Baroreflex activation therapy with the Barostim™ device in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a patient level meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

AIMS: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remains associated with high morbidity and mortality, poor quality of life (QoL) and significant exercise limitation. Sympatho-vagal imbalance has been shown to predict adverse prognosis and symptoms in HFrEF, yet it has not been specifically targeted by any guideline-recommended device therapy to date. Barostim™, which directly addresses this imbalance, is the first Food and Drug Administration approved neuromodulation technology for HFrEF. We aimed to analyse all randomized trial evidence to evaluate the effect of baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) on heart failure symptoms, QoL and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) in HFrEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: An individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis was performed on all eligible trials that randomized HFrEF patients to BAT + guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) or GDMT alone (open label). Endpoints included 6-month changes in 6-min hall walk (6MHW) distance, Minnesota Living With Heart Failure (MLWHF) QoL score, NT-proBNP, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class in all patients and three subgroups. A total of 554 randomized patients were included. In all patients, BAT provided significant improvement in 6MHW distance of 49 m (95% confidence interval [CI] 33, 64), MLWHF QoL of -13 points (95% CI -17, -10), and 3.4 higher odds of improving at least one NYHA class (95% CI 2.3, 4.9) when comparing from baseline to 6 months. These improvements were similar, or better, in patients who had baseline NT-proBNP <1600 pg/ml, regardless of the cardiac resynchronization therapy indication status. CONCLUSION: An IPD meta-analysis suggests that BAT improves exercise capacity, NYHA class, and QoL in HFrEF patients receiving GDMT. These clinically meaningful improvements were consistent across the range of patients studies. BAT was also associated with an improvement in NT-proBNP in subjects with a lower baseline NT-proBNP.

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.

Cost-impact analysis of baroreflex activation therapy in chronic heart failure patients in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The study evaluated the cost of baroreflex activation therapy plus guideline directed therapy (BAT + GDT) compared to GDT alone for HF patients with reduced ejection fraction and New York Heart Association Class III or II (with a recent history of III). Baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) is delivered by an implantable device that stimulates the baroreceptors through an electrode attached to the outside of the carotid artery, which rebalances the autonomic nervous system to regain cardiovascular (CV) homeostasis. The BeAT-HF trial evaluated the safety and effectiveness of BAT. METHODS: A cost impact model was developed from a U.S. health care payer or integrated delivery network perspective over a 3-year period for BAT + GDT versus GDT alone. Expected costs were calculated by utilizing 6-month data from the BeAT-HF trial and existing literature. HF hospitalization rates were extrapolated based on improvement in NT-proBNP. RESULTS: At baseline the expected cost of BAT + GDT were $29,526 per patient more than GDT alone due to BAT device and implantation costs. After 3 years, the predicted cost per patient was $9521 less expensive for BAT + GDT versus GDT alone due to lower rates of significant HF hospitalizations, CV non-HF hospitalizations, and resource intensive late-stage procedures (LVADs and heart transplants) among the BAT + GDT group. CONCLUSIONS: BAT + GDT treatment becomes less costly than GDT alone beginning between years 1 and 2 and becomes less costly cumulatively between years 2 and 3, potentially providing significant savings over time. As additional BeAT-HF trial data become available, the model can be updated to show longer term effects.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Insights From PARADIGM-HF.

Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common comorbidity in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, associated with undertreatment and worse outcomes. New treatments for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction may be particularly important in patients with concomitant COPD. Methods and Results We examined outcomes in 8399 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, according to COPD status, in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Blocker-Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) trial. Cox regression models were used to compare COPD versus non-COPD subgroups and the effects of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril. Patients with COPD (n=1080, 12.9%) were older than patients without COPD (mean 67 versus 63 years; P<0.001), with similar left ventricular ejection fraction (29.9% versus 29.4%), but higher NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; median, 1741 pg/mL versus 1591 pg/mL; P=0.01), worse functional class (New York Heart Association III/IV 37% versus 23%; P<0.001) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Score (73 versus 81; P<0.001), and more congestion and comorbidity. Medical therapy was similar in patients with and without COPD except for beta-blockade (87% versus 94%; P<0.001) and diuretics (85% versus 80%; P<0.001). After multivariable adjustment, COPD was associated with higher risks of heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR], 1.32; 95% CI, 1.13-1.54), and the composite of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.34), but not cardiovascular death (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.94-1.30), or all-cause mortality (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.99-1.31). COPD was also associated with higher risk of all cardiovascular hospitalization (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.05-1.31) and noncardiovascular hospitalization (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.29-1.64). The benefit of sacubitril/valsartan over enalapril was consistent in patients with and without COPD for all end points. Conclusions In PARADIGM-HF, COPD was associated with lower use of beta-blockers and worse health status and was an independent predictor of cardiovascular and noncardiovascular hospitalization. Sacubitril/valsartan was beneficial in this high-risk subgroup. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01035255.

Baroreflex Activation Therapy in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: This study demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). OBJECTIVES: The BeAT-HF (Baroreflex Activation Therapy for Heart Failure) trial was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial; subjects were randomized 1:1 to receive either BAT plus optimal medical management (BAT group) or optimal medical management alone (control group). METHODS: Four patient cohorts were created from 408 randomized patients with HFrEF using the following enrollment criteria: current New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III or functional class II (patients who had a recent history of NYHA functional class III); ejection fraction ≤35%; stable medical management for ≥4 weeks; and no Class I indication for cardiac resynchronization therapy. Effectiveness endpoints were the change from baseline to 6 months in 6-min hall walk distance (6MHW), Minnesota Living with HF Questionnaire quality-of-life (QOL) score, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels. The safety endpoint included the major adverse neurological or cardiovascular system or procedure-related event rate (MANCE). RESULTS: Results from, timeline and rationale for, cohorts A, B, and C are presented in detail in the text. Cohort D, which represented the intended use population that reflected the U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved instructions for use (enrollment criteria plus NT-proBNP <1,600 pg/ml), consisted of 245 patients followed-up for 6 months (120 in the BAT group and 125 in the control group). BAT was safe and significantly improved QOL, 6MHW, and NT-proBNP. In the BAT group versus the control group, QOL score decreased (Δ = -14.1; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -19 to -9; p < 0.001), 6MHW distance increased (Δ = 60 m; 95% CI: 40 to 80 m; p < 0.001), NT-proBNP decreased (Δ = -25%; 95% CI: -38% to -9%; p = 0.004), and the MANCE free rate was 97% (95% CI: 93% to 100%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: BAT was safe and significantly improved QOL, exercise capacity, and NT-proBNP. (Baroreflex Activation Therapy for Heart Failure [BeAT-HF]; NCT02627196).

First granted example of novel FDA trial design under Expedited Access Pathway for premarket approval: BeAT-HF.

BACKGROUND: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) initiated the Expedited Access Pathway (EAP) to accelerate approval of novel therapies targeting unmet needs for life-threatening conditions. EAP allows for the possibility of initial FDA approval using intermediate end points with postapproval demonstration of improved outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Describe the EAP process using the BeAT-HF trial as a case study. METHODS: BeAT-HF will examine the safety and effectiveness of baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) in heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction using an Expedited and Extended Phase design. In the Expedited Phase, BAT plus guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) will be compared at 6 months postimplant to GDMT alone using 3 intermediate end points: 6-minute hall walk distance, Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide. The rate of heart failure morbidity and cardiovascular mortality will be compared between the arms to evaluate early trending using predictive probability modeling. Sample size of 264 patients randomized 1:1 to BAT + GDMT versus GDMT alone provides 81% power for the Expedited Phase intermediate end points. For the Extended Phase, the heart failure morbidity and cardiovascular mortality end point is based on an expected event rate of 0.4 events/patient/year in the GDMT arm. With an adaptive sample size selection design for robustness to inaccurate assumptions, a sample size of 480-960 randomized patients followed ≥2 years allows detecting a 30% reduction in the primary end point with a power of 97.5%. CONCLUSION: Through a unique collaboration with FDA under the EAP, the BeAT-HF trial design allows for the possibility of approval of BAT, initially for symptom relief and subsequently for outcomes improvement.

Baroreflex activation therapy for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in patients with and without coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: In a randomized trial, baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) improved exercise capacity, quality of life and NT-proBNP in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). In view of different mechanisms underlying HFrEF, we performed a post-hoc subgroup analysis of efficacy and safety of BAT in patients with and without coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <35% and NYHA Class III were randomized 1:1 to guideline-directed medical and device therapy alone or plus BAT. Patients with a history of CAD, prior myocardial infarction or coronary artery bypass graft were assigned to the CAD group with all others assigned to the no-CAD group. Of 71 BAT treated patients, 52 had CAD and 19 had no CAD. In the control group, 49 of 69 patients had CAD and 20 had no CAD. The system- or procedure-related major adverse neurological or cardiovascular event rate was 3.8% in the CAD group vs. 0% in the no-CAD group (p = 1.0). In the whole cohort, NYHA Class, Minnesota Living with Heart Failure score, 6-minute hall walk distance and NTproBNP were improved in BAT treated patients compared with controls. Statistical analyses revealed no interaction between the presence of CAD and effect of BAT (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: No major differences were found in BAT efficacy or safety between patients with and without CAD, indicating that BAT improves exercise capacity, quality of life and NTproBNP in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01471860 and NCT01720160.

Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes in PARADIGM-HF.

BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction have impaired health-related quality of life (HRQL) with variable responses to therapies that target mortality and heart failure hospitalizations. In PARADIGM-HF trial (Prospective Comparison of ARNI [Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor] With ACEI [Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme Inhibitor] to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure), sacubitril/valsartan reduced morbidity and mortality compared with enalapril. Another major treatment goal is to improve HRQL. Given improvements in mortality with sacubitril/valsartan, this analysis provides comprehensive assessment of impact of therapy on HRQL in survivors only. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (after run-in phase) completed disease-specific HRQL using Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) at randomization, 4 month, 8 month, and annual visits. Changes in KCCQ scores were calculated using repeated measures analysis of covariance model that adjusted for treatment and baseline values (principal efficacy prespecified at 8 months). Among the 8399 patients enrolled in PARADIGM-HF, 7623 (91%) completed KCCQ scores at randomization with complete data at 8 months for 6881 patients (90% of baseline). At 8 months, sacubitril/valsartan group noted improvements in both KCCQ clinical summary score (+0.64 versus -0.29; P=0.008) and KCCQ overall summary score (+1.13 versus -0.14; P<0.001) in comparison to enalapril group and significantly less proportion of patients with deterioration (≥5 points decrease) of both KCCQ scores (27% versus 31%; P=0.01). Adjusted change scores demonstrated consistent improvements in sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril through 36 months. CONCLUSIONS: Change scores in KCCQ clinical summary scores and KCCQ overall summary scores were better in patients treated with sacubitril/valsartan compared with those treated with enalapril, with consistency in most domains, and persist during follow-up beyond 8 months. These findings demonstrate that sacubitril/valsartan leads to better HRQL in surviving patients with heart failure. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01035255.

Surgical Experience and Long-term Results of Baroreflex Activation Therapy for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

The purpose of this publication is to describe the intraoperative experience along with long-term safety and efficacy of the second-generation baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) system in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction HF (HFrEF). In a randomized trial of New York Heart Association Class III HFrEF, 140 patients were assigned 1:1 to receive BAT plus medical therapy or medical therapy alone. Procedural information along with safety and efficacy data were collected and analyzed over 12 months. Within the cohort of 71 patients randomized to BAT, implant procedure time decreased with experience, from 106 ± 37 minutes on the first case to 83 ± 32 minutes on the third case. The rate of freedom from system- and procedure-related complications was 86% through 12 months, with the percentage of days alive without a complication related to system, procedure, or underlying cardiovascular condition identical to the control group. The complications that did occur were generally mild and short-lived. Overall, 12 months therapeutic benefit from BAT was consistent with previously reported efficacy through 6 months: there was a significant and sustained beneficial treatment effect on New York Heart Association functional Class, quality of life, 6-minute hall walk distance, plasma N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, and systolic blood pressure. This was true for the full trial cohort and a predefined subset not receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy. There is a rapid learning curve for the specialized procedures entailed in a BAT system implant. BAT system implantation is safe with the therapeutic benefits of BAT in patients with HFrEF being substantial and maintained for at least 1 year.

Baroreflex activation therapy for the treatment of heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction: safety and efficacy in patients with and without cardiac resynchronization therapy.

AIMS: Increased sympathetic and decreased parasympathetic activity contribute to heart failure (HF) symptoms and disease progression. Carotid baroreceptor stimulation (baroreflex activation therapy, BAT) results in centrally mediated reduction of sympathetic and increase in parasympathetic activity. Because patients treated with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) may have less sympathetic/parasympathetic imbalance, we hypothesized that there would be differences in the response to BAT in patients with CRT vs. those without CRT. METHODS AND RESULTS: New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class III patients with an ejection fraction (EF) ≤35% were randomized (1 : 1) to ongoing guideline-directed medical and device therapy (GDMT, control) or ongoing GDMT plus BAT. Safety endpoint was system-/procedure-related major adverse neurological and cardiovascular events (MANCE). Efficacy endpoints were Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Quality of Life (QoL), 6-min hall walk distance (6MHWD), N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and HF hospitalization rate. In this sample, 146 patients were randomized (70 control; 76 BAT) and were 140 activated (45 with CRT and 95 without CRT). MANCE-free rate at 6 months was 100% in CRT and 96% in no-CRT group. At 6 months, in the no-CRT group, QoL score, 6MHWD, LVEF, NT-proBNP and HF hospitalizations were significantly improved in BAT patients compared with controls. Changes in efficacy endpoints in the CRT group favoured BAT; however, the improvements were less than in the no-CRT group and were not statistically different from control. CONCLUSIONS: BAT is safe and significantly improved QoL, exercise capacity, NTpro-BNP, EF, and rate of HF hospitalizations in GDMT-treated NYHA Class III HF patients. These effects were most pronounced in patients not treated with CRT.

Baroreflex Activation Therapy for the Treatment of Heart Failure With a Reduced Ejection Fraction.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this clinical trial was to assess the safety and efficacy of carotid BAT in advanced HF. BACKGROUND: Increased sympathetic and decreased parasympathetic activity contribute to heart failure (HF) symptoms and disease progression. Baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) results in centrally mediated reduction of sympathetic outflow and increased parasympathetic activity. METHODS: Patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III HF and ejection fractions ≤35% on chronic stable guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) were enrolled at 45 centers in the United States, Canada, and Europe. They were randomly assigned to receive ongoing GDMT alone (control group) or ongoing GDMT plus BAT (treatment group) for 6 months. The primary safety end point was system- and procedure-related major adverse neurological and cardiovascular events. The primary efficacy end points were changes in NYHA functional class, quality-of-life score, and 6-minute hall walk distance. RESULTS: One hundred forty-six patients were randomized, 70 to control and 76 to treatment. The major adverse neurological and cardiovascular event-free rate was 97.2% (lower 95% confidence bound 91.4%). Patients assigned to BAT, compared with control group patients, experienced improvements in the distance walked in 6 min (59.6 ± 14 m vs. 1.5 ± 13.2 m; p = 0.004), quality-of-life score (-17.4 ± 2.8 points vs. 2.1 ± 3.1 points; p < 0.001), and NYHA functional class ranking (p = 0.002 for change in distribution). BAT significantly reduced N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (p = 0.02) and was associated with a trend toward fewer days hospitalized for HF (p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: BAT is safe and improves functional status, quality of life, exercise capacity, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, and possibly the burden of heart failure hospitalizations in patients with GDMT-treated NYHA functional class III HF. (Barostim Neo System in the Treatment of Heart Failure; NCT01471860; Barostim HOPE4HF [Hope for Heart Failure] Study; NCT01720160).

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the safety and efficacy of intravenous MCC-135 as an adjunct to primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction: Evaluation of MCC-135 for left ventricular salvage in acute myocardial infarction (EVOLVE).

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to test the hypothesis that intracellular calcium modulation by 5-methyl-2-[piperazin-1-yl] benzene sulfonic acid monohydrate (MCC-135 [Caldaret]; Mitsubishi Pharma Corporation, Osaka, Japan) would preserve left ventricular function and reduce infarct size in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). BACKGROUND: Calcium overload inside myocytes during ischemia and reperfusion not only affects myocardial function but also may be related to myocyte necrosis. MCC-135 is the first in a new class of agents that modulate intracellular calcium overload. METHODS: Patients with acute STEMI undergoing primary PCI were randomized into placebo, low-dose, and high-dose MCC-135 groups. The predefined target population was those with anterior myocardial infarction and pre-PCI TIMI grade flow 0 or 1. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on Day 5 was the primary end point. Secondary end points included infarct size measured by single photon emission computed tomography and by serum cardiac markers. Patients were followed up to 30 days for clinical outcome. RESULTS: Among 500 patients enrolled, 141 qualified as the target population. In this target population, there was no difference in the LVEF between 3 groups (placebo: 47.0% +/- 1.7% [mean +/- SEM], the low dose: 47.4% +/- 1.7%, the high dose: 45.1% +/- 2.0%). The infarct size on day 5 was not significantly different between the groups. The composite clinical outcome occurred in 25.5% in the placebo group, in 19.2% in the low-dose group, and in 34.2% in the high-dose group during a 30-day follow-up period (P = nonsignificant). MCC-135 appeared to be safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: There were no significant benefits of MCC-135 on preservation of LVEF and reduction of infarct size on day 5 in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI.