Cardiac Myosin Activation with Omecamtiv Mecarbil in Systolic Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The selective cardiac myosin activator omecamtiv mecarbil has been shown to improve cardiac function in patients with heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction. Its effect on cardiovascular outcomes is unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned 8256 patients (inpatients and outpatients) with symptomatic chronic heart failure and an ejection fraction of 35% or less to receive omecamtiv mecarbil (using pharmacokinetic-guided doses of 25 mg, 37.5 mg, or 50 mg twice daily) or placebo, in addition to standard heart-failure therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of a first heart-failure event (hospitalization or urgent visit for heart failure) or death from cardiovascular causes. RESULTS: During a median of 21.8 months, a primary-outcome event occurred in 1523 of 4120 patients (37.0%) in the omecamtiv mecarbil group and in 1607 of 4112 patients (39.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86 to 0.99; P = 0.03). A total of 808 patients (19.6%) and 798 patients (19.4%), respectively, died from cardiovascular causes (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.11). There was no significant difference between groups in the change from baseline on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score. At week 24, the change from baseline for the median N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level was 10% lower in the omecamtiv mecarbil group than in the placebo group; the median cardiac troponin I level was 4 ng per liter higher. The frequency of cardiac ischemic and ventricular arrhythmia events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection, those who received omecamtiv mecarbil had a lower incidence of a composite of a heart-failure event or death from cardiovascular causes than those who received placebo. (Funded by Amgen and others; GALACTIC-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02929329; EudraCT number, 2016-002299-28.).

Omecamtiv mecarbil in chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: GALACTIC-HF baseline characteristics and comparison with contemporary clinical trials.

AIMS: The safety and efficacy of the novel selective cardiac myosin activator, omecamtiv mecarbil, in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is being tested in the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC-HF) trial. Here we describe the baseline characteristics of participants in GALACTIC-HF and how these compare with other contemporary trials. METHODS AND RESULTS: Adults with established HFrEF, New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class ≥II, ejection fraction ≤35%, elevated natriuretic peptides and either current hospitalization for heart failure or history of hospitalization/emergency department visit for heart failure within a year were randomized to either placebo or omecamtiv mecarbil (pharmacokinetic-guided dosing: 25, 37.5, or 50 mg bid). A total of 8256 patients [male (79%), non-white (22%), mean age 65 years] were enrolled with a mean ejection fraction 27%, ischaemic aetiology in 54%, NYHA class II 53% and III/IV 47%, and median N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide 1971 pg/mL. Heart failure therapies at baseline were among the most effectively employed in contemporary heart failure trials. GALACTIC-HF randomized patients representative of recent heart failure registries and trials with substantial numbers of patients also having characteristics understudied in previous trials including more from North America (n = 1386), enrolled as inpatients (n = 2084), systolic blood pressure <100 mmHg (n = 1127), estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 (n = 528), and treated with sacubitril/valsartan at baseline (n = 1594). CONCLUSIONS: GALACTIC-HF enrolled a well-treated, high-risk population from both inpatient and outpatient settings, which will provide a definitive evaluation of the efficacy and safety of this novel therapy, as well as informing its potential future implementation.

Comparison of Outcome Adjudication by Investigators and by a Central End Point Committee in Heart Failure Trials: Experience of the SHIFT Heart Failure Study.

BACKGROUND: The usefulness of adjudication by central end point committees (CECs) is poorly assessed in heart failure (HF) trials. We aimed to assess its impact on the outcome of the SHIFT trial (Systolic HF Treatment With the If Inhibitor Ivabradine Trial). METHODS: SHIFT was a randomized placebo-controlled trial investigating the effect of ivabradine in 6505 HF patients with reduced ejection fraction. Prespecified end points, reported by investigators (all cardiologists) using specific case report form pages, included all-cause and specific causes of deaths and hospitalizations. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular deaths or hospitalizations for worsening HF. We compared the adjudication of prespecified end points made by investigators and by the CEC. RESULTS: Investigators identified 7529 prespecified end points, 6793 of which were confirmed by the CEC: 98.1% of cardiovascular deaths, 88.6% of all hospitalizations, and 84.4% of hospitalizations for worsening HF. These differences had no meaningful impact on the study results; hazard ratio for the primary composite end point: investigators, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.76-0.91) versus CEC, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.75-0.90), with similar results for each component of the primary end point (hazard ratio of 0.92 versus 0.91 for cardiovascular death and 0.78 versus 0.74 for hospitalization for worsening HF). CONCLUSIONS: Central adjudication by a CEC in the SHIFT study confirmed most of cardiovascular deaths and worsening HF hospitalizations assessed by cardiologists and did not result in a significant change of the final result as compared to investigator judgment. In this context, the benefits of CEC in blinded HF trials should be reconsidered. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02441218. URL: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN70429960; Unique identifier: ISRCTN70429960.

Omecamtiv Mecarbil in Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: Rationale and Design of GALACTIC-HF.

A central factor in the pathogenesis of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction is the initial decrease in systolic function. Prior attempts at increasing cardiac contractility with oral drugs have uniformly resulted in signals of increased mortality at pharmacologically effective doses. Omecamtiv mecarbil is a novel, selective cardiac myosin activator that has been shown to improve cardiac function and to decrease ventricular volumes, heart rate, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide in patients with chronic HF. The GALACTIC-HF (Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure) trial tests the hypotheses that omecamtiv mecarbil can safely improve symptoms, prevent clinical HF events, and delay CV death in patients with chronic HF. The GALACTIC-HF trial is an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven cardiovascular outcomes trial. More than 8,000 patients with chronic symptomatic (New York Heart Association functional class II to IV) HF, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%, elevated natriuretic peptides, and either current hospitalization for HF or history of hospitalization or emergency department visit for HF within a year of screening will be randomized to either oral placebo or omecamtiv mecarbil employing a pharmacokinetic-guided dose titration strategy using doses of 25, 37.5, or 50 mg twice daily. The primary efficacy outcome is the time to cardiovascular death or first HF event. The study has 90% power to assess a final hazard ratio of approximately 0.80 in cardiovascular death, the first secondary outcome. The GALACTIC-HF trial is the first trial examining whether selectively increasing cardiac contractility in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction will result in improved clinical outcomes. (Registrational Study With Omecamtiv Mecarbil/AMG 423 to Treat Chronic Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction [GALACTIC-HF]; NCT02929329).

Report of the European Society of Cardiology Cardiovascular Round Table regulatory workshop update of the evaluation of new agents for the treatment of acute coronary syndrome: Executive summary.

Regulatory authorities interpret the results of randomized controlled trials according to published principles. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is planning a revision of the 2000 and 2003 guidance documents on clinical investigation of new medicinal products for the treatment of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) to achieve consistency with current knowledge in the field. This manuscript summarizes the key output from a collaborative workshop, organized by the Cardiovascular Round Table and the European Affairs Committee of the European Society of Cardiology, involving clinicians, academic researchers, trialists, European and US regulators, and pharmaceutical industry researchers. Specific questions in four key areas were selected as priorities for changes in regulatory guidance: patient selection, endpoints, methodologic issues and issues related to the research for novel agents. Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) should be studied separately for therapies aimed at the specific pathophysiology of either condition, particularly for treatment of the acute phase, but can be studied together for other treatments, especially long-term therapy. Unstable angina patients should be excluded from acute phase ACS trials. In general, cardiovascular death and reinfarction are recommended for primary efficacy endpoints; other endpoints may be considered if specifically relevant for the therapy under study. New agents or interventions should be tested against a background of evidence-based therapy with expanded follow-up for safety assessment. In conclusion, new guidance documents for randomized controlled trials in ACS should consider changes regarding patient and endpoint selection and definitions, and trial designs. Specific requirements for the evaluation of novel pharmacological therapies need further clarification.