Phase 3 Trial of Interleukin-1 Trap Rilonacept in Recurrent Pericarditis.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin-1 has been implicated as a mediator of recurrent pericarditis. The efficacy and safety of rilonacept, an interleukin-1α and interleukin-1ß cytokine trap, were studied previously in a phase 2 trial involving patients with recurrent pericarditis. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3 multicenter, double-blind, event-driven, randomized-withdrawal trial of rilonacept in patients with acute symptoms of recurrent pericarditis (as assessed on a patient-reported scale) and systemic inflammation (as shown by an elevated C-reactive protein [CRP] level). Patients presenting with pericarditis recurrence while receiving standard therapy were enrolled in a 12-week run-in period, during which rilonacept was initiated and background medications were discontinued. Patients who had a clinical response (i.e., met prespecified response criteria) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive continued rilonacept monotherapy or placebo, administered subcutaneously once weekly. The primary efficacy end point, assessed with a Cox proportional-hazards model, was the time to the first pericarditis recurrence. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients with pericarditis pain and an elevated CRP level were enrolled in the run-in period. During the run-in period, the median time to resolution or near-resolution of pain was 5 days, and the median time to normalization of the CRP level was 7 days. A total of 61 patients underwent randomization. During the randomized-withdrawal period, there were too few recurrence events in the rilonacept group to allow for the median time to the first adjudicated recurrence to be calculated; the median time to the first adjudicated recurrence in the placebo group was 8.6 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.0 to 11.7; hazard ratio in a Cox proportional-hazards model, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.18; P<0.001 by the log-rank test). During this period, 2 of 30 patients (7%) in the rilonacept group had a pericarditis recurrence, as compared with 23 of 31 patients (74%) in the placebo group. In the run-in period, 4 patients had adverse events leading to the discontinuation of rilonacept therapy. The most common adverse events with rilonacept were injection-site reactions and upper respiratory tract infections. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with recurrent pericarditis, rilonacept led to rapid resolution of recurrent pericarditis episodes and to a significantly lower risk of pericarditis recurrence than placebo. (Funded by Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals; RHAPSODY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03737110.).

Anti-interleukin-1 agents for pericarditis: a primer for cardiologists.

Anti-interleukin (IL)-1 agents have been developed for the treatment of autoinflammatory and rheumatic conditions, where overproduction of IL-1 is an important pathophysiologic process. IL-1α and IL-1ß are the most studied members of the IL-1 family of cytokines and have the strongest proinflammatory effects. A naturally occurring antagonist (IL-1Ra) mitigates their proinflammatory effects. Overproduction of both IL-1α (released by inflamed/damaged pericardial cells) and IL-1ß (released by inflammatory cells) is now a well-recognized therapeutic target in patients with recurrent idiopathic pericarditis. Currently, there are three available anti-IL-1 agents: anakinra (recombinant human IL-1Ra), rilonacept (a soluble decoy receptor 'trap', binding both IL-1α and IL-1ß), and canakinumab (human monoclonal anti-IL-1ß antibody). For patients with corticosteroid-dependent and colchicine-resistant recurrent pericarditis with evidence of systemic inflammation, as evidenced by elevated C-reactive protein, the efficacy and safety of anakinra (2 mg/kg/day up to 100 mg/day subcutaneously usually for at least 6 months, then tapered) and rilonacept (320 mg subcutaneously for the first day followed by 160 mg subcutaneously weekly) have been clearly demonstrated in observational studies and randomized controlled clinical trials. Severe side effects are rare and discontinuation rates are very low (<4%). The most common reported side effect is injection site reactions (>50% of patients). In this article, we describe the historical and pathophysiological background and provide a comprehensive review of these agents, which appear to be the most significant advance in medical therapy of recurrent pericarditis in the last 5 years.

Recurrent Pericarditis: a Stubborn Opponent Meets New Treatments in 2022.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Our goal in writing this review was to provide a comprehensive appraisal of current therapies for idiopathic recurrent pericarditis with a particular focus on the newest therapeutic agents. We sought to understand the role of the inflammasome in the pathophysiology of pericarditis and how it informs the use of interleukin-1 (IL-1)-directed therapies. RECENT FINDINGS: The latest research on this topic has focused on the critical role of the NLRP3 (NACHT, leucine-rich repeat, and pyrin domain-containing protein) inflammasome. Very recently, components of the NLRP3 inflammasome were detected by immune staining in pericardial tissue from patients with recurrent idiopathic pericarditis. In a mouse model of pericarditis, anti-IL-1 agents anakinra and rilonacept reduced NLRP3 immunostaining. Subsequent study of these drugs in human subjects with idiopathic recurrent pericarditis demonstrated their efficacy. Recurrent idiopathic pericarditis, while relatively rare, poses a continued treatment challenge and contributes to a diminished quality of life for those patients who are afflicted. Recent developments, including an animal model of the disease and the use of IL-1-directed therapies, represent an exciting leap forward in our understanding of treatment targets. These advances offer not only new tools in our fight against this disease, but also the promise of earlier intervention and attenuation of disease morbidity. As our experience with these new agents expands, we can address questions about the ideal timing of introduction of anti-IL-1 therapy and duration of therapy and better understand the potential side effect profile.

SERCA2a-phospholamban interaction monitored by an interposed circularly permutated green fluorescent protein.

The interaction of phospholamban (PLB) and the sarcoplasmic reticulum Ca2+-ATPase (SERCA2a) is a key regulator of cardiac contractility and a therapeutic target in heart failure (HF). PLB-mediated increases in SERCA2a activity improve cardiac function and HF. Clinically, this mechanism can only be exploited by a general activation of the proteinkinase A (PKA), which is associated with side effects and adverse clinical outcomes. A selective interference of the PLB-SERCA2a interaction is desirable but will require novel tools that allow for an integrated assessment of this interaction under both physiological and pathophysiological conditions. A circularly permutated green fluorescent protein (cpGFP) was interposed between SERCA2a and PLB to result into a single SERCA2a-cpGFP-PLB recombinant protein (SGP). Expression, phosphorylation, fluorescence, and function of SGP were evaluated. Expression of SGP-cDNA results in a functional recombinant protein at the predicted molecular weight. The PLB domain of SGP retains its ability to polymerize and can be phosphorylated by PKA activation. This increases the fluorescent yield of SGP by between 10% and 165% depending on cell line and conditions. In conclusion, a single recombinant fusion protein that combines SERCA2a, a circularly permutated green fluorescent protein, and PLB can be expressed in cells and can be phosphorylated at the PLB domain that markedly increases the fluorescence yield. SGP is a novel cellular SERCA2a-PLB interaction monitor.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study describes the design and characterization of a novel biosensor that can visualize the interaction of SERCA2a and phospholamban (PLB). The biosensor combines SERCA2a, a circularly permutated green fluorescent protein, and PLB into one recombinant protein (SGP). Proteinkinase A activation results in phosphorylation of the PLB domain and is associated with a marked increase in the fluorescence yield to allow for real-time monitoring of the SERCA2a and PLB interaction in cells.

Health-related quality of life in patients with recurrent pericarditis: results from a phase 2 study of rilonacept.

BACKGROUND: Impact of recurrent pericarditis (RP) on patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was evaluated through qualitative patient interviews and as an exploratory endpoint in a Phase 2 trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of rilonacept (IL-1α/IL-1ß cytokine trap) to treat RP. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with ten adults with RP to understand symptoms and HRQoL impacts, and the 10-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health (PROMIS GH) v1.2 was evaluated to determine questionnaire coverage of patient experience. The Phase 2 trial enrolled participants with active symptomatic RP (A-RP, n = 16) and corticosteroid-dependent participants with no active recurrence at baseline (CSD-RP, n = 9). All participants received rilonacept weekly during a 6-week base treatment period (TP) plus an optional 18-week extension period (EP). Tapering of concomitant medications, including corticosteroids (CS), was permitted during EP. HRQoL was assessed using the PROMIS GH, and patient-reported pain and blood levels of c-reactive protein (CRP) were collected at Baseline and follow-up periods. A secondary, descriptive analysis of the Phase 2 trial efficacy results was completed using HRQoL measures to characterize both the impact of RP and the treatment effect of rilonacept. RESULTS: Information from qualitative interviews demonstrated that PROMIS GH concepts are relevant to adults with RP. From the Phase 2 trial, both participant groups showed impacted HRQoL at Baseline (mean PROMIS Global Physical Health [GPH] and Global Mental Health [GMH], were lower than population norm average). In A-RP, GPH/MPH improved by end of base TP and were sustained through EP (similar trends were observed for pain and CRP). Similarly, in CSD-RP, GPH/MPH improved by end of TP and further improved during EP, during CS tapering or discontinuation, without disease recurrence (low pain scores and CRP levels continued during the TP and EP). CONCLUSION: This is the first study demonstrating impaired HRQoL in RP. Rilonacept treatment was associated with HRQoL improvements using PROMIS GH scores. Maintained/improved HRQoL during tapering/withdrawal of CS without recurrence suggests that rilonacept may provide an alternative to CS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.Gov; NCT03980522; 5 June 2019, retrospectively registered; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03980522 .

RHAPSODY: Rationale for and design of a pivotal Phase 3 trial to assess efficacy and safety of rilonacept, an interleukin-1α and interleukin-1ß trap, in patients with recurrent pericarditis.

Recurrent pericarditis (RP) occurs in 15% to 30% of patients following a first episode, despite standard treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, colchicine, and corticosteroids; many patients become dependent on corticosteroids. Rilonacept (KPL-914), an interleukin-1α and ß inhibitor, is in development for the treatment of RP. RHAPSODY, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized-withdrawal (RW) pivotal Phase 3 trial (NCT03737110), enrolls patients 12 years or older presenting with at least a third pericarditis episode, pericarditis pain score ≥4 (11-point numeric rating scale [NRS]), and C-reactive protein ≥1 mg/dL at screening. After a subcutaneous loading dose (adults, 320 mg; children, 4.4 mg/kg), all patients receive blinded weekly subcutaneous rilonacept (adults, 160 mg; children, 2.2 mg/kg) during the run-in period. Patients must taper and discontinue concomitant pericarditis medications during the blinded run-in period and achieve clinical response (C-reactive protein ≤0.5 mg/dL and weekly average NRS ≤2.0 during the 7 days prior to and including the day of randomization) by end of the run-in (while on rilonacept monotherapy) to be randomized to either continued rilonacept or placebo in the RW period. Primary efficacy end point was time to adjudicated pericarditis recurrence during the RW period; secondary efficacy end points were proportion of patients maintaining clinical response, percentage of days with NRS ≤2, and percentage of patients with no-to-minimal pericarditis symptoms at week 16 of the RW period. Safety evaluations include adverse event monitoring, physical examinations, and laboratory tests. The RHAPSODY trial will evaluate the efficacy and safety of rilonacept in the treatment of RP to improve outcomes and patient health-related quality of life.

Safety and Feasibility of a Nocturnal Heart Rate Elevation-Exploration of a Novel Treatment Concept.

BACKGROUND: Diastolic dysfunction and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are associated with myocardial fibrosis and concentric left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). In a preclinical model of LVH, we demonstrated that a moderate increase in heart rate can reduce interstitial fibrosis and improve LV compliance. We therefore hypothesized that moderately elevated heart rates can be used to beneficially modify the myocardial substrate in patients with diastolic dysfunction and HFpEF. As a preliminary step to test this hypothesis, we evaluated if patients can tolerate this novel pacemaker-based treatment approach without adverse effects. METHODS AND RESULTS: A pacemaker-mediated increase in heart rate to 100 beats/min for 5 hours at night was tested over 4 weeks in 10 patients with diastolic dysfunction. The patients underwent a physical examination, biomarker collection, 6-minute walk test, heart failure questionnaire, and echocardiography before and after the pacing intervention. None of the patients reported any symptoms at night. No arrhythmias were induced. Eight patients completed the protocol. Three patients experienced unanticipated daytime pacing from an interfering pacemaker function. There were no detrimental changes in biomarkers or LV systolic function. CONCLUSIONS: Nocturnal pacing at a rate of 100 beats/min appears to be safe and well tolerated in this small exploratory patient cohort.

Isosorbide Mononitrate in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Nitrates are commonly prescribed to enhance activity tolerance in patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction. We compared the effect of isosorbide mononitrate or placebo on daily activity in such patients. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, crossover study, 110 patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction were randomly assigned to a 6-week dose-escalation regimen of isosorbide mononitrate (from 30 mg to 60 mg to 120 mg once daily) or placebo, with subsequent crossover to the other group for 6 weeks. The primary end point was the daily activity level, quantified as the average daily accelerometer units during the 120-mg phase, as assessed by patient-worn accelerometers. Secondary end points included hours of activity per day during the 120-mg phase, daily accelerometer units during all three dose regimens, quality-of-life scores, 6-minute walk distance, and levels of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). RESULTS: In the group receiving the 120-mg dose of isosorbide mononitrate, as compared with the placebo group, there was a nonsignificant trend toward lower daily activity (-381 accelerometer units; 95% confidence interval [CI], -780 to 17; P=0.06) and a significant decrease in hours of activity per day (-0.30 hours; 95% CI, -0.55 to -0.05; P=0.02). During all dose regimens, activity in the isosorbide mononitrate group was lower than that in the placebo group (-439 accelerometer units; 95% CI, -792 to -86; P=0.02). Activity levels decreased progressively and significantly with increased doses of isosorbide mononitrate (but not placebo). There were no significant between-group differences in the 6-minute walk distance, quality-of-life scores, or NT-proBNP levels. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction who received isosorbide mononitrate were less active and did not have better quality of life or submaximal exercise capacity than did patients who received placebo. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02053493.).

Pharmacological heart rate lowering in patients with a preserved ejection fraction-review of a failing concept.

Epidemiological studies have demonstrated that high resting heart rates are associated with increased mortality. Clinical studies in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction have shown that heart rate lowering with beta-blockers and ivabradine improves survival. It is therefore often assumed that heart rate lowering is beneficial in other patients as well. Here, we critically appraise the effects of pharmacological heart rate lowering in patients with both normal and reduced ejection fraction with an emphasis on the effects of pharmacological heart rate lowering in hypertension and heart failure. Emerging evidence from recent clinical trials and meta-analyses suggest that pharmacological heart rate lowering is not beneficial in patients with a normal or preserved ejection fraction. This has just begun to be reflected in some but not all guideline recommendations. The detrimental effects of pharmacological heart rate lowering are due to an increase in central blood pressures, higher left ventricular systolic and diastolic pressures, and increased ventricular wall stress. Therefore, we propose that heart rate lowering per se reproduces the hemodynamic effects of diastolic dysfunction and imposes an increased arterial load on the left ventricle, which combine to increase the risk of heart failure and atrial fibrillation. Pharmacologic heart rate lowering is clearly beneficial in patients with a dilated cardiomyopathy but not in patients with normal chamber dimensions and normal systolic function. These conflicting effects can be explained based on a model that considers the hemodynamic and ventricular structural effects of heart rate changes.

Effect of Inorganic Nitrite vs Placebo on Exercise Capacity Among Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: The INDIE-HFpEF Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: There are few effective treatments for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Short-term administration of inorganic nitrite or nitrate preparations has been shown to enhance nitric oxide signaling, which may improve aerobic capacity in HFpEF. Objective: To determine the effect of 4 weeks' administration of inhaled, nebulized inorganic nitrite on exercise capacity in HFpEF. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-treatment, crossover trial of 105 patients with HFpEF. Participants were enrolled from July 22, 2016, to September 12, 2017, at 17 US sites, with final date of follow-up of January 2, 2018. Interventions: Inorganic nitrite or placebo administered via micronebulizer device. During each 6-week phase of the crossover study, participants received no study drug for 2 weeks (baseline/washout) followed by study drug (nitrite or placebo) at 46 mg 3 times a day for 1 week followed by 80 mg 3 times a day for 3 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was peak oxygen consumption (mL/kg/min). Secondary end points included daily activity levels assessed by accelerometry, health status as assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (score range, 0-100, with higher scores reflecting better quality of life), functional class, cardiac filling pressures assessed by echocardiography, N-terminal fragment of the prohormone brain natriuretic peptide levels, other exercise indices, adverse events, and tolerability. Outcomes were assessed after treatment for 4 weeks. Results: Among 105 patients who were randomized (median age, 68 years; 56% women), 98 (93%) completed the trial. During the nitrite phase, there was no significant difference in mean peak oxygen consumption as compared with the placebo phase (13.5 vs 13.7 mL/kg/min; difference, -0.20 [95% CI, -0.56 to 0.16]; P = .27). There were no significant between-treatment phase differences in daily activity levels (5497 vs 5503 accelerometry units; difference, -15 [95% CI, -264 to 234]; P = .91), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (62.6 vs 61.9; difference, 1.1 [95% CI, -1.4 to 3.5]; P = .39), functional class (2.5 vs 2.5; difference, 0.1 [95% CI, -0.1 to 0.2]; P = .43), echocardiographic E/e' ratio (16.4 vs 16.6; difference, 0.1 [95% CI, -1.2 to 1.3]; P = .93), or N-terminal fragment of the prohormone brain natriuretic peptide levels (520 vs 533 pg/mL; difference, 11 [95% CI, -53 to 75]; P = .74). Worsening heart failure occurred in 3 participants (2.9%) during the nitrite phase and 8 (7.6%) during the placebo phase. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with HFpEF, administration of inhaled inorganic nitrite for 4 weeks, compared with placebo, did not result in significant improvement in exercise capacity. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02742129.

Myocardial stiffness in patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction: contributions of collagen and titin.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine whether patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have an increase in passive myocardial stiffness and the extent to which discovered changes depend on changes in extracellular matrix fibrillar collagen and cardiomyocyte titin. METHODS AND RESULTS: Seventy patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting underwent an echocardiogram, plasma biomarker determination, and intraoperative left ventricular epicardial anterior wall biopsy. Patients were divided into 3 groups: referent control (n=17, no hypertension or diabetes mellitus), hypertension (HTN) without (-) HFpEF (n=31), and HTN with (+) HFpEF (n=22). One or more of the following studies were performed on the biopsies: passive stiffness measurements to determine total, collagen-dependent and titin-dependent stiffness (differential extraction assay), collagen assays (biochemistry or histology), or titin isoform and phosphorylation assays. In comparison with controls, patients with HTN(-)HFpEF had no change in left ventricular end-diastolic pressure, myocardial passive stiffness, collagen, or titin phosphorylation but had an increase in biomarkers of inflammation (C-reactive protein, soluble ST2, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 1). In comparison with both control and HTN(-)HFpEF, patients with HTN(+)HFpEF had increased left ventricular end-diastolic pressure, left atrial volume, N-terminal propeptide of brain natriuretic peptide, total, collagen-dependent, and titin-dependent stiffness, insoluble collagen, increased titin phosphorylation on PEVK S11878(S26), reduced phosphorylation on N2B S4185(S469), and increased biomarkers of inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: Hypertension in the absence of HFpEF did not alter passive myocardial stiffness. Patients with HTN(+)HFpEF had a significant increase in passive myocardial stiffness; collagen-dependent and titin-dependent stiffness were increased. These data suggest that the development of HFpEF depends on changes in both collagen and titin homeostasis.

Effects of Xanthine Oxidase Inhibition in Hyperuricemic Heart Failure Patients: The Xanthine Oxidase Inhibition for Hyperuricemic Heart Failure Patients (EXACT-HF) Study.

BACKGROUND: Oxidative stress may contribute to heart failure (HF) progression. Inhibiting xanthine oxidase in hyperuricemic HF patients may improve outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We randomly assigned 253 patients with symptomatic HF, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%, and serum uric acid levels ≥9.5 mg/dL to receive allopurinol (target dose, 600 mg daily) or placebo in a double-blind, multicenter trial. The primary composite end point at 24 weeks was based on survival, worsening HF, and patient global assessment. Secondary end points included change in quality of life, submaximal exercise capacity, and left ventricular ejection fraction. Uric acid levels were significantly reduced with allopurinol in comparison with placebo (treatment difference, -4.2 [-4.9, -3.5] mg/dL and -3.5 [-4.2, -2.7] mg/dL at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively, both P<0.0001). At 24 weeks, there was no significant difference in clinical status between the allopurinol- and placebo-treated patients (worsened 45% versus 46%, unchanged 42% versus 34%, improved 13% versus 19%, respectively; P=0.68). At 12 and 24 weeks, there was no significant difference in change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores or 6-minute walk distances between the 2 groups. At 24 weeks, left ventricular ejection fraction did not change in either group or between groups. Rash occurred more frequently with allopurinol (10% versus 2%, P=0.01), but there was no difference in serious adverse event rates between the groups (20% versus 15%, P=0.36). CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk HF patients with reduced ejection fraction and elevated uric acid levels, xanthine oxidase inhibition with allopurinol failed to improve clinical status, exercise capacity, quality of life, or left ventricular ejection fraction at 24 weeks. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00987415.

Heart rate-induced modifications of concentric left ventricular hypertrophy: exploration of a novel therapeutic concept.

Lowering the heart rate is considered to be beneficial in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). In a dilated left ventricle (LV), pharmacological heart rate lowering is associated with a reduction in LV chamber size. In patients with HFrEF, this structural change is associated with better survival. HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is increasingly prevalent but, so far, without any evidence-based treatment. HFpEF is typically associated with LV concentric remodeling and hypertrophy. The effects of heart rate on this structural phenotype are not known. Analogous with the benefits of a low heart rate on a dilated heart, we hypothesized that increased heart rates could lead to potentially beneficial remodeling of a concentrically hypertrophied LV. This was explored in an established porcine model of concentric LV hypertrophy and fibrosis. Our results suggest that a moderate increase in heart rate can be used to reduce wall thickness, normalize LV chamber volumes, decrease myocardial fibrosis, and improve LV compliance. Our results also indicate that the effects of heart rate can be titrated, are reversible, and do not induce HF. These findings may provide the rationale for a novel therapeutic approach for HFpEF and its antecedent disease substrate.

Ultrafiltration in decompensated heart failure with cardiorenal syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Ultrafiltration is an alternative strategy to diuretic therapy for the treatment of patients with acute decompensated heart failure. Little is known about the efficacy and safety of ultrafiltration in patients with acute decompensated heart failure complicated by persistent congestion and worsened renal function. METHODS: We randomly assigned a total of 188 patients with acute decompensated heart failure, worsened renal function, and persistent congestion to a strategy of stepped pharmacologic therapy (94 patients) or ultrafiltration (94 patients). The primary end point was the bivariate change from baseline in the serum creatinine level and body weight, as assessed 96 hours after random assignment. Patients were followed for 60 days. RESULTS: Ultrafiltration was inferior to pharmacologic therapy with respect to the bivariate end point of the change in the serum creatinine level and body weight 96 hours after enrollment (P=0.003), owing primarily to an increase in the creatinine level in the ultrafiltration group. At 96 hours, the mean change in the creatinine level was -0.04±0.53 mg per deciliter (-3.5±46.9 µmol per liter) in the pharmacologic-therapy group, as compared with +0.23±0.70 mg per deciliter (20.3±61.9 µmol per liter) in the ultrafiltration group (P=0.003). There was no significant difference in weight loss 96 hours after enrollment between patients in the pharmacologic-therapy group and those in the ultrafiltration group (a loss of 5.5±5.1 kg [12.1±11.3 lb] and 5.7±3.9 kg [12.6±8.5 lb], respectively; P=0.58). A higher percentage of patients in the ultrafiltration group than in the pharmacologic-therapy group had a serious adverse event (72% vs. 57%, P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial involving patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure, worsened renal function, and persistent congestion, the use of a stepped pharmacologic-therapy algorithm was superior to a strategy of ultrafiltration for the preservation of renal function at 96 hours, with a similar amount of weight loss with the two approaches. Ultrafiltration was associated with a higher rate of adverse events. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00608491.).

Evaluation and Treatment of Pericarditis: A Systematic Review.

IMPORTANCE: Pericarditis is the most common form of pericardial disease and a relatively common cause of chest pain. OBJECTIVE: To summarize published evidence on the causes, diagnosis, therapy, prevention, and prognosis of pericarditis. EVIDENCE REVIEW: A literature search of BioMedCentral, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was performed for human studies without language restriction from January 1, 1990, to August 31, 2015. After literature review and selection of meta-analyses, randomized clinical trials, and large observational studies, 30 studies (5 meta-analyses, 10 randomized clinical trials, and 16 cohort studies) with 7569 adult patients were selected for inclusion. FINDINGS: The etiology of pericarditis may be infectious (eg, viral and bacterial) or noninfectious (eg, systemic inflammatory diseases, cancer, and post-cardiac injury syndromes). Tuberculosis is a major cause of pericarditis in developing countries but accounts for less than 5% of cases in developed countries, where idiopathic, presumed viral causes are responsible for 80% to 90% of cases. The diagnosis is based on clinical criteria including chest pain, a pericardial rub, electrocardiographic changes, and pericardial effusion. Certain features at presentation (temperature >38°C [>100.4°F], subacute course, large effusion or tamponade, and failure of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug [NSAID] treatment) indicate a poorer prognosis and identify patients requiring hospital admission. The most common treatment for idiopathic and viral pericarditis in North America and Europe is NSAID therapy. Adjunctive colchicine can ameliorate the initial episode and is associated with approximately 50% lower recurrence rates. Corticosteroids are a second-line therapy for those who do not respond, are intolerant, or have contraindications to NSAIDs and colchicine. Recurrences may occur in 30% of patients without preventive therapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Pericarditis is the most common form of pericardial disease worldwide and may recur in as many as one-third of patients who present with idiopathic or viral pericarditis. Appropriate triage and treatment with NSAIDs may reduce readmission rates for pericarditis. Treatment with colchicine can reduce recurrence rates.

Diuretic strategies in patients with acute decompensated heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Loop diuretics are an essential component of therapy for patients with acute decompensated heart failure, but there are few prospective data to guide their use. METHODS: In a prospective, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned 308 patients with acute decompensated heart failure to receive furosemide administered intravenously by means of either a bolus every 12 hours or continuous infusion and at either a low dose (equivalent to the patient's previous oral dose) or a high dose (2.5 times the previous oral dose). The protocol allowed specified dose adjustments after 48 hours. The coprimary end points were patients' global assessment of symptoms, quantified as the area under the curve (AUC) of the score on a visual-analogue scale over the course of 72 hours, and the change in the serum creatinine level from baseline to 72 hours. RESULTS: In the comparison of bolus with continuous infusion, there was no significant difference in patients' global assessment of symptoms (mean AUC, 4236±1440 and 4373±1404, respectively; P=0.47) or in the mean change in the creatinine level (0.05±0.3 mg per deciliter [4.4±26.5 µmol per liter] and 0.07±0.3 mg per deciliter [6.2±26.5 µmol per liter], respectively; P=0.45). In the comparison of the high-dose strategy with the low-dose strategy, there was a nonsignificant trend toward greater improvement in patients' global assessment of symptoms in the high-dose group (mean AUC, 4430±1401 vs. 4171±1436; P=0.06). There was no significant difference between these groups in the mean change in the creatinine level (0.08±0.3 mg per deciliter [7.1±26.5 µmol per liter] with the high-dose strategy and 0.04±0.3 mg per deciliter [3.5±26.5 µmol per liter] with the low-dose strategy, P=0.21). The high-dose strategy was associated with greater diuresis and more favorable outcomes in some secondary measures but also with transient worsening of renal function. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute decompensated heart failure, there were no significant differences in patients' global assessment of symptoms or in the change in renal function when diuretic therapy was administered by bolus as compared with continuous infusion or at a high dose as compared with a low dose. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00577135.).

Cardiac titin and heart disease.

The giant sarcomeric protein titin is a key determinant of myocardial passive stiffness and stress-sensitive signaling. Titin stiffness is modulated by isoform variation, phosphorylation by protein kinases, and, possibly, oxidative stress through disulfide bond formation. Titin has also emerged as an important human disease gene. Early studies in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) revealed shifts toward more compliant isoforms, an adaptation that offsets increases in passive stiffness based on the extracellular matrix. Similar shifts are observed in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. In contrast, hypophosphorylation of PKA/G sites contributes to a net increase in cardiomyocyte resting tension in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. More recently, titin mutations have been recognized as the most common etiology of inherited DCM. In addition, some DCM-causing mutations affect RBM20, a titin splice factor. Titin mutations are a rare cause of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and also underlie some cases of arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia. Finally, mutations of genes encoding proteins that interact with and/or bind to titin are responsible for both DCM and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Targeting titin as a therapeutic strategy is in its infancy, but it could potentially involve manipulation of isoforms, posttranslational modifications, and upregulation of normal protein in patients with disease-causing mutations.

Absence of Pericarditis Recurrence in Rilonacept-Treated Patients With COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination: Results From the RHAPSODY Long-term Extension.

Background: Rilonacept inhibits the interleukin-1 pathway, and extended treatment in patients with recurrent pericarditis (RP) reduced recurrence risk by 98% in the phase 3 trial, RHAPSODY long-term extension (LTE). Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2 vaccination and/or infection may trigger pericarditis recurrence, and in clinical practice, it is unknown whether to continue rilonacept during SARS-CoV-2 infection. This post-hoc analysis of the RHAPSODY LTE aimed to inform rilonacept management in RP patients vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 or who contract COVID-19. Methods: Analysis was conducted from May 2020 to June 2022. The LTE portion of RHAPSODY LTE enabled up to 24 months of additional open-label rilonacept treatment beyond the pivotal study. Rilonacept efficacy data in preventing pericarditis recurrence were assessed, and concomitant SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and COVID-19 adverse event data were evaluated. Results: No pericarditis recurrences were temporally associated with vaccination. Sixteen COVID-19 cases were reported; 10 in 30 unvaccinated or partially vaccinated patients (33%) vs 6 of 44 fully vaccinated patients (14%; P = 0.04). Twelve of 16 patients (75%) were receiving rilonacept at the time of infection, and none experienced pericarditis recurrence. One pericarditis recurrence occurred in the peri-COVID-19 period in 1 of 4 patients who had stopped rilonacept treatment > 4.5 months prior. COVID-19 severity was mild in 13 patients, moderate in 2, and severe in 1. Conclusions: Full vaccination effectively reduced COVID-19 events in patients treated with rilonacept. Vaccination or COVID-19 during rilonacept treatment did not increase pericarditis recurrence. Continued rilonacept treatment in patients contracting COVID-19 did not worsen disease severity, whereas rilonacept interruption increased pericarditis recurrence, supporting a recommendation for continued rilonacept treatment for RP during vaccination or COVID-19. ClinicalTrialsgov identifier: NCT03737110.

Contexte: Le rilonacept inhibe la voie de l'interleukine-1 et, d'après les résultats de la période de prolongation à long terme de l'essai de phase III RHAPSODY, la poursuite du traitement par cet agent chez les patients atteints de péricardite récidivante a réduit le risque de récidive de 98 %. La vaccination contre le syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère (SRAS)-CoV-2 ou l'infection à ce virus pourrait toutefois déclencher une récidive de la péricardite, et dans la pratique clinique, on ignore s'il vaut mieux poursuivre le traitement par rilonacept pendant l'infection à SRAS-CoV-2. Cette analyse post-hoc de la période de prolongation à long terme de l'essai RHAPSODY vise à orienter la gestion du rilonacept chez les patients atteints de péricardite récidivante qui sont vaccinés contre le SRAS-CoV-2 ou qui contractent la COVID-19. Méthodologie: L'analyse a été effectuée de mai 2020 à juin 2022. La période de prolongation à long terme de l'essai RHAPSODY a permis d'accumuler des données en mode ouvert pendant une période allant jusqu'à 24 mois au-delà de l'étude pivot. Les données sur l'efficacité du rilonacept en prévention de la récidive de péricardite ont été évaluées, tout comme les données sur la vaccination concomitante contre le SRAS-CoV-2 et les cas de COVID-19. Résultats: Aucune récidive de la péricardite n'a pu être associée sur le plan temporel avec la vaccination. Au total, 16 cas de COVID-19 ont été signalés, dont 10 chez les patients non vaccinés ou partiellement vaccinés sur 30 (33 %) et 6 chez les patients complètement vaccinés sur 44 (14 %; p = 0,04). De ces 16 patients, 12 (75 %) prenaient du rilonacept au moment de l'infection et aucun n'a connu de récidive de la péricardite. Une récidive de la péricardite s'est produite dans la période suivant la COVID-19 chez 1 des 4 patients qui avaient cessé de prendre le rilonacept > 4,5 mois auparavant. La COVID-19 a été légère chez 13 patients, modérée chez 2 patients et sévère chez 1 patient. Conclusions: La vaccination complète a réduit efficacement les cas de COVID-19 chez les patients traités par le rilonacept. La vaccination ou l'infection à SRAS-CoV-2 pendant le traitement par rilonacept n'a pas augmenté le risque de récidive de la péricardite. La poursuite du traitement par rilonacept chez les patients atteints de COVID-19 n'a pas aggravé la sévérité de la maladie, tandis que l'interruption du traitement a augmenté le risque de récidive de la péricardite, ce qui plaide en faveur de la recommandation de poursuivre le traitement de la péricardite récidivante par le rilonacept pendant la vaccination ou la COVID-19. Numéro d'identification ClinicalTrialsgov: NCT03737110.