Dapagliflozin and Apparent Treatment-Resistant Hypertension in Heart Failure With Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction: The DELIVER Trial.

BACKGROUND: Apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH) is prevalent and associated with adverse outcomes in heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. Less is known about the potential role of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibition in this high-risk population. In this post hoc analysis of the DELIVER trial (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients with Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure), we evaluated clinical profiles and treatment effects of dapagliflozin among participants with aTRH. METHODS: DELIVER participants were categorized on the basis of baseline blood pressure (BP), with aTRH defined as BP ≥140/90 mm Hg (≥130/80 mm Hg if diabetes) despite treatment with 3 antihypertensive drugs including a diuretic. Nonresistant hypertension was defined as BP above threshold but not meeting aTRH criteria. Controlled BP was defined as BP under threshold. Incidence of the primary outcome (cardiovascular death or worsening heart failure event), key secondary outcomes, and safety events was assessed by baseline BP category. RESULTS: Among 6263 DELIVER participants, 3766 (60.1%) had controlled BP, 1779 (28.4%) had nonresistant hypertension, and 718 (11.5%) had aTRH at baseline. Participants with aTRH had more cardiometabolic comorbidities and tended to have higher left ventricular ejection fraction and worse kidney function. Rates of the primary outcome were 8.7 per 100 patient-years in those with controlled BP, 8.5 per 100 patient-years in the nonresistant hypertension group, and 9.5 per 100 patient-years in the aTRH group. Relative treatment benefits of dapagliflozin versus placebo on the primary outcome were consistent across BP categories (Pinteraction=0.114). Participants with aTRH exhibited the greatest absolute reduction in the rate of primary events with dapagliflozin (4.1 per 100 patient-years) compared with nonresistant hypertension (2.7 per 100 patient-years) and controlled BP (0.8 per 100 patient-years). Irrespective of assigned treatment, participants with aTRH experienced a higher rate of reported vascular events, including myocardial infarction and stroke, over study follow-up. Dapagliflozin modestly reduced systolic BP (by ≈1 to 3 mm Hg) without increasing risk of hypotension, hypovolemia, or other serious adverse events, irrespective of BP category, but did not improve the proportion of participants with aTRH attaining goal BP over time. CONCLUSIONS: aTRH was identified in >1 in 10 patients with heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction >40% in DELIVER. Dapagliflozin consistently improved clinical outcomes and was well-tolerated, including among those with aTRH. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03619213.

The Effect of Omecamtiv Mecarbil in Hospitalized Patients as Compared With Outpatients With HFrEF: An Analysis of GALACTIC-HF.

BACKGROUND: In the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac Outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC-HF) trial, omecamtiv mecarbil, compared with placebo, reduced the risk of worsening heart failure (HF) events, or cardiovascular death in patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction. The primary aim of this prespecified analysis was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of omecamtiv mecarbil by randomization setting, that is, whether participants were enrolled as outpatients or inpatients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients were randomized either during a HF hospitalization or as an outpatient, within one year of a worsening HF event (hospitalization or emergency department visit). The primary outcome was a composite of worsening HF event (HF hospitalization or an urgent emergency department or clinic visit) or cardiovascular death. Of the 8232 patients analyzed, 2084 (25%) were hospitalized at randomization. Hospitalized patients had higher N-terminal prohormone of B-type natriuretic peptide concentrations, lower systolic blood pressure, reported more symptoms, and were less frequently treated with a renin-angiotensin system blocker or a beta-blocker than outpatients. The rate (per 100 person-years) of the primary outcome was higher in hospitalized patients (placebo group = 38.3/100 person-years) than in outpatients (23.1/100 person-years); adjusted hazard ratio 1.21 (95% confidence interval 1.12-1.31). The effect of omecamtiv mecarbil versus placebo on the primary outcome was similar in hospitalized patients (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.78-1.01) and outpatients (hazard ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.86-1.02) (interaction P = .51). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction had a higher rate of the primary outcome than outpatients. Omecamtiv mecarbil decreased the risk of the primary outcome both when initiated in hospitalized patients and in outpatients.

Dapagliflozin and diuretic utilization in heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction: the DELIVER trial.

AIMS: Dapagliflozin reduced the combined risk of worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death among patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. In this study, the safety and efficacy of dapagliflozin according to background diuretic therapy and the influence of dapagliflozin on longitudinal diuretic use were evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this pre-specified analysis of the Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the LIVEs of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure (DELIVER) trial, the effects of dapagliflozin vs. placebo were assessed in the following subgroups: no diuretic, non-loop diuretic, and loop diuretic furosemide equivalent doses of <40, 40, and >40 mg, respectively. Of the 6263 randomized patients, 683 (10.9%) were on no diuretic, 769 (12.3%) were on a non-loop diuretic, and 4811 (76.8%) were on a loop diuretic at baseline. Treatment benefits of dapagliflozin on the primary composite outcome were consistent by diuretic use categories (Pinteraction = 0.64) or loop diuretic dose (Pinteraction = 0.57). Serious adverse events were similar between dapagliflozin and placebo arms, irrespective of diuretic use or dosing. Dapagliflozin reduced new initiation of loop diuretics by 32% [hazard ratio (HR) 0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.55-0.84, P < 0.001] but did not influence discontinuations/disruptions (HR 0.98; 95% CI: 0.86-1.13, P = 0.83) in follow-up. First sustained loop diuretic dose increases were less frequent, and sustained dose decreases were more frequent in patients treated with dapagliflozin: net difference of -6.5% (95% CI: -9.4 to -3.6; P < 0.001). The mean dose of loop diuretic increased over time in the placebo arm, a longitudinal increase that was significantly attenuated with treatment with dapagliflozin (placebo-corrected treatment effect of -2.5 mg/year; 95% CI: -1.5, -3.7, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, the clinical benefits of dapagliflozin relative to placebo were consistent across a wide range of diuretic categories and doses with a similar safety profile. Treatment with dapagliflozin significantly reduced new loop diuretic requirement over time.

Sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction: a pre-specified participant-level pooled analysis of PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF.

AIMS: The PARAGLIDE-HF trial demonstrated reductions in natriuretic peptides with sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan in patients with heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction who had a recent worsening HF event, but was not adequately powered to examine clinical outcomes. PARAGON-HF included a subset of PARAGLIDE-HF-like patients who were recently hospitalized for HF. Participant-level data from PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF were pooled to better estimate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in reducing cardiovascular and renal events in HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. METHODS AND RESULTS: Both PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF were multicentre, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled trials of sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan in patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF >40% in PARAGLIDE-HF and ≥45% in PARAGON-HF). In the pre-specified primary analysis, we pooled participants in PARAGLIDE-HF (all of whom were enrolled during or within 30 days of a worsening HF event) with a 'PARAGLIDE-like' subset of PARAGON-HF (those hospitalized for HF within 30 days). We also pooled the entire PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF populations for a broader context. The primary endpoint for this analysis was the composite of total worsening HF events (including first and recurrent HF hospitalizations and urgent visits) and cardiovascular death. The secondary endpoint was the pre-specified renal composite endpoint for both studies (≥50% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline, end-stage renal disease, or renal death). Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced total worsening HF events and cardiovascular death in both the primary pooled analysis of participants with recent worsening HF [n = 1088; rate ratio (RR) 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.99; P = 0.042] and in the pooled analysis of all participants (n = 5262; RR 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75-0.98; P = 0.027). In the pooled analysis of all participants, first nominal statistical significance was reached by Day 9 after randomization, and treatment benefits were larger in those with LVEF ≤60% (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.66-0.91) compared with those with LVEF >60% (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.86-1.40; Pinteraction = 0.021). Sacubitril/valsartan was also associated with lower rates of the renal composite endpoint in the primary pooled analysis [hazard ratio (HR) 0.67; 95% CI 0.43-1.05; P = 0.080] and the pooled analysis of all participants (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.44-0.83; P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: In pooled analyses of PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF, sacubitril/valsartan reduced cardiovascular and renal events among patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. These data provide support for use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, particularly among those with an LVEF below normal, regardless of care setting.

Effects of omecamtiv mecarbil in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction according to blood pressure: the GALACTIC-HF trial.

AIM: Patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and low systolic blood pressure (SBP) have high mortality, hospitalizations, and poorly tolerate evidence-based medical treatment. Omecamtiv mecarbil may be particularly helpful in such patients. This study examined its efficacy and tolerability in patients with SBP ≤100 mmHg enrolled in the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC-HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: The GALACTIC-HF enrolled patients with baseline SBP ≥85 mmHg with a primary outcome of time to cardiovascular death or first heart failure event. In this analysis, patients were divided according to their baseline SBP (≤100 vs. >100 mmHg). Among the 8232 analysed patients, 1473 (17.9%) had baseline SBP ≤100 mmHg and 6759 (82.1%) had SBP >100 mmHg. The primary outcome occurred in 715 (48.5%) and 2415 (35.7%) patients with SBP ≤100 and >100 mmHg, respectively. Patients with lower SBP were at higher risk of adverse outcomes. Omecamtiv mecarbil, compared with placebo, appeared to be more effective in reducing the primary composite endpoint in patients with SBP ≤100 mmHg [hazard ratio (HR), 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.70-0.94] compared with those with SBP >100 mmHg (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.88-1.03; P-value for interaction = 0.051). In both groups, omecamtiv mecarbil did not change SBP values over time and did not increase the risk of adverse events, when compared with placebo. CONCLUSION: In GALACTIC-HF, risk reduction of heart failure outcomes with omecamtiv mecarbil compared with placebo was large and significant in patients with low SBP. Omecamtiv mecarbil did not affect SBP and was well tolerated independent of SBP values.

Influence of atrial fibrillation on efficacy and safety of omecamtiv mecarbil in heart failure: the GALACTIC-HF trial.

AIMS: In GALACTIC-HF, the cardiac myosin activator omecamtiv mecarbil compared with placebo reduced the risk of heart failure events or cardiovascular death in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. We explored the influence of atrial fibrillation or flutter (AFF) on the effectiveness of omecamtiv mecarbil. METHODS AND RESULTS: GALACTIC-HF enrolled patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class II-IV heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%, and elevated natriuretic peptides. We assessed whether the presence or absence of AFF, a pre-specified subgroup, modified the treatment effect for the primary and secondary outcomes, and additionally explored effect modification in patients who were or were not receiving digoxin. Patients with AFF (n = 2245, 27%) were older, more likely to be randomized as an inpatient, less likely to have a history of ischaemic aetiology or myocardial infarction, had a worse NYHA class, worse quality of life, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate, and higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide. The treatment effect of omecamtiv mecarbil was modified by baseline AFF (interaction P = 0.012), with patients without AFF at baseline deriving greater benefit. The worsening of the treatment effect by baseline AFF was significantly more pronounced in digoxin users than in non-users (interaction P = 0.007); there was minimal evidence of effect modification in those patients not using digoxin (P = 0.47) or in digoxin users not in AFF. CONCLUSION: Patients in AFF at baseline were less likely to benefit from omecamtiv mecarbil than patients without AFF, although the attenuation of the treatment effect was disproportionally concentrated in patients with AFF who were also receiving digoxin.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02929329.

Tricuspid Regurgitation and Clinical Outcomes in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is common and is associated with poor outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF). However, data with adjudicated events from fully characterized patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are lacking. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to explore the association between mild or moderate/severe TR and clinical outcomes of patients with HFrEF. METHODS: GALACTIC-HF (Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac Outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure) was a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial comparing omecamtiv mecarbil vs placebo in patients with symptomatic HFrEF. RESULTS: Among the 8,232 patients analyzed in the GALACTIC-HF trial, 8,180 (99%) had data regarding baseline TR (none: n = 6,476 [79%], mild: n = 919 [11%], and moderate/severe: n = 785 [10%]). The primary composite outcome of a first HF event or cardiovascular death occurred in 2,368 (36.6%) patients with no TR, 353 (38.4%) patients with mild TR, and 389 (49.6%) patients with moderate/severe TR. Moderate/severe TR was independently associated with a higher relative risk of the primary composite outcome compared with either no TR (adjusted HR: 1.12 [95% CI: 1.01-1.26]; P = 0.046) or no/mild TR (adjusted HR: 1.14 [95% CI: 1.02-1.27]; P = 0.025) driven predominantly by HF events. The association between moderate/severe TR and clinical outcomes was more pronounced in outpatients with worse renal function, higher left ventricular ejection fraction, and lower N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and bilirubin levels. The beneficial treatment effect of omecamtiv mecarbil vs placebo on clinical outcomes was not modified by TR. CONCLUSIONS: In symptomatic patients with HFrEF, baseline moderate/severe TR was independently associated with cardiovascular death or HF events driven predominantly by HF events. The beneficial treatment effect of omecamtiv mecarbil on the primary outcome was not modified by TR.

Sacubitril/valsartan compared to ramipril in high-risk post-myocardial infarction patients stratified according to use of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists: Insight from the PARADISE MI trial.

AIM: It is unknown whether safety and clinical endpoints by use of sacubitril/valsartan (an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor [ARNI]) are affected by mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) in high-risk myocardial infarction (MI) patients. The aim of this study was to examine whether MRA modifies safety and clinical endpoints by use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with a MI and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and/or pulmonary congestion. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n = 5661) included in the PARADISE MI trial (Prospective ARNI vs. ACE Inhibitor Trial to Determine Superiority in Reducing Heart Failure Events After MI) were stratified according to MRA. Primary outcomes in this substudy were worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death. Safety was defined as symptomatic hypotension, hyperkalaemia >5.5 mmol/L, or permanent drug discontinuation. A total of 2338 patients (41%) were treated with MRA. Safety of ARNI compared to ramipril was not altered significantly by ± MRA, and both groups had similar increase in symptomatic hypotension with ARNI. In patients taking MRA, the risk of hyperkalaemia or permanent drug discontinuation was not significantly altered by ARNI (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). The effect of ARNI compared with ramipril was similar in those who were and were not taking MRA (hazard ratio [HR]MRA 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-1.19 and HRMRA- 0.87, 95% CI 0.71-1.05, for the primary endpoint; p = 0.51 for interaction [Clinical Endpoint Committee adjudicated]); similar findings were observed if investigator-reported endpoints were evaluated (p = 0.61 for interaction). CONCLUSIONS: Use of a MRA did not modify safety or clinical endpoints related to initiation of ARNI compared to ramipril in the post-MI setting in patients with LVSD and/or congestion.

Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibition in Patients With STEMI vs NSTEMI.

BACKGROUND: Patients who sustain an acute myocardial infarction (AMI), including ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), remain at high risk for heart failure (HF), coronary events, and death. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors have been shown to significantly decrease the risk for cardiovascular events in both STEMI and NSTEMI patients. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to determine whether angiotensin-receptor blockade and neprilysin inhibition with sacubitril/valsartan, compared with ramipril, has impact on reducing cardiovascular events according to the type of AMI. METHODS: The PARADISE-MI (Prospective ARNI versus ACE inhibitor trial to DetermIne Superiority in reducing heart failure Events after Myocardial Infarction) trial enrolled patients with AMI complicated by left ventricular dysfunction and/or pulmonary congestion and at least 1 risk-enhancing factor. Patients were randomized to either sacubitril/valsartan or ramipril. The primary endpoint was death from cardiovascular causes or incident HF. In this prespecified analysis, we stratified patients according to AMI type. RESULTS: Of 5,661 enrolled patients, 4,291 (75.8%) had STEMI. These patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities and cardiovascular risk factors than NSTEMI patients. After adjustment for potential confounders, the risk for the primary outcome was marginally higher in NSTEMI vs STEMI patients (adjusted HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.00-1.41), with borderline statistical significance (P = 0.05). The primary composite outcome occurred at similar rates in patients randomized to sacubitril/valsartan vs ramipril in STEMI (10% vs 12%; HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.73-1.04; P = 0.13) and NSTEMI patients (17% vs 17%; HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.75-1.25; P = 0.80; P interaction = 0.53). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with ramipril, sacubitril/valsartan did not significantly decrease the risk for cardiovascular death and HF in patients with AMI complicated by left ventricular dysfunction, irrespective of the type of AMI. (Prospective ARNI vs ACE Inhibitor Trial to Determine Superiority in Reducing Heart Failure Events After MI; NCT02924727).

Effects of Dapagliflozin in Patients in Asia: A Post Hoc Subgroup Analysis From the DELIVER Trial.

Background: Patients with heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction in Asia may have different clinical characteristics and outcomes compared with patients from other parts of the world. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical characteristics, safety, and efficacy of dapagliflozin in patients in Asia vs outside Asia in the DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients with Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure) trial. Methods: In the DELIVER trial, patients with HF and left ventricular ejection fraction >40% were enrolled across 353 sites in 20 countries. The effects of dapagliflozin vs placebo on primary (composite of worsening HF or cardiovascular death) and secondary outcomes were compared in patients from Asia vs outside Asia. Results: Among 6,263 participants, 1,226 (19.6%) were enrolled in Asia. Participants from Asia were less likely to have diabetes, hypertension, history of myocardial infarction, or obesity. After adjusting for clinically relevant characteristics, those in Asia had similar risks of primary composite outcome compared with those from outside Asia (HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.82-1.15). Those in Asia had a lower risk of all-cause mortality compared with those enrolled outside Asia (HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.44-0.66). Enrollment from Asia did not modify the effect of dapagliflozin on the primary outcome (Pinteraction = 0.54). Serious adverse events and rates of drug discontinuation were also balanced in both treatment arms, irrespective of enrollment in Asia vs outside Asia. Conclusions: In the global DELIVER trial, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of CV death or worsening HF events and was well tolerated among participants enrolled in both Asia and other geographic regions.

Blood Pressure and Dapagliflozin in Heart Failure With Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction: DELIVER.

BACKGROUND: Optimizing systolic blood pressure (SBP) in heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction carries a Class I recommendation but with limited evidence. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have antihypertensive effects across cardiovascular disease. OBJECTIVES: The authors examined the interplay between SBP and treatment effects of dapagliflozin on SBP and cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: The authors analyzed 6,263 DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the LIVEs of Patients With PReserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure) participants and related baseline and mean achieved SBP categories (<120, 120-129, 130-139, ≥140 mm Hg) to the primary outcome (cardiovascular death or worsening HF), secondary outcomes, and safety events. They analyzed whether the blood pressure-lowering effects of dapagliflozin accounted for its treatment effects by adjusting for the change in SBP from baseline to 1 month. RESULTS: The average age was 72 ± 10 years and 44% were women. SBP <120 mm Hg was associated with higher HF and mortality events, although amputation and stroke risk increased with higher SBP. Dapagliflozin reduced SBP by 1.8 (95% CI: 1.1-2.5) mm Hg compared with placebo at 1 month. The treatment effect of dapagliflozin on the primary outcome and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score was consistent across SBP (interaction P = 0.15 and P = 0.98, respectively). Adverse events between arms were similar across SBP categories. The treatment effect was not accounted for by reducing blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS: In DELIVER, risk by SBP was augmented in the lowest and highest categories and varied by endpoint examined. Dapagliflozin modestly decreased SBP compared with placebo. Dapagliflozin was similarly efficacious and safe across the range of baseline SBP. The beneficial effects of dapagliflozin were not accounted for the changes in SBP. (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the LIVEs of Patients With PReserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure [DELIVER]; NCT03619213).

Efficacy of omecamtiv mecarbil in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction according to N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level: insights from the GALACTIC-HF trial.

AIM: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is predictive of both outcomes and response to treatment in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The aim of this study was to examine the effect of the cardiac myosin activator omecamtiv mecarbil according to baseline NT-proBNP level in the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure trial (GALACTIC-HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: The primary outcome was the composite of a worsening heart failure event (urgent clinic visit, emergency department visit, or hospitalization) or cardiovascular death. We prespecified analysis of the effect of treatment according to baseline NT-proBNP (≤ median, > median), excluding individuals with atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL). Of the 8232 patients analysed, 8206 had an available baseline NT-proBNP measurement. Among the 5971 patients not in AF/AFL, the median (Q1-Q3) NT-proBNP level was 1675 (812-3579) pg/ml. Hazard ratios (HR) for the effect of omecamtiv mecarbil, compared with placebo, for the primary endpoint in patients without AF/AFL were: ≤ median 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-1.09), > median 0.81 (0.73-0.90) (p-interaction = 0.095); for the overall population (including patients with AF/AFL) the HRs were ≤ median 1.01 (0.90-1.15) and > median 0.88 (0.80-0.96) (p-interaction = 0.035). There was an interaction between treatment and NT-proBNP, examined as a continuous variable, with greater effect of omecamtiv mecarbil on the primary outcome in patients with a higher baseline NT-proBNP (p-interaction = 0.086). CONCLUSIONS: In GALACTIC-HF, the benefit of omecamtiv mecarbil appeared to be larger in patients with higher baseline NT-proBNP levels, especially in patients without AF/AFL. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02929329; EudraCT number, 2016-002299-28.

Omecamtiv Mecarbil in Black Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: Insights From GALACTIC-HF.

BACKGROUND: Omecamtiv mecarbil improves cardiovascular outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (EF). Consistency of drug benefit across race is a key public health topic. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of omecamtiv mecarbil among self-identified Black patients. METHODS: In GALACTIC-HF (Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac Outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure) patients with symptomatic HF, elevated natriuretic peptides, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35% were randomized to omecamtiv mecarbil or placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of time to first event of HF or cardiovascular death. The authors analyzed treatment effects in Black vs White patients in countries contributing at least 10 Black participants. RESULTS: Black patients accounted for 6.8% (n = 562) of overall enrollment and 29% of U.S. enrollment. Most Black patients enrolled in the United States, South Africa, and Brazil (n = 535, 95%). Compared with White patients enrolled from these countries (n = 1,129), Black patients differed in demographics, comorbid conditions, received higher rates of medical therapy and lower rates of device therapies, and experienced higher overall event rates. The effect of omecamtiv mecarbil was consistent in Black vs White patients, with no difference in the primary endpoint (HR = 0.83 vs 0.88, P-interaction = 0.66), similar improvements in heart rate and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and no significant safety signals. Among endpoints, the only nominally significant treatment-by-race interaction was the placebo-corrected change in blood pressure from baseline in Black vs White patients (+3.4 vs -0.7 mm Hg, P for interaction = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: GALACTIC-HF enrolled more Black patients than other recent HF trials. Black patients treated with omecamtiv mecarbil had similar benefit and safety compared with White counterparts.

Influence of background medical therapy on efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in patients with heart failure with improved ejection fraction in the DELIVER trial.

AIMS: The Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients with Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure (DELIVER) trial demonstrated the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor dapagliflozin to be beneficial in patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF) with improved ejection fraction (HFimpEF; those with prior left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% that had improved to >40% by enrolment). Whether this benefit differs by background medical therapy is unclear. The current study aims to determine the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin among patients with HFimpEF by background medical therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: Treatment effects on the primary endpoint (worsening HF or cardiovascular death) were assessed by number of background HF medical therapies (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, evidence-based beta-blocker, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist). Among the 6263 patients randomized in DELIVER, 1151 (18%) had HFimpEF. Of those, 21% of patients were on 0-1 therapies, 44% were on two therapies, and 35% were on three therapies. During 2.3 years of median follow-up, the incidence rate of the primary outcome was 9.7, 8.8, and 8.4 per 100 person-years for patients on 0-1, 2 and 3 HF medications at baseline, respectively. Treatment effects with dapagliflozin on the primary outcome may be greater in patients with HFimpEF on 0-1 therapies at baseline (pinteraction = 0.09), driven mostly by a significant interaction for HF hospitalization (pinteraction = 0.023) with no evidence of effect modification for cardiovascular death (pinteraction = 0.65). Treatment effects of dapagliflozin on the primary outcome were, however, consistent when assessed across the modified Heart Failure Collaboratory Medical Therapy Score integrating both therapeutic use and dosing (pinteraction = 0.39). The use of dapagliflozin was not associated with changes in use or doses of background HF therapies, and among patients on three HF medications at baseline, the addition of dapagliflozin did not lead to higher adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HFimpEF, the safety and efficacy of dapagliflozin were largely similar by background use and dosing of HF medical therapies. The benefit of dapagliflozin in reducing HF events tended to be greater in those patients on 0-1 medications at baseline. Among patients already on three HF medical therapies, the addition of dapagliflozin was safe without requiring de-escalation of other therapies.

Cardio-Renal-Metabolic Overlap, Outcomes, and Dapagliflozin in Heart Failure With Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Cardio-renal-metabolic (CRM) conditions are individually common among patients with heart failure (HF), but the prevalence and influence of overlapping CRM conditions in this population have not been well-studied. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to evaluate the impact of overlapping CRM conditions on clinical outcomes and treatment effects of dapagliflozin in HF. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure), we evaluated the prevalence of comorbid CRM conditions (atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, and type 2 diabetes), their impact on the primary outcome (cardiovascular death or worsening HF), and treatment effects of dapagliflozin by CRM status. RESULTS: Among 6,263 participants, 1,952 (31%), 2,245 (36%), and 1,236 (20%) had 1, 2, and 3 additional CRM conditions, respectively. HF alone was uncommon (13%). Greater CRM multimorbidity was associated with older age, higher body mass index, longer-duration HF, worse health status, and lower left ventricular ejection fraction. Risk of the primary outcome increased with higher CRM overlap, with 3 CRM conditions independently associated with highest risk of primary events (adjusted HR: 2.16 [95% CI: 1.72-2.72]; P < 0.001) compared with HF alone. Relative benefits of dapagliflozin on the primary outcome were consistent irrespective of the type of CRM overlap (Pinteraction = 0.773) and by the number of CRM conditions (Pinteraction = 0.734), with greatest absolute benefits among those with highest CRM multimorbidity. Estimated 2-year numbers needed to treat with dapagliflozin to prevent 1 primary event were approximately 52, 39, 33, and 24 for participants with 0, 1, 2, and 3 additional CRM conditions at baseline, respectively. Adverse events between treatment arms were similar across the CRM spectrum. CONCLUSIONS: CRM multimorbidity was common and associated with adverse outcomes among patients with HF and left ventricular ejection fraction >40% in DELIVER. Dapagliflozin was safe and effective across the CRM spectrum, with greater absolute benefits among those with highest CRM overlap (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the LIVEs of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure [DELIVER]; NCT03619213).

Renal and blood pressure effects of dapagliflozin in recently hospitalized patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction: Insights from the DELIVER trial.

AIMS: Patients recently hospitalized for heart failure (HF) often have unstable haemodynamics and experience worsening renal failure, and are at elevated risk for recurrent HF events. In DELIVER, dapagliflozin reduced HF events or cardiovascular death including among patients who were hospitalized or recently hospitalized. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined the effects of dapagliflozin versus placebo on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) slope (acute and chronic), 1-month change in systolic blood pressure, and the occurrence of serious hypovolaemic or renal adverse events in patients with and without HF hospitalization within 30 days of randomization. The 654 (90 randomized during hospitalization, 147 1-7 days post-discharge and 417 8-30 days post-discharge) recently hospitalized patients had lower baseline eGFR compared with those without recent HF hospitalization (median [interquartile range] 55 [43, 71] vs. 60 [47, 75] ml/min/1.73 m2 ). Dapagliflozin consistently reduced the risk of all-cause (pinteraction = 0.20), cardiac-related (pinteraction = 0.75), and HF-specific (pinteraction = 0.90) hospitalizations, irrespective of recent HF hospitalization. In those recently hospitalized, acute placebo-corrected eGFR reductions with dapagliflozin were modest and similar to patients without recent hospitalization (-2.0 [-4.1, +0.1] vs. -3.4 [-3.9, -2.9] ml/min/1.73 m2 , pinteraction = 0.12). Dapagliflozin's effect to slow chronic eGFR decline was similar regardless of recent hospitalization (pinteraction = 0.57). Dapagliflozin had a minimal effect on 1-month systolic blood pressure and to a similar degree in patients with and without recent hospitalization (-1.3 vs.-1.8 mmHg, pinteraction = 0.64). There was no treatment-related excess in renal or hypovolaemic serious adverse events, irrespective of recent HF hospitalization. CONCLUSION: In patients recently hospitalized with HF, initiation of dapagliflozin had minimal effects on blood pressure and did not increase renal or hypovolaemic serious adverse events, yet afforded long-term cardiovascular and kidney protective effects. These data suggest that the benefit to risk ratio favours initiation of dapagliflozin among stabilized patients hospitalized or recently hospitalized for HF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03619213.

Effects of dapagliflozin on heart failure hospitalizations according to severity of inpatient course: Insights from DELIVER and DAPA-HF.

AIMS: Dapagliflozin resulted in significant and sustained reductions in first and recurrent heart failure (HF) hospitalizations among patients with HF across the spectrum of ejection fraction. How treatment with dapagliflozin differentially impacts hospitalization for HF of varying complexity is not well studied. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the DELIVER and DAPA-HF trials, we examined the effects of dapagliflozin on adjudicated HF hospitalizations of varying complexity and hospital length of stay (LOS). HF hospitalizations requiring intensive care unit stay, intravenous vasoactive therapies, invasive/non-invasive ventilation, mechanical fluid removal or mechanical circulatory support were categorized as complicated. The balance was classified as uncomplicated. Of the total 1209 HF hospitalizations reported in DELIVER, 854 (71%) were uncomplicated and 355 (29%) were complicated. Of the total 799 HF hospitalizations reported in DAPA-HF, 453 (57%) were uncomplicated and 346 (43%) were complicated. Relative to patients experiencing a first uncomplicated HF hospitalization, those with complicated HF hospitalizations had a significantly higher in-hospital mortality both in DELIVER (16.7% vs. 2.3%, p < 0.001) and DAPA-HF (15.1% vs. 3.8%, p < 0.001). Dapagliflozin similarly reduced total 'uncomplicated' (DELIVER: rate ratio [RR] 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.82 and DAPA-HF: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54-0.87) and 'complicated' HF hospitalizations (DELIVER: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.63-1.06 and DAPA-HF: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58-0.97). Dapagliflozin consistently reduced hospitalizations irrespective of their LOS: <5 days (DELIVER: RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.58-0.99 and DAPA-HF: RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42-0.80) or ≥5 days (DELIVER: RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.58-0.86 and DAPA-HF: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62-0.94). CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of hospitalizations (∼30-40%) among patients with HF irrespective of ejection fraction required intensification of treatment beyond standard intravenous diuretics. Such patients experienced significantly higher in-hospital mortality. Treatment with dapagliflozin consistently reduced HF hospitalizations regardless of severity of inpatient course or LOS. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, DELIVER (NCT03619213) and DAPA-HF (NCT03036124).

Dapagliflozin in Heart Failure With Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction According to Polypharmacy Status.

BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure (HF) have a high burden of multimorbidity, often necessitating numerous medications. There may be clinical concern about introducing another medication, especially among individuals with polypharmacy. OBJECTIVES: This study examined the efficacy and safety of addition of dapagliflozin according to the number of concomitant medications in HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of the DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure) trial, 6,263 participants with symptomatic HF with left ventricular ejection fraction >40% were randomized to dapagliflozin or placebo. Baseline medication use (including vitamins and supplements) was collected. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed by medication use categories ("nonpolypharmacy": <5 medications; "polypharmacy": 5 to 9 medications; and "hyperpolypharmacy": ≥10 medications) and continuously. The primary outcome was worsening HF or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: Overall, 3,795 (60.6%) patients met polypharmacy and 1,886 (30.1%) met hyperpolypharmacy criteria. Higher numbers of medications were strongly associated with higher comorbidity burden and increased rates of the primary outcome. Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin similarly reduced the risk of the primary outcome irrespective of polypharmacy status (nonpolypharmacy HR: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.58-1.34]; polypharmacy HR: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.75-1.03]; hyperpolypharmacy HR: 0.73 [95% CI: 0.60-0.88]; Pinteraction = 0.30). Similarly, benefits with dapagliflozin were consistent across the spectrum of total medication use (Pinteraction = 0.06). Although adverse events increased with higher number of medications, they were not more frequent with dapagliflozin, regardless of polypharmacy status. CONCLUSIONS: In the DELIVER trial, dapagliflozin safely reduced worsening HF or cardiovascular death across a broad range of baseline medication use, including among individuals with polypharmacy (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure [DELIVER]; NCT03619213).

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.