geographical differences in cardiovascular trials.

BACKGROUND: Analyses of country or regional differences in cardiovascular (CV) trials are based on geographical subgroup analyses. However, apart from map location and related racial, ethnic, and genetic variations, identified differences may also depend on social structure and provision and access to health care, for which country income and income inequality are indicators. The aim of the study was to examine the association between country per capita income and income inequality and prognosis in patients with heart failure or an acute coronary syndrome in 3 international trials (EMPHASIS-HF, EPHESUS, and EXAMINE). METHODS: Countries were classified into high income or low-middle income (LMICs) and into low, middle, or high inequality using the Gini index. The main outcome measures were all-cause and CV death. RESULTS: Patients from LMICs and countries with higher inequality were younger, were less often white, had fewer comorbid conditions, and were less often treated with guideline-recommended therapies, including devices. These patients had higher adjusted mortality rates (+15% to +70%) compared with patients from high-income countries and countries with less inequality. Patients from countries with the combination of greater inequality and low-middle income had particularly high mortality rates (+80% to +190%) compared with those that did not have both characteristics. Living in a country that is poor and has inequality had more impact on death rates than any comorbidity. These findings were reproduced in 3 trials. CONCLUSIONS: Patients from LMICs and countries with greater inequality had the highest mortality rates. The prognostic impact of income and inequality is substantial and should be considered when looking into subgroup differences in CV trials.

Temporal Trends and Patterns in Mortality After Incident Heart Failure: A Longitudinal Analysis of 86 000 Individuals.

Importance: Despite considerable improvements in heart failure care, mortality rates among patients in high-income countries have changed little since the early 2000s. Understanding the reasons underlying these trends may provide valuable clues for developing more targeted therapies and public health strategies. Objective: To investigate mortality rates following a new diagnosis of heart failure and examine changes over time and by cause of death and important patient features. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based retrospective cohort study analyzed anonymized electronic health records of individuals who received a new diagnosis of heart failure between January 2002 and December 2013 who were followed up until December 2014 from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, which links information from primary care, secondary care, and the national death registry from a subset of the UK population. The data were analyzed from January 2018 to February 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause and cause-specific mortality rates at 1 year following diagnosis. Poisson regression models were used to calculate rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals comparing 2013 with 2002, adjusting for age, sex, region, socioeconomic status, and 17 major comorbidities. Results: Of 86 833 participants, 42 581 (49%) were women, 51 215 (88%) were white, and the mean (SD) age was 76.6 (12.6) years. While all-cause mortality rates declined only modestly over time (RR comparing 2013 with 2002, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.88-1.00), underlying patterns presented explicit trends. A decline in cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.67-0.80) was offset by an increase in noncardiovascular deaths (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.11-1.33). Subgroup analyses further showed that overall mortality rates declined among patients younger than 80 years (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.71-0.88) but not among those older than 80 years (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90-1.06). After cardiovascular causes (898 [43%]), the major causes of death in 2013 were neoplasms (311 [15%]), respiratory conditions (243 [12%]), and infections (13%), the latter 2 explaining most of the observed increase in noncardiovascular mortality. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with a new heart failure diagnosis, considerable progress has been achieved in reducing mortality in young and middle-aged patients and cardiovascular mortality across all age groups. Improvements to overall mortality are hindered by high and increasing rates of noncardiovascular events. These findings challenge current research priorities and management strategies and call for a greater emphasis on associated comorbidities. Specifically, infection prevention presents as a major opportunity to improve prognosis.

Reduced loop diuretic use in patients taking sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril: the PARADIGM-HF trial.

AIMS: To assess differences in diuretic dose requirements in patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril in the Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Overall, 8399 patients with New York Heart Association class II-IV heart failure and reduced LVEF were randomized to sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg bid or enalapril 10 mg twice daily. Loop diuretic doses were assessed at baseline, 6, 12, and 24 months, and furosemide dose equivalents were calculated via multiplication factors (2x for torsemide and 40x for bumetanide). Percentages of participants with reductions or increases in loop diuretic dose were determined. At baseline, 80.8% of participants were taking any diuretics (n = 6290 for loop diuretics, n = 496 for other diuretics); of those, recorded dosage data for loop diuretics were available on 5487 participants. Mean baseline furosemide equivalent doses were 48.2 mg for sacubitril/valsartan and 49.6 mg for enalapril (P = 0.25). Patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan were more likely to reduce diuretic dose and less likely to increase diuretic dose relative to those randomized to enalapril at 6, 12, 24 months post-randomization, with an overall decreased diuretic use of 2.0% (P = 0.02), 4.1% (P < 0.001), and 6.1% (P < 0.001) at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively, with similar findings in an on-treatment analysis. CONCLUSION: Treatment with sacubitril/valsartan was associated with more loop diuretic dose reductions and fewer dose increases compared with enalapril, suggesting that treatment with sacubitril/valsartan may reduce the requirement for loop diuretics relative to enalapril in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Income Inequality and Outcomes in Heart Failure: A Global Between-Country Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the relationship between income inequality and heart failure outcomes. BACKGROUND: The income inequality hypothesis postulates that population health is influenced by income distribution within a society, with greater inequality associated with worse outcomes. METHODS: This study analyzed heart failure outcomes in 2 large trials conducted in 54 countries. Countries were divided by tertiles of Gini coefficients (where 0% represented absolute income equality and 100% represented absolute income inequality), and heart failure outcomes were adjusted for standard prognostic variables, country per capita income, education index, hospital bed density, and health worker density. RESULTS: Of the 15,126 patients studied, 5,320 patients lived in Gini coefficient tertile 1 countries (coefficient: <33%), 6,124 patients lived in tertile 2 countries (33% to 41%), and 3,772 patients lived in tertile 3 countries (>41%). Patients in tertile 3 were younger than tertile 1 patients, were more often women, and had less comorbidity and several indicators of less severe heart failure, yet the tertile 3-to-1 hazard ratios (HRs) for the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization were 1.57 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.38 to 1.79) and 1.48 for all-cause death (95% CI: 1.29 to 1.71) after adjustment for recognized prognostic variables. After additional adjustments were made for per capita income, education index, hospital bed density, and health worker density, these HRs were 1.46 (95% CI: 1.25 to 1.70) and 1.30 (95% CI: 1.10 to 1.53), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Greater income inequality was associated with worse heart failure outcomes, with an impact similar to those of major comorbidities. Better understanding of the societal and personal bases of these findings may suggest approaches to improve heart failure outcomes.

Heart Failure: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, and Management of Heart Failure in Diabetes Mellitus.

This article briefly discusses the epidemiology of heart failure and diabetes and summarizes the key findings from the recent cardiovascular outcome trials in patients with type 2 diabetes, with a focus on heart failure as an endpoint.

Cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF) represents a major public health issue and is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan (formerly LCZ696) compared with an ACE inhibitor (ACEI) (enalapril) in the treatment of HF-REF from the perspective of healthcare providers in the UK, Denmark and Colombia. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis was performed based on data from a multinational, Phase III randomised controlled trial. A decision-analytic model was developed based on a series of regression models, which extrapolated health-related quality of life, hospitalisation rates and survival over a lifetime horizon. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: In the UK, the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for sacubitril/valsartan (using cardiovascular mortality) was £17 100 (€20 400) versus enalapril. In Denmark, the ICER for sacubitril/valsartan was Kr 174 000 (€22 600). In Colombia, the ICER was COP$39.5 million (€11 200) per QALY gained. Deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that results were most sensitive to the extrapolation of mortality, duration of treatment effect and time horizon, but were robust to other structural changes, with most scenarios associated with ICERs below the willingness-to-pay threshold for all three country settings. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested the probability that sacubitril/valsartan was cost-effective at conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds was 68%-94% in the UK, 84% in Denmark and 95% in Colombia. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that, in all three countries, sacubitril/valsartan is likely to be cost-effective compared with an ACEI (the current standard of care) in patients with HF-REF.