Finerenone in Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists reduce morbidity and mortality among patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction, but their efficacy in those with heart failure and mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction has not been established. Data regarding the efficacy and safety of the nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist finerenone in patients with heart failure and mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction are needed. METHODS: In this international, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or greater, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive finerenone (at a maximum dose of 20 mg or 40 mg once daily) or matching placebo, in addition to usual therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of total worsening heart failure events (with an event defined as a first or recurrent unplanned hospitalization or urgent visit for heart failure) and death from cardiovascular causes. The components of the primary outcome and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 32 months, 1083 primary-outcome events occurred in 624 of 3003 patients in the finerenone group, and 1283 primary-outcome events occurred in 719 of 2998 patients in the placebo group (rate ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 0.95; P = 0.007). The total number of worsening heart failure events was 842 in the finerenone group and 1024 in the placebo group (rate ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.94; P = 0.006). The percentage of patients who died from cardiovascular causes was 8.1% and 8.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.11). Finerenone was associated with an increased risk of hyperkalemia and a reduced risk of hypokalemia. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure and mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, finerenone resulted in a significantly lower rate of a composite of total worsening heart failure events and death from cardiovascular causes than placebo. (Funded by Bayer; FINEARTS-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04435626.).

Prognostic Role of Tissue Iron Deficiency Measured by sTfR Levels in Heart Failure Patients without Systemic Iron Deficiency or Anemia.

Background. Iron deficiency (ID) is a significant, high-prevalence comorbidity in chronic heart failure (HF) that represents an independent predictor of a worse prognosis. However, a clear-cut diagnosis of ID in HF patients is not assured. The soluble transferrin receptor (sTfR) is a marker that reflects tissue-level iron demand and may be an early marker of ID. However, the impact of sTfR levels on clinical outcomes in non-anemic HF patients with a normal systemic iron status has never been evaluated. Methods. This is a post hoc analysis of an observational, prospective cohort study of 1236 patients with chronic HF of which only those with normal hemoglobin levels and a normal systemic iron status were studied. The final cohort consisted of 215 patients. Tissue ID was defined as levels of sTfR > 75th percentile (1.65 mg/L). Our aim was to describe the association between sTfR and clinical outcomes (all-cause death and HF hospitalization) and to explore its association with a wide array of serum biomarkers. Results. The sTfR level (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.13-1.96, p = 0.005) and tissue ID (HR 2.14, 95% CI 1.22-3.75, p = 0.008) was associated with all-cause death. However, we found no association between sTfR levels and the risk of HF hospitalization. Furthermore, high sTfR levels were associated with a worse biomarker profile indicating myocardial damage (troponin and NT-proBNP), systemic inflammation (CRP and albumin), and impaired erythropoiesis (erythropoietin). Conclusions. In this cohort, the presence of tissue ID defined by sTfR levels is an independent factor for all-cause death in patients with normal systemic iron parameters.

Correction: Breaking the 30-day barrier: Long-term effectiveness of a nurse-led 7-step transitional intervention program in heart failure.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279815.].

Time from admission to randomization and the effect of empagliflozin in acute heart failure: A post-hoc analysis from EMPULSE.

AIMS: Patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (HF) could be enrolled in EMPULSE (NCT04157751) upon haemodynamic stabilization and between 24 h and 5 days after hospital admission. The timing of treatment initiation may influence the efficacy and safety of drugs such as empagliflozin. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient characteristics, clinical events, and treatment effects according to time from admission to randomization. METHODS AND RESULTS: The EMPULSE population was dichotomized by median time from hospital admission to randomization (1-2 days vs. 3-5 days). The primary outcome was a hierarchical composite endpoint of time to all-cause death, number of HF events, time to first HF event, and a ≥5-point difference in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score change from baseline after 90 days, analysed using the win ratio (WR) method. Patients randomized later (3-5 days, average time 3.9 days; n = 312) had a higher risk of experiencing clinical events than patients randomized earlier (1-2 days, average time 1.7 days; n = 215). The treatment effect favoured empagliflozin versus placebo in patients randomized later (3-5 days: WR 1.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-2.25) but was attenuated in patients randomized earlier (1-2 days: WR 1.04, 95% CI 0.74-1.44) (interaction p = 0.029). A similar pattern was observed for the composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death and all-cause hospitalizations (interaction p < 0.1 for both). The reduction of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels was more pronounced with empagliflozin among patients randomized later than in patients randomized earlier (interaction p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients hospitalized for acute HF enrolled in EMPULSE, those randomized later after hospital admission (3-5 days) experienced greater clinical benefit with empagliflozin than those randomized earlier (1-2 days). These findings should be confirmed in future studies before clinical application.

Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of Right Ventricular Fat Quantification from Computed Tomography in Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy.

Background: In arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) non-invasive scar evaluation is not included among the diagnostic criteria or the predictors of ventricular arrhythmias (VA) and sudden death (SD). Computed tomography (CT) has excellent spatial resolution and allows a clear distinction between myocardium and fat; thus, it has great potential for the evaluation of myocardial scar in ARVC. Objective: The objective of this study is to evaluate the feasibility, and the diagnostic and prognostic value of semi-automated quantification of right ventricular (RV) fat replacement from CT images. Methods: An observational case-control study was carried out including 23 patients with a definite (19) or borderline (4) ARVC diagnosis and 23 age- and sex-matched controls without structural heart disease. All patients underwent contrast-enhanced cardiac CT. RV images were semi-automatically reconstructed with the ADAS-3D software (ADAS3D Medical, Barcelona, Spain). A fibrofatty scar was defined as values of Hounsfield Units (HU) <-10. Within the scar, a border zone (between -10 HU and -50 HU) and dense scar (<-50 HU) were distinguished. Results: All ARVC patients had an RV scar and all scar-related measurements were significantly higher in ARVC cases than in controls (p < 0.001). The total scar area and dense scar area showed no overlapping values between cases and controls, achieving perfect diagnostic performance (sensitivity and specificity of 100%). Among ARVC patients, 16 (70%) had experienced sustained VA or aborted SD. Among all clinical, ECG and imaging parameters, the dense scar area was the only one with a statistically significant association with VA and SD (p = 0.003). Conclusions: In ARVC, RV myocardial fat quantification from CT is feasible and may have considerable diagnostic and prognostic value.

Variations in threshold values for border zone and dense scar produce significant changes in scar parameters obtained by ADAS-3D.

BACKGROUND: ADAS-3D software elaborates cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) images to obtain a quantitative evaluation of dense scar and border zone (BZ), including BZ channels, which can be useful for ventricular tachycardia ablation and risk stratification. However, most prior reports with ADAS-3D used flexible thresholds (60% ± 5% and 40% ± 5% of maximum pixel signal intensity) to define dense scar and BZ. The impact of such variations of the threshold values on the measurements obtained with ADAS-3D is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to quantify the degree of change in ADAS-3D measurements when different thresholds for dense scar and BZ are employed. METHODS: A single-center retrospective observational cohort study including 87 consecutive patients with previous myocardial infarction who underwent CMR was conducted. ADAS-3D software semiautomatically processed CMR sequences. We compared the scar measurements obtained with the 9 possible combinations of thresholds (55%/60%/65% and 35%/40%/45% of maximum pixel signal intensity). RESULTS: The overall comparison between thresholds showed highly significant differences (P < .001) in all scar parameters. Not a single patient maintained the same number of BZ channels with all the thresholds settings. A percentage difference of up to 200% in BZ channel numbers and channel mass was observed in all 36 comparisons. An absolute difference of up to 10 channels was also recorded. Of note, the highest median channel mass (obtained with the thresholds 35-65) was 59-fold higher compared with the lowest one (obtained with the 45-55 cutoffs). CONCLUSION: Variations in threshold values result in statistically significant and high-magnitude changes in the quantification of scar parameters by ADAS-3D.

Efficacy and safety of hypertonic saline therapy in ambulatory patients with heart failure: The SALT-HF trial.

AIMS: Combination of hypertonic saline solution (HSS) with intravenous loop diuretics has been suggested to improve diuretic response in patients hospitalized for heart failure (HF). The efficacy and safety of this approach in the ambulatory setting remain unexplored. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomized study, we allocated ambulatory patients with worsening heart failure (WHF) to a 1-h infusion of intravenous furosemide (ivFurosemide)-HSS versus ivFurosemide. The primary endpoint was the volume of diuresis at 3 h. Secondary endpoints included 3-h natriuresis and weight variation, 7-day congestion data, kidney function and electrolytes, and 30-day clinical events. Overall, 167 participants (median age: 81 years, 30.5% female) were randomized across 13 sites between December 2020 and March 2023. There were no differences in 3-h diuresis between treatments (ivFurosemide-HSS: 1099 ml vs. ivFurosemide: 1103 ml, p = 0.963), 3-h natriuresis (∆ +2.642 mEq/L, p = 0.559), or 3-h weight (∆ +0.012 kg, p = 0.920). Patients in the ivFurosemide-HSS arm experienced significant weight decrease at 7 days (Δ -0.586 kg, p = 0.048). There were no between-treatment differences in clinical congestion score, biomarkers, inferior vena cava diameter, or the presence of lung ultrasound B-lines. At 30 days, 26.5% of the patients in the ivFurosemide-HSS group versus 33.3% in the ivFurosemide group experienced WHF (hazard ratio 0.76, p = 0.330). The incidence of death from any cause or HF hospitalization was 6% of patients in the ivFurosemide-HSS group and 8.3% of patients in the ivFurosemide group (hazard ratio 0.69, p = 0.521). The incidence of worsening kidney function or metabolic derangements was not significantly different in the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: A single infusion of ivFurosemide-HSS did not improve 3-h diuresis or congestion parameters in patients with ambulatory WHF. This therapy showed an appropriate safety profile.

Geographical variation in patient characteristics and outcomes in heart failure with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction.

AIMS: Compared to heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction, HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), and HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) are increasing in prevalence, yet little is known about the geographic variation in patient characteristics, treatments and outcomes among these two HF phenotypes. The aim of this study was to investigate geographic differences in HFpEF and HFmrEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted an individual patient analysis of five clinical trials enrolling patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF from North America (NA), Latin America (LA), Western Europe (WE), Central/Eastern Europe and Russia (CEER), and Asia-Pacific (AP). We compared regions using descriptive statistics and multivariable regression models. Among the 19 959 patients included, 4066 (23.1%) had HFmrEF and 15 353 (76.9%) HFpEF. Regardless of HF phenotype, patients from WE were oldest, and those in CEER youngest. LA had the largest portion of females and NA most black patients. Obesity and diabetes were most prevalent in NA and hypertension and coronary heart disease most common in CEER. Self-reported health status varied strikingly and was the worst in NA and best in AP. Among patients with HFmrEF, rates of the primary composite endpoint (cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization) were: NA 12.56 per 100 patient-years (/100py), AP 11.67/100py, CEER 10.12/100py, LA 8.90/100py, and WE 8.43/100py, driven by differences in the rate of HF hospitalization. The corresponding values in HFpEF were 11.47/100py, 7.80/100py, 5.47/100py, 5.92/100py, and 7.80/100py, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial geographic variation in patient characteristics, treatment and outcomes among patients with HFpEF and HFmrEF. These findings have implications for interpretation and generalizability of trial results, design and conduct of future trials, and optimization of care for these patients.

Baseline characteristics of patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction: The FINEARTS-HF trial.

AIMS: To describe the baseline characteristics of participants in the FINEARTS-HF trial, contextualized with prior trials including patients with heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF). The FINEARTS-HF trial is comparing the effects of the non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist finerenone with placebo in reducing cardiovascular death and total worsening HF events in patients with HFmrEF/HFpEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with symptomatic HF, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥40%, estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥ 25 ml/min/1.73 m2, elevated natriuretic peptide levels and evidence of structural heart disease were enrolled and randomized to finerenone titrated to a maximum of 40 mg once daily or matching placebo. We validly randomized 6001 patients to finerenone or placebo (mean age 72 ± 10 years, 46% women). The majority were New York Heart Association functional class II (69%). The baseline mean LVEF was 53 ± 8% (range 34-84%); 36% of participants had a LVEF <50% and 64% had a LVEF ≥50%. The median N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) was 1041 (interquartile range 449-1946) pg/ml. A total of 1219 (20%) patients were enrolled during or within 7 days of a worsening HF event, and 3247 (54%) patients were enrolled within 3 months of a worsening HF event. Compared with prior large-scale HFmrEF/HFpEF trials, FINEARTS-HF participants were more likely to have recent (within 6 months) HF hospitalization and greater symptoms and functional limitations. Further, concomitant medications included a larger percentage of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors than previous trials. CONCLUSIONS: FINEARTS-HF has enrolled a broad range of high-risk patients with HFmrEF and HFpEF. The trial will determine the safety and efficacy of finerenone in this population.

Serum potassium abnormalities, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor discontinuation, and clinical outcomes in patients with chronic cardiovascular, metabolic, and renal conditions: A population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASIs) play a crucial role in the treatment of several chronic cardiovascular conditions. Nonetheless, hyperkalemia, a frequent side effect, often leads to the discontinuation of RAASIs. The implications of hyperkalemia-driven changes in RAASI medications are poorly understood. METHODS: Population-based, observational, retrospective cohort study. Two large healthcare databases were utilized to identify 77,089 individuals aged 55 years and older with chronic conditions who were prescribed RAASIs between 2015 and 2017 in Southern Barcelona, Spain. We assessed the interplay between serum potassium abnormalities, RAASI management, and their associations with clinical outcomes, adjusting for potential confounders including socioeconomic factors, medical conditions, and potassium levels. RESULTS: The one-year prevalence of hyperkalemia (defined as serum potassium, K+ >5.0 mmol/L) was 17.8 %. RAASI were down-titrated in 16.1 % of these 13,673 patients with K+ levels. Factors linked to a higher likelihood of reducing/discontinuing RAASI after developing hyperkalemia included older age, impaired kidney function, higher potassium levels, and previous hospitalizations. Dose reduction/discontinuation of RAASI after developing hyperkalemia was associated with an increased risk of hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.16, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.21) and with increased mortality (HR 1.60, 95 % CI 1.56-1.84). CONCLUSION: In this large, observational study, hyperkalemia was linked to a greater likelihood of discontinuing RAASIs. Down-titration of RAASI was independently associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes such as hospitalization and specially mortality. Although the observational nature of the study, these findings underscore the importance of preventing circumstances that may lead to RAASI down-titration, such as hyperkalemia, as well as preventing hospitalizations and mortality, to ensure RAASI benefits.

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.

Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients receiving oral anticoagulants for the treatment of non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

Background: Frequent monitoring of patients declined during the COVID-19 pandemic, harming patients with chronic diseases who critically needed correct monitoring. We evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) receiving treatment with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) or non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) in clinical practice in Spain. Methods: This observational, retrospective study analyzed prevalent patients treated with NOAC/VKA on 14/03/2019 (pre-COVID-19 period) and 14/03/2020 (COVID-19 period), who were followed up to 12 months. The study also considered incident patients who started treatment with NOAC/VKA between 15/03/2019 and 13/03/2020 (pre-COVID-19 period) and from 15/03/2020 to 13/03/2021 (COVID-19 period). Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, effectiveness, treatment patterns, and healthcare resource utilization were considered. Results: Prevalent patients amounted to 12,336 and 13,342 patients, whereas 1,612 and 1,602 incident patients were included in the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 periods, respectively. Prevalent patients treated with VKA had more strokes, thromboembolism, and major bleeding compared to those receiving NOAC, particularly during the COVID-19 period. NOAC patients had a 12 % lower risk of death than those on treatment with VKA (Hazard ratio = 0.88 [95 % CI: 0.81 - 0.95], p = 0.033). In addition, VKA patients were less persistent after 12 months than NOAC patients (pre-COVID-19 period: 52.1 % vs. 78.9 %, p < 0.001; COVID-19 period: 49.2 % vs. 80.3 %, p < 0.001), and required more healthcare visits and hospitalizations than those on treatment with NOAC. Conclusion: Compared to VKA, NOAC seems to have reduced the incidence of severe events and the use of healthcare resources for NVAF, particularly during the pandemic.

Clinical profile, management and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock undergoing transfer between centers in Spain.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical profile, management, and prognosis of ST segment elevation myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS) requiring interhospital transfer, as well as the prognostic impact of structural variables of the treating centers in this setting. METHODS: This study included patients with STEMI-CS treated at revascularization-capable centers from 2016 to 2020. The patients were divided into the following groups: group A: patients attended throughout their admission at hospitals with interventional cardiology without cardiac surgery; group B: patients treated at hospitals with interventional cardiology and cardiac surgery; and group C: patients transferred to centers with interventional cardiology and cardiac surgery. We analyzed the association between the volume of STEMI-CS cases treated, the availability of cardiac intensive care units (CICU), and heart transplant with hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 4189 episodes were included: 1389 (33.2%) from group A, 2627 from group B (62.7%), and 173 from group C (4.1%). Transferred patients were younger, had a higher cardiovascular risk, and more commonly underwent revascularization, mechanical circulatory support, and heart transplant during hospitalization (P<.001). The crude mortality rate was lower in transferred patients (46.2% vs 60.3% in group A and 54.4% in group B, (P<.001)). Lower mortality was associated with a higher volume of care and CICU availability (OR, 0.75, P=.009; and 0.80, P=.047). CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of transfers in patients with STEMI-CS in our setting is low. Transferred patients were younger and underwent more invasive procedures. Mortality was lower among patients transferred to centers with a higher volume of STEMI-CS cases and CICU.

Developing Cardio-Oncology Programs in the New Era: Beyond Ventricular Dysfunction Due to Cancer Treatments.

Cardiovascular disease is a common problem in cancer patients that is becoming more widely recognized. This may be a consequence of prior cardiovascular risk factors but could also be secondary to the anticancer treatments. With the goal of offering a multidisciplinary approach to guaranteeing optimal cancer therapy and the early detection of related cardiac diseases, and in light of the recent ESC Cardio-Oncology Guideline recommendations, we developed a Cardio-Oncology unit devoted to the prevention and management of these specific complications. This document brings together important aspects to consider for the development and organization of a Cardio-Oncology program through our own experience and the current evidence.

Impact of COVID-19 in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction enrolled in the DELIVER trial.

AIM: COVID-19 may affect clinical risk in patients with heart failure. DELIVER began before and was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to evaluate the association between COVID-19 and clinical outcomes among DELIVER participants. METHODS AND RESULTS: Participants with chronic heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF) were randomized to dapagliflozin or placebo across 350 sites in 20 countries. COVID-19 was investigator-reported and the contribution of COVID-19 to death was centrally adjudicated. We assessed (i) the incidence of COVID-19, (ii) event rates before/during the pandemic, and (iii) risks of death after COVID-19 diagnosis compared to risks of death in participants without COVID-19. Further, we performed a sensitivity analysis assessing treatment effects of dapagliflozin vs. placebo censored at pandemic onset. Of 6263 participants, 589 (9.4%) developed COVID-19, of whom 307 (52%) required/prolonged hospitalization. A total of 155 deaths (15% of all deaths) were adjudicated as definitely/possibly COVID-19-related. COVID-19 cases and deaths did not differ by randomized assignment. Death rate in the 12 months following diagnosis was 56.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 48.0-65.6) versus 6.4 (95% CI 6.0-6.8)/100 participant-years among trial participants with versus without COVID-19 (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 8.60, 95% CI 7.18-10.30). Risk was highest 0-3 months following diagnosis (153.5, 95% CI 130.3-180.8) and remained elevated at 3-6 months (12.6, 95% CI 6.6-24.3/100 participant-years). After excluding investigator-reported fatal COVID-19 events, all-cause death rates in the 12 months following diagnosis among COVID-19 survivors (n = 458) remained higher (aHR 2.46, 95% CI 1.83-3.33) than rates for all trial participants from randomization, with censoring of participants who developed COVID-19 at the time of diagnosis. Dapagliflozin reduced cardiovascular death/worsening HF events when censoring participants at COVID-19 diagnosis (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.72-0.91) and pandemic onset (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58-0.89). There were no diabetic ketoacidosis or major hypoglycaemic events within 30 days of COVID-19. CONCLUSION: DELIVER is one of the most extensive experiences with COVID-19 of any cardiovascular trial, with >75% of follow-up time occurring during the pandemic. COVID-19 was common, with >50% of cases leading to hospitalization or death. Treatment benefits of dapagliflozin persisted when censoring at COVID-19 diagnosis and pandemic onset. Patients surviving COVID-19 had a high early residual risk. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03619213.

Repetitive levosimendan infusions for patients with advanced chronic heart failure in the vulnerable post-discharge period: The multinational randomized LeoDOR trial.

AIM: The LeoDOR trial explored the efficacy and safety of intermittent levosimendan therapy in the vulnerable phase following a hospitalization for acute heart failure (HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prospective multicentre, double-blind, two-armed trial, patients with advanced HF were randomized 2:1 at the end of an index hospitalization for acute HF to intermittent levosimendan therapy or matching placebo for 12 weeks. All patients had left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤30% during index hospitalization. Levosimendan was administered according to centre preference either as 6 h infusion at a rate of 0.2 µg/kg/min every 2 weeks, or as 24 h infusion at a rate of 0.1 µg/kg/min every 3 weeks. The primary efficacy assessment after 14 weeks was based on a global rank score consisting of three hierarchical groups. Secondary clinical endpoints included the composite risk of tiers 1 and 2 at 14 and 26 weeks, respectively. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the planned number of patients could not be recruited. The final modified intention-to-treat analysis included 145 patients (93 in the combined levosimendan arm, 52 in the placebo arm), which reduced the statistical power to detect a 20% risk reduction in the primary endpoint to 60%. Compared with placebo, intermittent levosimendan had no significant effect on the primary endpoint: the mean rank score was 72.55 for the levosimendan group versus 73.81 for the placebo group (p = 0.863). However, there was a signal towards a higher incidence of the individual clinical components of the primary endpoint in the levosimendan group versus the placebo group both after 14 weeks (hazard ratio [HR] 2.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-7.68; p = 0.021) and 26 weeks (HR 1.64, 95% CI 0.87-3.11; p = 0.122). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients recently hospitalized with HF and reduced LVEF, intermittent levosimendan therapy did not improve post-hospitalization clinical stability.

Soluble Transferrin Receptor as Iron Deficiency Biomarker: Impact on Exercise Capacity in Heart Failure Patients.

The soluble transferrin receptor (sTfR) is a marker of tissue iron status, which could indicate an increased iron demand at the tissue level. The impact of sTfR levels on functional capacity and quality of life (QoL) in non-anemic heart failure (HF) patients with otherwise normal systemic iron status has not been evaluated. We conducted an observational, prospective, cohort study of 1236 patients with chronic HF. We selected patients with normal hemoglobin levels and normal systemic iron status. Tissue iron deficiency (ID) was defined as levels of sTfR > 75th percentile (1.63 mg per L). The primary endpoints were the distance walked in the 6 min walking test (6MWT) and the overall summary score (OSS) of the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ). The final study cohort consisted of 215 patients. Overall QoL was significantly worse (51 ± 27 vs. 39 ± 20, p-value = 0.006, respectively), and the 6 MWT distance was significantly worse in patients with tissue ID when compared to patients without tissue ID (206 ± 179 m vs. 314 ± 155, p-value < 0.0001, respectively). Higher sTfR levels, indicating increased iron demand, were associated with a shorter distance in the 6 MWT (standardized ß = -0.249, p < 0.001) and a higher MLHFQ OSS (standardized ß = 0.183, p-value = 0.008). In this study, we show that in patients with normal systemic iron parameters, higher levels of sTfR are strongly associated with an impaired submaximal exercise capacity and with worse QoL.

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist use and the effects of empagliflozin on clinical outcomes in patients admitted for acute heart failure: Findings from EMPULSE.

AIMS: In patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF) empagliflozin produced greater clinical benefit than placebo. Many patients with AHF are treated with mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs). The interplay between empagliflozin and MRAs in AHF is yet to be explored. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of empagliflozin versus placebo according to MRA use at baseline in the EMPULSE trial (NCT04157751). METHODS AND RESULTS: In this analysis all comparisons were performed between empagliflozin and placebo, stratified by baseline MRA use. The primary outcome included all-cause death, heart failure events, and a ≥5 point difference in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) total symptom score at 90 days, assessed using the win ratio (WR). First heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death was a secondary outcome. From the 530 patients randomized, 276 (52%) were receiving MRAs at baseline. MRA users were younger, had lower ejection fraction, better renal function, and higher KCCQ scores. The primary outcome showed benefit of empagliflozin irrespective of baseline MRA use (WR 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.97 and WR 1.27, 95% CI 0.93-1.73 in MRA users and non-users, respectively; interaction p = 0.52). The effect of empagliflozin on first heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death was not modified by MRA use (hazard ratio [HR] 0.58, 95% CI 0.30-1.11 and HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.47-1.52 in MRA users and non-users, respectively; interaction p = 0.39). Investigator-reported and severe hyperkalaemia events were infrequent (<6%) irrespective of MRA use. CONCLUSIONS: In patients admitted for AHF, initiation of empagliflozin produced clinical benefit and was well tolerated irrespective of background MRA use. These findings support the early use of empagliflozin on top of MRA therapy in patients admitted for AHF.