Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 185
Filter
Add more filters

Publication year range
1.
Eur Heart J ; 44(44): 4650-4661, 2023 Nov 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37632738

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) is recommended before mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (MTEER) in patients with heart failure (HF) and severe functional mitral regurgitation (FMR). Whether MTEER is being performed on the background of optimal GDMT in clinical practice is unknown. METHODS: Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50% who underwent MTEER for FMR from 23 July 2019 to 31 March 2022 in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry were identified. Pre-procedure GDMT utilization was assessed. Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to evaluate associations between pre-MTEER therapy (no/single, double, or triple therapy) and risk of 1-year mortality or HF hospitalization (HFH). RESULTS: Among 4199 patients across 449 sites, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors were used in 85.1%, 44.4%, 28.6%, and 19.9% before MTEER, respectively. Triple therapy was prescribed for 19.2%, double therapy for 38.2%, single therapy for 36.0%, and 6.5% were on no GDMT. Significant centre-level variation in the proportion of patients on pre-intervention triple therapy was observed (0%-61%; adjusted median odds ratio 1.48 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-3.88]; P < .001). In patients eligible for 1-year follow-up (n = 2014; 341 sites), the composite rate of 1-year mortality or HFH was lowest in patients prescribed triple therapy (23.0%) compared with double (24.8%), single (35.7%), and no (41.1%) therapy (P < .01 comparing across groups). Associations persisted after accounting for relevant clinical characteristics, with lower risk in patients prescribed triple therapy [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.73, 95% CI .55-.97] and double therapy (aHR 0.69, 95% CI .56-.86) before MTEER compared with no/single therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Under one-fifth of patients with LVEF <50% who underwent MTEER for FMR in this US nationwide registry were prescribed comprehensive GDMT, with substantial variation across sites. Compared with no/single therapy, triple and double therapy before MTEER were independently associated with reduced risk of mortality or HFH 1 year after intervention.


Subject(s)
Heart Failure , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Mitral Valve Insufficiency , Humans , Treatment Outcome , Stroke Volume , Ventricular Function, Left , Mitral Valve Insufficiency/etiology , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Heart Failure/etiology , Registries
2.
J Card Fail ; 29(1): 87-107, 2023 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36243339

ABSTRACT

Heart failure (HF) and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) frequently coexist; 1 comorbidity worsens the prognosis of the other. HF is responsible for almost half the deaths of patients on dialysis. Despite patients' with ESKD composing an extremely high-risk population, they have been largely excluded from landmark clinical trials of HF, and there is, thus, a paucity of data regarding the management of HF in patients on dialysis, and most of the available evidence is observational. Likewise, in clinical practice, guideline-directed medical therapy for HF is often down-titrated or discontinued in patients with ESKD who are undergoing dialysis; this is due to concerns about safety and tolerability. In this state-of-the-art review, we discuss the available evidence for each of the foundational HF therapies in ESKD, review current challenges and barriers to managing patients with HF on dialysis, and outline future directions to optimize the management of HF in these high-risk patients.


Subject(s)
Heart Failure , Kidney Failure, Chronic , Humans , Renal Dialysis , Heart Failure/therapy , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Kidney Failure, Chronic/epidemiology , Kidney Failure, Chronic/therapy , Risk Factors
3.
J Card Fail ; 29(6): 896-906, 2023 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36632934

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine whether circulating modifiers of endothelial function are associated with cardiac structure and clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS: We measured 25 proteins related to endothelial function in 99 patients from the GUIDE-IT study. Protein levels were evaluated for association with echocardiographic parameters and the incidence of all-cause death and hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). RESULTS: Higher concentrations of angiopoietin 2 (ANGPT2), vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1 (VEGFR1) and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) were significantly associated with worse function and larger ventricular volumes. Over time, decreases in ANGPT2 and, to a lesser extent, VEGFR1 and HGF, were associated with improvements in cardiac size and function. Individuals with higher concentrations of ANGPT2, VEGFR1 or HGF had increased risks for a composite of death and HHF in the following year (HR 2.76 (95% CI 1.73-4.40) per 2-fold change in ANGPT2; HR 1.76 (95% CI 1.11-2.79) for VEGFR1; and HR 4.04 (95% CI 2.19-7.44) for HGF). CONCLUSIONS: Proteins related to endothelial function associate with cardiac size, cardiac function and clinical outcomes in patients with HFrEF. These results support the concept that endothelial function may be an important contributor to the progression to and the recovery from HFrEF.


Subject(s)
Heart Failure , Ventricular Dysfunction, Left , Humans , Stroke Volume/physiology , Risk Factors , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A , Cause of Death , Chronic Disease , Ventricular Function, Left/physiology
4.
J Card Fail ; 29(5): 787-804, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37117140

ABSTRACT

Natriuretic peptides, brain (B-type) natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) are globally and most often used for the diagnosis of heart failure (HF). In addition, they can have an important complementary role in the risk stratification of its prognosis. Since the development of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), the use of natriuretic peptides as therapeutic agents has grown in importance. The present document is the result of the Trilateral Cooperation Project among the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, the Heart Failure Society of America and the Japanese Heart Failure Society. It represents an expert consensus that aims to provide a comprehensive, up-to-date perspective on natriuretic peptides in the diagnosis and management of HF, with a focus on the following main issues: (1) history and basic research: discovery, production and cardiovascular protection; (2) diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers: acute HF, chronic HF, inclusion/endpoint in clinical trials, and natriuretic peptides-guided therapy; (3) therapeutic use: nesiritide (BNP), carperitide (ANP) and ARNIs; and (4) gaps in knowledge and future directions.


Subject(s)
Cardiology , Heart Failure , Natriuretic Peptides , Humans , Biomarkers , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Heart Failure/therapy , Natriuretic Peptide, Brain/therapeutic use , Peptide Fragments , Prognosis
5.
Am Heart J ; 251: 115-126, 2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35640729

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend titration of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and beta-blockers among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) to maximally tolerated doses. Patient characteristics associated with dose titration and clinical outcomes subsequent to dose titration remain poorly characterized. METHODS: Among 1999 ambulatory patients with chronic HFrEF in the HF-ACTION trial, use and dosing of ACEi and evidence-based beta-blockers were examined at baseline and 6-month follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess factors associated with dose escalation (medication initation or dosing increase) or dose de-escalation (medication discontinuation or dosing decrease). Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to examine associations between dose trajectory group (stable target, stable sub-target, dose escalation, and dose de-escalation) and subsequent mortality and hospitalization outcomes. RESULTS: For both ACEi and beta-blockers, hospitalization for heart failure in the 6 months prior to enrollment (odds ratio [OR] 2.32 [95% confidence interval 1.58-3.42]) for ACEi; 1.42 [1.05-1.9] for beta-blockers) and higher systolic blood pressure (OR 1.01 [1.00-1.03] per 1 mmHg increase for ACEi; 1.01 [1.00-1.02] for beta-blockers) were associated with dose escalation. Hospitalization 6 months prior to enrollment for any cause (including HF or non-HF causes) was associated with dose de-escalation (OR 1.60 [1.14-2.25] for ACEi; 1.67 [1.20-2.33] for beta-blockers). After adjustment for patient characteristics, compared with stable target dosing, dose de-escalation of either medication was associated with greater all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.64 [1.11-2.42] for ACEi; 1.62 [1.04-2.53] for beta-blockers). Compared with stable target dosing, both dose de-escalation (aHR 1.98 [1.36-2.87]) and stable sub-target dosing (aHR 1.49 [1.18-1.87]) of beta-blockers were associated with greater cardiovascular mortality or hospitalization for heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: Among outpatients with chronic HFrEF, patient characteristics including recent hospitalization status and blood pressure were associated with odds of subsequent escalation and de-escalation of ACEi and beta-blocker therapy. Compared with patients receiving guildeline-recommended target doses, dose de-escalation of either medication and sub-target dosing of beta-blockers were associated with greater morbidity and mortality over long-term follow-up.


Subject(s)
Heart Failure , Ventricular Dysfunction, Left , Adrenergic beta-Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Hospitalization , Humans , Stroke Volume/physiology , Ventricular Dysfunction, Left/drug therapy
6.
J Card Fail ; 28(2): 334-338, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34628013

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Palliative care (PC) in advanced heart failure (HF) aims to improve symptoms and quality of life (QOL), in part through medication management. The impact of PC on polypharmacy (>5 medications) remains unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We explored patterns of polypharmacy in the Palliative Care in HF (PAL-HF) randomized controlled trial of standard care vs interdisciplinary PC in advanced HF (N = 150). We describe differences in medication counts between arms at 2, 6, 12, and 24 weeks for HF (12 classes) and PC (6 classes) medications. General linear mixed models were used to evaluate associations between treatment arm and polypharmacy over time. The median age of the patients was 72 years (interquartile range 62-80 years), 47% were female, and 41% were Black. Overall, 48% had ischemic etiology, and 55% had an ejection fraction of 40% or less. Polypharmacy was present at baseline in 100% of patients. HF and PC medication counts increased in both arms, with no significant differences in counts by drug class at any time point between arms. CONCLUSIONS: In a trial of patients with advanced HF considered eligible for PC, polypharmacy was universal at baseline and increased during follow-up with no effect of the palliative intervention on medication counts relative to standard care.


Subject(s)
Heart Failure , Quality of Life , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Humans , Middle Aged , Palliative Care/methods , Polypharmacy , Stroke Volume
7.
Circulation ; 142(8): 790-798, 2020 08 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32833519

ABSTRACT

Patient access to a drug after US regulatory approval is controlled by complex interactions between governmental and third-party payers, pharmacy benefit managers, distributers, manufacturers, health systems, and pharmacies that together mediate the receipt of goods by patients after prescription by clinicians. Recent medication approvals highlight why and how the distribution of clinically beneficial novel therapies is controlled. Although imposed limitations on availability may be rational considering the fiduciary responsibilities of payers and escalating spending on health care and pharmaceuticals, transparency and communication are lacking, and some utilization management may disproportionately affect vulnerable populations. Analysis of the current health insurance landscape suggests mechanisms by which patient access to appropriate medications can be improved and patient and clinician frustration reduced while acknowledging the financial realities of the pharmaceutical marketplace. We propose creation of a shared, standardized, and transparent process for coverage decisions that minimizes administrative barriers and is defensible on the basis of clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence. These reforms would benefit patients and improve the efficiency of the pharmaceutical system.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , Drug Costs , Insurance, Pharmaceutical Services , Pharmaceutical Preparations/economics , Cardiology/economics , Cardiovascular Diseases/drug therapy , Cardiovascular Diseases/economics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , United States
8.
Am Heart J ; 233: 1-4, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33245905

ABSTRACT

Recognizing that body surface area (BSA) is a commonly used metric to inform medication dosing across fields of medicine, it is possible that patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with higher BSA may be more likely to tolerate higher doses of GDMT. Using the HF-ACTION trial, we examined (1) the relationship between BSA and achievement of target dosing of evidence-based beta-blocker and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) therapy, and (2) the associations and interactions between target dosing, clinical outcomes, and BSA.


Subject(s)
Adrenergic beta-Antagonists/administration & dosage , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Body Surface Area , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Cause of Death , Drug Dosage Calculations , Female , Heart Failure/mortality , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Proportional Hazards Models , Stroke Volume
9.
Am Heart J ; 236: 37-48, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33636137

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Minorities and women are underrepresented in cardiovascular research. Whether their higher enrollment can be predicted or influences research site performance is unclear. METHODS: We evaluated 104 sites that enrolled 4,184 patients in the U.S. Platinum Diversity (PD) and Promus Element Plus (PE Plus) studies (2012 to 2016). Research sites were ranked from lowest to highest minority and female enrollment, respectively. United States Census Bureau division and core-based statistical area (CBSA) populations were determined for each site and the following study performance metrics compared across quartiles of minority and female enrollment, respectively: (1) study subject enrollment rate (SER), (2) time to first patient enrolled, (3) rate of follow-up visits not done, (4) rate of follow-up visits out of window, and (5) protocol deviation rate (PDR). Multivariable regression was used to predict SER and PDR. RESULTS: Minority enrollment varied by region (P = .025) and population (P = .024) with highest recruitment noted in the Pacific, West South Central, South Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic and East North Central divisions. Female enrollment bore no relationship to region (P = .67) or population (P = .40). Median SER was similar in sites withi the highest vs lowest quartile of minority enrollment (SER of 4 vs 5 patients per month, respectively, P =0.78) and highest vs. lowest female enrollment (SER of 4 vs 4, respectively, P = .21). Median PDR was lower in sites within the highest vs lowest minority enrollment (0.23 vs 0.50 PDs per patient per month, respectively, P = .01) and highest vs. lowest female enrollment (0.28 vs. 0.37 PDs per patient per month, respectively, P = .04). However, this relationship did not persist after multivariable adjustment. All other site performance metrics were comparable across quartiles of minority and female enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: Minority, but not female enrollment, correlated with research site geographic region and surrounding population. High enrollment of minorities and women did not influence study performance metrics. These findings help inform future strategies aimed at increasing clinical trial diversity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The PD and PE Plus studies are registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov under identifiers NCT02240810 and NCT01589978, respectively. KEY POINTS: Question: Does the enrollment of more Blacks, Hispanics and women in US cardiovascular research studies influence the overall rate of study subject enrollment and/or other key study site performance metrics and can diverse enrollment be predicted? FINDINGS: In this pooled analysis of 104 sites that enrolled 4,184 patients in the Platinum Diversity and Promus Element Plus Post-Approval Studies, we found that the enrollment of higher proportions of underrepresented minorities and women was univariately associated with lower protocol deviation rates while having no effect on other site performance metrics. A site's geographic location and surrounding population predicted minority, but not female enrollment. Meaning: These findings suggest that cardiovascular research subject diversity may be predicted from site characteristics and enhanced without compromising key study performance metrics. These insights help inform future strategies aimed at improving clinical trial diversity.


Subject(s)
Coronary Artery Disease , Minority Health/statistics & numerical data , Patient Selection , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Women's Health/statistics & numerical data , Clinical Trials as Topic/methods , Clinical Trials as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Coronary Artery Disease/mortality , Coronary Artery Disease/surgery , Drug-Eluting Stents , Female , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Minority Groups/classification , Minority Groups/statistics & numerical data , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/instrumentation , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Registries/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology
10.
J Card Fail ; 27(12): 1359-1366, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34166799

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear why depression is associated with adverse outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF). We examine the relationship between depression and clinical outcomes among patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction managed with guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). METHODS AND RESULTS: Using the GUIDE-IT trial, 894 patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction were stratified according to a history of depression, and Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to examine the association with outcomes. There were 140 patients (16%) in the overall cohort who had depression. They tended to be female (29% vs 46%, P < .001) and White (67% vs 53%, P = .002). There were no differences in GDMT rates at baseline or at 90 days; nor were there differences in target doses of these therapies achieved at 90 days (NS, all). amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels at all time points were similar between the cohorts (P > .05, all). After adjustment, depression was associated with all-cause hospitalizations (hazard ratio, 1.42, 95% confidence interval 1.11-1.81, P < .01), cardiovascular death (hazard ratio, 1.69, 95% confidence interval 1.07-2.68, P = .025), and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.54, 95% confidence interval 1.03-2.32, P = .039). CONCLUSIONS: Depression impacts clinical outcomes in HF regardless of GDMT intensity and amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels. This finding underscores the need for a focus on mental health in parallel to achievement of optimal GDMT in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01685840, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01685840.


Subject(s)
Depression , Heart Failure , Depression/epidemiology , Female , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Hospitalization , Humans , Proportional Hazards Models , Stroke Volume
11.
J Card Fail ; 27(6): 662-669, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33731305

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In a randomized control trial, Palliative Care in Heart Failure (PAL-HF) improved heart failure-related quality of life, though cost-effectiveness remains unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the PAL-HF trial, which provided outpatient palliative care to patients with advanced heart failure. METHODS AND RESULTS: Outcomes for usual care and PAL-HF strategies were compared using a Markov cohort model over 36 months from a payer perspective. The model parameters were informed by PAL-HF trial data and supplemented with meta-analyses and Medicare administrative data. Outcomes included hospitalization, place of death, Medicare expenditures, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Simulated mortality rates were the same for PAL-HF and usual care cohorts, at 89.7% at 36 months. In the base case analysis, the PAL-HF intervention resulted in an incremental gain of 0.03 QALYs and an incremental cost of $964 per patient for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $29,041 per QALY. In 1-way sensitivity analyses, an intervention cost of up to $140 per month is cost effective at $50,000 per QALY. Of 1000 simulations, the PC intervention had a 66.1% probability of being cost effective at a $50,000 willingness-to-pay threshold assuming no decrease in hospitalization. In a scenario analysis, PAL-HF decreased payer spending through reductions in noncardiovascular hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: These results from this single-center trial are encouraging that palliative care for advanced heart failure is an economically attractive intervention. Confirmation of these findings in larger multicenter trials will be an important part of developing the evidence to support more widespread implementation of the PAL-HF palliative care intervention.


Subject(s)
Heart Failure , Palliative Care , Aged , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Heart Failure/therapy , Humans , Medicare , Quality of Life , United States/epidemiology
12.
J Card Fail ; 2021 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33663906

ABSTRACT

In this document, we propose a universal definition of heart failure (HF) as the following: HF is a clinical syndrome with symptoms and or signs caused by a structural and/or functional cardiac abnormality and corroborated by elevated natriuretic peptide levels and or objective evidence of pulmonary or systemic congestion. We propose revised stages of HF as follows. At-risk for HF (Stage A), for patients at risk for HF but without current or prior symptoms or signs of HF and without structural or biomarkers evidence of heart disease. Pre-HF (stage B), for patients without current or prior symptoms or signs of HF, but evidence of structural heart disease or abnormal cardiac function, or elevated natriuretic peptide levels. HF (Stage C), for patients with current or prior symptoms and/or signs of HF caused by a structural and/or functional cardiac abnormality. Advanced HF (Stage D), for patients with severe symptoms and/or signs of HF at rest, recurrent hospitalizations despite guideline-directed management and therapy (GDMT), refractory or intolerant to GDMT, requiring advanced therapies such as consideration for transplant, mechanical circulatory support, or palliative care. Finally, we propose a new and revised classification of HF according to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). The classification includes HF with reduced EF (HFrEF): HF with an LVEF of ≤40%; HF with mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF): HF with an LVEF of 41% to 49%; HF with preserved EF (HFpEF): HF with an LVEF of ≥50%; and HF with improved EF (HFimpEF): HF with a baseline LVEF of ≤40%, a ≥10-point increase from baseline LVEF, and a second measurement of LVEF of >40%.

13.
Circulation ; 140(25): 2108-2118, 2019 12 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31841369

ABSTRACT

Following regulatory guidance set forth in 2008 by the US Food and Drug Administration for new drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus, many large randomized, controlled trials have been conducted with the primary goal of assessing the safety of antihyperglycemic medications on the primary end point of major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Heart failure (HF) was not specifically mentioned in the US Food and Drug Administration guidance and therefore it was not a focus of these studies when planned. Several trials subsequently showed the impact of antihyperglycemic drugs on HF outcomes, which were not originally specified as the primary end point of the trials. The most impressive finding has been the substantial and consistent risk reduction in HF hospitalization seen across 4 trials of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. However, to date, these results have not led to regulatory approval of any of these drugs for a HF indication or a recommendation for use by US HF guidelines. It is therefore important to explore to what extent persuasive treatment effects on nonprimary end points can be used to support regulatory claims and guideline recommendations. This topic was discussed by researchers, clinicians, industry sponsors, regulators, and representatives from professional societies, who convened on the US Food and Drug Administration campus on March 6, 2019. This report summarizes these discussions and the key takeaway messages from this meeting.


Subject(s)
Clinical Trials as Topic/methods , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Cardiovascular Diseases/blood , Cardiovascular Diseases/drug therapy , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Endpoint Determination , Heart Failure/blood , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Humans , Research Report/standards , Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2/blood , Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors/pharmacology , Treatment Outcome
14.
Am Heart J ; 230: 54-58, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32950462

ABSTRACT

Community engagement and rapid translation of findings for the benefit of patients has been noted as a major criterion for NIH decisions regarding allocation of funds for research priorities. We aimed to examine whether the presence of top NIH-funded institutions resulted in a benefit on the cardiovascular and cancer mortality of their local population. METHODS AND RESULTS: Based on the annual NIH funding of every academic medical from 1995 through 2014, the top 10 funded institutes were identified and the counties where they were located constituted the index group. The comparison group was created by matching each index county to another county which lacks an NIH-funded institute based on sociodemographic characteristics. We compared temporal trends of age-standardized cardiovascular mortality between the index counties and matched counties and states. This analysis was repeated for cancer mortality as a sensitivity analysis. From 1980 through 2014, the annual cardiovascular mortality rates declined in all counties. In the index group, the average decline in cardiovascular mortality rate was 51.5 per 100,000 population (95% CI, 46.8-56.2), compared to 49.7 per 100,000 population (95% CI, 45.9-53.5) in the matched group (P = .27). Trends in cardiovascular mortality of the index counties were similar to the cardiovascular mortality trends of their respective states. Cancer mortality rates declined at higher rates in counties with top NIH-funded medical centers (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Cardiovascular mortality rates have decreased with no apparent incremental benefit for communities with top NIH-funded institutions, underscoring the need for an increased focus on implementation science in cardiovascular diseases.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/supply & distribution , Cardiovascular Diseases/mortality , Financing, Government , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Neoplasms/mortality , Academic Medical Centers/economics , Adult , Age Factors , Confidence Intervals , Female , Humans , Male , Mortality/trends , Rural Health Services/supply & distribution , United States/epidemiology , Urban Health Services/supply & distribution
15.
Circulation ; 138(10): 1039-1053, 2018 09 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30354535

ABSTRACT

With few notable exceptions, drug development for heart failure (HF) has become progressively more challenging, and there remain no definitively proven therapies for patients with acute HF or HF with preserved ejection fraction. Inspection of temporal trends suggests an increasing rate of disagreement between early-phase and phase III trial end points. Preliminary results from phase II HF trials are frequently promising, but increasingly followed by disappointing phase III results. Given this potential disconnect, it is reasonable to carefully re-evaluate the purpose, design, and execution of phase II HF trials, with particular attention directed toward the surrogate end points commonly used by these studies. In this review, we offer a critical reappraisal of the role of phase II HF trials and surrogate end points, highlighting challenges in their use and interpretation, lessons learned from past experiences, and specific strengths and weaknesses of various surrogate outcomes. We conclude by proposing a series of approaches that should be considered for the goal of optimizing the efficiency of HF drug development. This review is based on discussions between scientists, clinical trialists, industry and government sponsors, and regulators that took place at the Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists Forum in Washington, DC, on December 2, 2016.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Agents/therapeutic use , Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic/standards , Drug Development/standards , Endpoint Determination/standards , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Research Design/standards , Cardiovascular Agents/adverse effects , Consensus , Heart Failure/diagnostic imaging , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Humans , Treatment Outcome
16.
Am Heart J ; 204: 163-173, 2018 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30121018

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Worsening renal function (WRF) can occur throughout a hospitalization for acute heart failure (HF). However, decongestion can be measured in different ways and the prognostic implications of WRF in the setting of different measures of decongestion are unclear. METHODS: Patients (N = 433) from the ESCAPE were classified by measures of decongestion during hospitalization: hemodynamic (right atrial pressure ≤8 mmHg and/or wedge pressure ≤15 mmHg at discharge), clinical (≤1 sign of congestion at discharge), hemoconcentration (any increase in hemoglobin) and estimated plasma volume using the Hakim formula (5% reduction in plasma volume). WRF was defined as creatinine increase ≥0.3 mg/dl during hospitalization. The association between WRF and 180-day all-cause death was assessed. RESULTS: Successful decongestion was observed in 124 (60%) patients by hemodynamics, 204 (49%) by clinical exam, 173 (47%) by hemoconcentration, and 165 (45%) by plasma volume. There was no agreement between the hemodynamic assessment and other decongestion measures in up to 43% of cases. Persistent congestion with concomitant WRF at discharge was associated with worse outcomes compared to patients without congestion and WRF. Among patients decongested at discharge, in-hospital WRF was not significantly associated with 180-day all-cause death, when using hemodynamic, clinical or estimated plasma volume as measures of decongestion (P > .05 for all markers). CONCLUSIONS: In patients hospitalized for HF, although there was disagreement across common measures of decongestion, in-hospital WRF was not associated with increased hazard of all-cause mortality among patients successfully decongested at discharge.


Subject(s)
Catheterization, Swan-Ganz , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Heart Failure/therapy , Hemodynamics , Kidney/physiopathology , Monitoring, Physiologic/methods , Aged , Creatinine/blood , Female , Heart Failure/blood , Heart Failure/mortality , Hemoglobins/metabolism , Hospitalization , Humans , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Readmission , Plasma Volume , Renal Insufficiency/etiology , Treatment Outcome
17.
Am Heart J ; 201: 40-48, 2018 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29910054

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Sleep-disordered breathing (SDB), including central and obstructive sleep apnea, is a marker of poor prognosis in heart failure (HF) and may worsen cardiac dysfunction over time. Treatment of SDB with adaptive servoventilation (ASV) may reverse pathologic cardiac remodeling in HF patients. METHODS: The Cardiovascular Improvements with Minute Ventilation-targeted Adaptive Servo-Ventilation Therapy in Heart Failure (CAT-HF) trial randomized patients with acute decompensated HF and confirmed SDB to either optimal medical therapy (OMT) or treatment with ASV and OMT. Patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or preserved EF (HFpEF) were included. Echocardiograms, performed at baseline and 6 months, assessed cardiac size and function and evaluated cardiac remodeling over time. The CAT-HF trial was stopped early in response to the SERVE-HF trial, which found increased mortality among HFrEF patients with central sleep apnea treated with ASV. RESULTS: Of the 126 patients enrolled prior to trial cessation, 95 had both baseline and 6-month echocardiograms (77 HFrEF and 18 HFpEF). Among HFrEF patients, both treatment arms demonstrated a significant increase in EF: +4.3% in the ASV group (.0004) and +4.6% in OMT alone (P = .007) and a significant decrease in LV end-systolic volume index: -9.4 mL/m2 in the ASV group (P = .01) and -8.6 mL/m2 in OMT alone (P = .003). Reductions in left atrial (LA) volume and E/e' were greater in the ASV arm, whereas patients receiving OMT alone demonstrated more improvement in right ventricular function. HFpEF patients treated with ASV also had a decrease in LA size that was greater than those receiving OMT alone. Although there were significant intragroup changes within the ASV + OMT and OMT-alone groups, there were no significant intergroup differences at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Significant reverse LV remodeling was seen among HFrEF patients with SDB regardless of treatment allocation. Substantial reductions in LA volume among HFrEF and HFpEF patients receiving ASV suggest that ASV treatment may also improve diastolic function and warrant further investigation.


Subject(s)
Heart Failure/complications , Heart Ventricles/physiopathology , Respiration, Artificial/methods , Sleep Apnea Syndromes/therapy , Stroke Volume/physiology , Ventricular Remodeling/physiology , Diastole , Disease Progression , Echocardiography , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Heart Ventricles/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Sleep Apnea Syndromes/etiology , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
19.
JAMA ; 318(8): 713-720, 2017 08 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28829876

ABSTRACT

Importance: The natriuretic peptides are biochemical markers of heart failure (HF) severity and predictors of adverse outcomes. Smaller studies have evaluated adjusting HF therapy based on natriuretic peptide levels ("guided therapy") with inconsistent results. Objective: To determine whether an amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP)-guided treatment strategy improves clinical outcomes vs usual care in high-risk patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Design, Settings, and Participants: The Guiding Evidence Based Therapy Using Biomarker Intensified Treatment in Heart Failure (GUIDE-IT) study was a randomized multicenter clinical trial conducted between January 16, 2013, and September 20, 2016, at 45 clinical sites in the United States and Canada. This study planned to randomize 1100 patients with HFrEF (ejection fraction ≤40%), elevated natriuretic peptide levels within the prior 30 days, and a history of a prior HF event (HF hospitalization or equivalent) to either an NT-proBNP-guided strategy or usual care. Interventions: Patients were randomized to either an NT-proBNP-guided strategy or usual care. Patients randomized to the guided strategy (n = 446) had HF therapy titrated with the goal of achieving a target NT-proBNP of less than 1000 pg/mL. Patients randomized to usual care (n = 448) had HF care in accordance with published guidelines, with emphasis on titration of proven neurohormonal therapies for HF. Serial measurement of NT-proBNP testing was discouraged in the usual care group. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the composite of time-to-first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality. Prespecified secondary end points included all-cause mortality, total hospitalizations for HF, days alive and not hospitalized for cardiovascular reasons, the individual components on the primary end point, and adverse events. Results: The data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping the study for futility when 894 (median age, 63 years; 286 [32%] women) of the planned 1100 patients had been enrolled with follow-up for a median of 15 months. The primary end point occurred in 164 patients (37%) in the biomarker-guided group and 164 patients (37%) in the usual care group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.98; 95% CI, 0.79-1.22; P = .88). Cardiovascular mortality was 12% (n = 53) in the biomarker-guided group and 13% (n = 57) in the usual care group (HR, 0.94; 95% CI; 0.65-1.37; P = .75). None of the secondary end points nor the decreases in the NT-proBNP levels achieved differed significantly between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In high-risk patients with HFrEF, a strategy of NT-proBNP-guided therapy was not more effective than a usual care strategy in improving outcomes. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01685840.


Subject(s)
Heart Failure/therapy , Natriuretic Peptide, Brain/blood , Peptide Fragments/blood , Aged , Biomarkers/blood , Cardiovascular Diseases/mortality , Female , Heart Failure/blood , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Heart Failure/physiopathology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Single-Blind Method , Stroke Volume , Treatment Failure , Ventricular Dysfunction/drug therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL