Heart failure pharmacotherapy and cancer: pathways and pre-clinical/clinical evidence.

Heart failure (HF) patients have a significantly higher risk of new-onset cancer and cancer-associated mortality, compared to subjects free of HF. While both the prevention and treatment of new-onset HF in patients with cancer have been investigated extensively, less is known about the prevention and treatment of new-onset cancer in patients with HF, and whether and how guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for HF should be modified when cancer is diagnosed in HF patients. The purpose of this review is to elaborate and discuss the effects of pillar HF pharmacotherapies, as well as digoxin and diuretics on cancer, and to identify areas for further research and novel therapeutic strategies. To this end, in this review, (i) proposed effects and mechanisms of action of guideline-directed HF drugs on cancer derived from pre-clinical data will be described, (ii) the evidence from both observational studies and randomized controlled trials on the effects of guideline-directed medical therapy on cancer incidence and cancer-related outcomes, as synthetized by meta-analyses will be reviewed, and (iii) considerations for future pre-clinical and clinical investigations will be provided.

New pharmacological agents and novel cardiovascular pharmacotherapy strategies in 2023.

Although cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of death worldwide, their pharmacotherapy remains suboptimal. Thus, there is a clear unmet need to develop more effective and safer pharmacological strategies. In this review, we summarize the most relevant advances in cardiovascular pharmacology in 2023, including the approval of first-in-class drugs that open new avenues for the treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and heart failure. The new indications of drugs already marketed (repurposing) for the treatment of obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, hypercholesterolemia, type 2 diabetes, obesity and heart failure, the impact of polypharmacy on guideline-directed drug use is highlighted as well as results from negative clinical trials. Finally, we end with a summary of the most important phase 2 and 3 clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of cardiovascular drugs under development for the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular diseases.

Characteristics of patients with recurrent acute myocardial infarction after MINOCA.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial infarction (MI) with non-obstructed coronary arteries (MINOCA) is an increasingly recognized condition with challenging management. Some MINOCA patients ultimately experience recurrent acute MI (re-AMI) during follow-up; however, clinical and angiographic factors predisposing to re-AMI are still poorly defined. METHODS: In this retrospective multicenter cohort study we enrolled consecutive patients fulfilling diagnostic criteria of MINOCA according to the IV universal definition of myocardial infarction; characteristics of patients experiencing re-AMI during the follow-up were compared to a group of MINOCA patients without re-AMI. RESULTS: 54 patients (mean age 66 ± 13) experienced a subsequent re-AMI after MINOCA and follow-up was available in 44 (81%). Compared to MINOCA patients without re-AMI (n = 695), on first invasive coronary angiography (ICA) MINOCA patients with re-AMI showed less frequent angiographically normal coronaries (37 versus 53%, p = 0.032) and had a higher prevalence of atherosclerosis involving 3 vessels or left main stem (17% versus 8%, p = 0.049). Twenty-four patients (44%) with re-AMI underwent a new ICA: 25% had normal coronary arteries, 12.5% had mild luminal irregularities (<30%), 20.8% had moderate coronary atherosclerosis (30-49%), and 41.7% showed obstructive coronary atherosclerosis (≥50% stenosis). Among patients undergoing new ICA, atherosclerosis progression was observed in 11 (45.8%), 37.5% received revascularization, only 4.5% had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL_C) under 55 mg/dL and 33% experienced a new cardiovascular disease (CVD) event (death, AMI, heart failure, stroke) at subsequent follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, only a minority of MINOCA patients with re-AMI underwent a repeated ICA, nearly one out of two showed atherosclerosis progression, often requiring revascularization. Recommended LDL-C levels were achieved only in a minority of the cases, indicating a possible underestimation of CVD risk in this population.

Characterisation of Ferritin-Lymphocyte Ratio in COVID-19.

Introduction: The ferritin-lymphocyte ratio (FLR) is a novel inflammatory biomarker for the assessment of acute COVID-19 patients. However, the prognostic value of FLR for predicting adverse clinical outcomes in COVID-19 remains unclear, which hinders its clinical translation. Methods: We characterised the prognostic value of FLR in COVID-19 patients, as compared to established inflammatory markers. Results: In 217 study patients (69 years [IQR: 55-82]; 60% males), FLR was weakly correlated with CRP (R = 0.108, p = 0.115) and white cell count (R = -0.144; p = 0.034). On ROC analysis, an FLR cut-off of 286 achieved a sensitivity of 86% and a specificity of 30% for predicting inpatient mortality (AUC 0.60, 95% CI: 0.53-0.67). The negative predictive values of FLR for ruling out mortality, non-invasive ventilation requirement and critical illness (intubation and/or ICU admission) were 86%, 85% and 93%, respectively. FLR performed similarly to CRP (AUC 0.60 vs. 0.64; p = 0.375) for predicting mortality, but worse than CRP for predicting non-fatal outcomes (all p < 0.05). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, COVID-19 patients with FLR values > 286 had worse inpatient survival than patients with FLR ≤ 286, p = 0.041. Conclusions: FLR has prognostic value in COVID-19 patients, and appears unrelated to other inflammatory markers such as CRP and WCC. FLR exhibits high sensitivity and negative predictive values for adverse clinical outcomes in COVID-19, and may be a good "rule-out" test. Further work is needed to improve the sensitivity of FLR and validate its role in prospective studies for guiding clinical management.

Sex Differences in Quality of Life in Patients with Ischemia with No Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease (INOCA): A Patient Self-Report Retrospective Survey from INOCA International.

Women with obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) have a relatively lower quality of life (QoL) compared to men, but our understanding of sex differences in QoL in ischemia with no obstructive coronary artery disease (INOCA) is limited. We conducted a survey of patient members of INOCA International with an assessment of self-reported health measures. Functional capacity was retrospectively estimated using the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI), assessing levels of activities performed before and after INOCA symptom onset. Of the 1579 patient members, the overall survey completion rate was 21%. Women represented 91% of the respondents. Estimated functional capacity, expressed as metabolic equivalents (METs), was higher before compared to after INOCA diagnosis comparably for both women and men. For every one MET decline in functional capacity, there was a significantly greater decline in QoL for men compared with women in physical health (4.0 ± 1.1 vs. 2.9 ± 0.3 days/month, p < 0.001), mental health (2.4 ± 1.2 vs. 1.8 ± 0.3 days/month, p = 0.001), and social health/recreational activities (4.1 ± 1.0 vs. 2.9 ± 0.3 days/month, p = 0.0001), respectively. In an international survey of patients living with INOCA, despite similar diagnoses, clinical comorbidities, and symptoms, INOCA-related functional capacity declines are associated with a greater adverse impact on QoL in men compared to women.

Low CRB-65 Scores Effectively Rule out Adverse Clinical Outcomes in COVID-19 Irrespective of Chest Radiographic Abnormalities.

Background: CRB-65 (Confusion; Respiratory rate ≥ 30/min; Blood pressure ≤ 90/60 mmHg; age ≥ 65 years) is a risk score for prognosticating patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. However, a significant proportion of COVID-19 patients have normal chest X-rays (CXRs). The influence of CXR abnormalities on the prognostic value of CRB-65 is unknown, limiting its wider applicability. Methods: We assessed the influence of CXR abnormalities on the prognostic value of CRB-65 in COVID-19. Results: In 589 study patients (71 years (IQR: 57-83); 57% males), 186 (32%) had normal CXRs. On ROC analysis, CRB-65 performed similarly in patients with normal vs. abnormal CXRs for predicting inpatient mortality (AUC 0.67 ± 0.05 vs. 0.69 ± 0.03). In patients with normal CXRs, a CRB-65 of 0 ruled out mortality, NIV requirement and critical illness (intubation and/or ICU admission) with negative predictive values (NPVs) of 94%, 98% and 99%, respectively. In patients with abnormal CXRs, a CRB-65 of 0 ruled out the same endpoints with NPVs of 91%, 83% and 86%, respectively. Patients with low CRB-65 scores had better inpatient survival than patients with high CRB-65 scores, irrespective of CXR abnormalities (all p < 0.05). Conclusions: CRB-65, CXR and CRP are independent predictors of mortality in COVID-19. Adding CXR findings (dichotomised to either normal or abnormal) to CRB-65 does not improve its prognostic accuracy. A low CRB-65 score of 0 may be a good rule-out test for adverse clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients with normal or abnormal CXRs, which deserves prospective validation.

Changes in circulating ApoJ-Glyc levels in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome: The EDICA trial.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial ischemia induces intracellular accumulation of non-glycosylated apolipoprotein J that results in a reduction of circulating glycosylated ApoJ (ApoJ-Glyc). The latter has been suggested to be a marker of transient myocardial ischemia. OBJECTIVE: This proof-of-concept clinical study aimed to assess whether changes in circulating ApoJ-Glyc could detect myocardial ischemia in patients attending the emergency department (ED) with chest pain suggestive of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: In suspected ACS patients, EDICA (Early Detection of Myocardial Ischemia in Suspected Acute Coronary Syndromes by ApoJ-Glyc a Novel Pathologically based Ischemia Biomarker), a multicentre, international, cohort study assessed changes in 2 glycosylated variants of ApoJ-Glyc, (ApoJ-GlycA2 and ApoJ-GlycA6), in serum samples obtained at ED admission (0 h), and 1 h and 3 h thereafter, blinded to the clinical diagnosis (i.e. STEMI, NSTEMI, unstable angina, non-ischemic). RESULTS: 404 patients were recruited; 291 were given a clinical diagnosis of "non-ischemic" chest pain and 113 were considered to have had an ischemic event. ApoJ-GlycA6 was lower on admission in ischemic compared with "non-ischemic" patients (66 [46-90] vs. 73 [56-95] µg/ml; P = 0.04). 74% of unstable angina patients (all with undetectable hs-Tn), had ischemic changes in ApoJ-Glyc at 0 h and 89% at 1 h. Initially low ApoJ-Glyc levels in 62 patients requiring coronary revascularization increased significantly after successful percutaneous intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Circulating ApoJ-Glyc concentrations decrease early in ED patients with myocardial ischemia compared with "non-ischemic" patients, even in the absence of troponin elevations. ApoJ-Glyc may be a useful marker of myocardial ischemia in the ED setting.

Between-Sex Differences in Risk Factors for Cardiovascular Disease among Patients with Myocardial Infarction-A Systematic Review.

Between-sex differences in the presentation, risk factors, management, and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction (MI) are well documented. However, as such differences are highly sensitive to cultural and social changes, there is a need to continuously re-evaluate the evidence. The present contemporary systematic review assesses the baseline characteristics of men and women presenting to secondary, tertiary, and quaternary centres with acute myocardial infarction (MI). Over 1.4 million participants from 18 studies, including primary prospective, cross sectional and retrospective observational studies, as well as secondary analysis of registry data are included in the study. The study showed that women were more likely than men to have a previous diagnosis of diabetes, hypertension, cerebrovascular disease, and heart failure. They also had lower odds of presenting with previous ischaemic heart disease and angina, dyslipidaemia, or a smoking history. Further work is necessary to understand the reasons for these differences, and the role that gender-specific risk factors may have in this context. Moreover, how these between-gender differences are implicated in management and outcomes also requires further work.

A Novel ELISA for the Quantification of Serum Levels of 2 Glycosylated Variants of Apolipoprotein J: Biomarkers for Myocardial Ischemia.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have pointed out a potential role of ApoJ-Glyc as a biomarker of cardiac ischemia. The aim of this study was to validate the analytical performance of 2 novel ELISAs against 2 different glycosylated ApoJ variants, ApoJ-GlycA2 and ApoJ-GlycA6. METHODS: The analytical measuring range, limit of blank (LoB), lower limit of quantification (LoQ), precision, accuracy, recovery, cross-reactivity, and stability were evaluated in serum samples. RESULTS: The analytical measuring range was 500-16 000 ng/mL for ApoJ-GlycA2 and 125-4000 ng/mL for ApoJ-GlycA6, with a LoB of 455 ng/mL and 121 ng/mL for ApoJ-GlycA2 and ApoJ-GlycA6, respectively. The LoQ was 500 ng/mL for ApoJ-GlycA2 and 125 ng/mL for ApoJ-GlycA6. The assay performance fulfills the acceptance criteria established in the European Medicines Agency Guideline on bioanalytical method validation. Specifically, the calibration range variability is <15% for ApoJ-GlycA2 and ApoJ-GlycA6; the accuracy is <15% for ApoJ-GlycA2 and ApoJ-GlycA6; the between- and within-run precision is <15% for ApoJ-GlycA6 and ≤20% for ApoJ-GlycA2; and the total allowable error is <30% for ApoJ-GlycA2 and ApoJ-GlycA6. Cross-reactivity studies revealed the absence of cross-reactivity with endogenous components of the matrix (using ApoJ-depleted serum), with nonglycosylated ApoJ and with transferrin (as a high abundant N-glycosylated serum protein). Both ApoJ-GlycA2 and ApoJ-GlycA6 measurements were stable after storage of serum samples at -80°C for 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed ELISAs to quantify ApoJ-GlycA2 and ApoJ-GlycA6 serum levels showed an acceptable analytical performance according to European Medicines Agency guidelines on bioanalytical method validation in terms of precision, accuracy, recovery, cross-reactivity, and stability.

Triglycerides revisited: is hypertriglyceridaemia a necessary therapeutic target in cardiovascular disease?

Despite the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk reduction achieved by low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering therapy, residual ASCVD risk still exists. Previous epidemiological studies have suggested high plasma triglyceride (TG) levels as a risk factor or risk marker for ASCVD independent of LDL-C levels. In this review, we highlighted the underlying pathophysiology of hypertriglyceridaemia, the mechanistic action of therapeutic agents, the interpretation of conflicting results on recent clinical trials, and the present options for primary and secondary prevention. The benefits of fibrates-induced reduction in TG and increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol might outweigh the disadvantages of increasing LDL-C levels in primary prevention. In secondary CVD prevention, using eicosapentaenoic acid without docosahexaenoic acid, in addition to statins, will be beneficial. This comprehensive review may prove useful for the development of novel approaches that target hypertriglyceridaemia in future.

Comparison of Lymphocyte-CRP Ratio to Conventional Inflammatory Markers for Predicting Clinical Outcomes in COVID-19.

Background: In COVID-19 patients, lymphocyte-CRP ratio (LCR) is a promising biomarker for predicting adverse clinical outcomes. How well LCR performs compared to conventional inflammatory markers for prognosticating COVID-19 patients remains unclear, which hinders the clinical translation of this novel biomarker. Methods: In a cohort of COVID-19 inpatients, we characterised the clinical applicability of LCR by comparing its prognostic value against conventional inflammatory markers for predicting inpatient mortality and a composite of mortality, invasive/non-invasive ventilation and intensive care unit admissions. Results: Of the 413 COVID-19 patients, 100 (24%) patients suffered inpatient mortality. On Receiver Operating Characteristics analysis, LCR performed similarly to CRP for predicting mortality (AUC 0.74 vs. 0.71, p = 0.049) and the composite endpoint (AUC 0.76 vs. 0.76, p = 0.812). LCR outperformed lymphocyte counts (AUC 0.74 vs. 0.66, p = 0.002), platelet counts (AUC 0.74 vs. 0.61, p = 0.003) and white cell counts (AUC 0.74 vs. 0.54, p < 0.001) for predicting mortality. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, patients with a low LCR (below a 58 cut-off) had worse inpatient survival than patients with other LCR values (p < 0.001). Conclusion: LCR appears comparable to CRP, but outperformed other inflammatory markers, for prognosticating COVID-19 patients. Further studies are required to improve the diagnostic value of LCR to facilitate clinical translation.

New pharmacological agents and novel cardiovascular pharmacotherapy strategies in 2022.

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) remain the leading cause of death worldwide and pharmacotherapy of most of them is suboptimal. Thus, there is a clear unmet clinical need to develop new pharmacological strategies with greater efficacy and better safety profiles. In this review, we summarize the most relevant advances in cardiovascular pharmacology in 2022 including the approval of first-in-class drugs that open new avenues for the treatment of obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (mavacamten), type 2 diabetes mellitus (tirzepatide), and heart failure (HF) independent of left ventricular ejection fraction (sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors). We also dealt with fixed dose combination therapies repurposing different formulations of "old" drugs with well-known efficacy and safety for the treatment of patients with acute decompensated HF (acetazolamide plus loop diuretics), atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (moderate-dose statin plus ezetimibe), Marfan syndrome (angiotensin receptor blockers plus ß-blockers), and secondary cardiovascular prevention (i.e. low-dose aspirin, ramipril and atorvastatin), thereby filling existing gaps in knowledge, and opening new avenues for the treatment of CVD. Clinical trials confirming the role of dapagliflozin in patients with HF and mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, long-term evolocumab to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events, vitamin K antagonists for stroke prevention in patients with rheumatic heart disease-associated atrial fibrillation, antibiotic prophylaxis in patients at high risk for infective endocarditis before invasive dental procedures, and vutrisiran for the treatment of hereditary transthyretin-related amyloidosis with polyneuropathy were also reviewed. Finally, we briefly discuss recent clinical trials suggesting that FXIa inhibitors may have the potential to uncouple thrombosis from hemostasis and attenuate/prevent thromboembolic events with minimal disruption of hemostasis.

Normal high-sensitivity cardiac troponin for ruling-out inpatient mortality in acute COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Assessment of inpatient mortality risk in COVID-19 patients is important for guiding clinical decision-making. High sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) is a biomarker of cardiac injury associated with a worse prognosis in COVID-19. We explored how hs-cTnT could potentially be used in clinical practice for ruling in and ruling out mortality in COVID-19. METHOD: We tested the diagnostic value of hs-cTnT in laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients (≥18 years old) admitted to the Royal Berkshire Hospital (UK) between 1st March and 10th May 2020. A normal hs-cTnT was defined as a value within the 99th percentile of healthy individuals (≤14 ng/L), and an elevated hs-cTnT was defined as >14 ng/L. Adverse clinical outcome was defined as inpatient mortality related to COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 191 COVID-19 patients (62% male; age 66±16 years) had hs-cTnT measured on admission. Of these patients, 124 (65%) had elevated hs-cTnT and 67 (35%) had normal hs-cTnT. On a group level, patients with elevated hs-cTnT had worse inpatient survival (p = 0.0014; Kaplan-Meier analysis) and higher risk of inpatient mortality (HR 5.84 [95% CI 1.29-26.4]; p = 0.02; Cox multivariate regression) compared to patients with normal hs-cTnT. On a per-patient level, a normal hs-cTnT had a negative predictive value of 94% (95% CI: 85-98%) for ruling out mortality, whilst an elevated hs-cTnT had a low positive predictive value of 38% (95% CI: 39-47%) for ruling in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In this study cohort of COVID-19 patients, the potential clinical utility of hs-cTnT appears to rest in ruling out inpatient mortality. This finding, if prospectively validated in a larger study, may allow hs-cTnT to become an important biomarker to facilitate admission-avoidance and early safe discharge.

Effective prognostic and clinical risk stratification in COVID-19 using multimodality biomarkers.

In acute coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) patients, effective clinical risk stratification has important implications on treatment and therapeutic resource distribution. This article reviews the evidence behind a wide range of biomarkers with prognostic value in COVID-19. Patient characteristics and co-morbidities, such as cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, are associated with increased mortality risk. Peripheral oxygen saturation and arterial oxygenation are predictive of severe respiratory compromise, whereas risk scores such as the 4C-score enable multi-factorial prognostic risk estimation. Blood tests such as markers of inflammation, cardiac injury and d-dimer and abnormalities on electrocardiogram are linked to inpatient prognosis. Of the imaging modalities, lung ultrasound and echocardiography enable the bedside assessment of prognostic abnormalities in COVID-19. Chest radiograph (CXR) and computed tomography (CT) can inform about prognostic pulmonary pathologies, whereas cardiovascular CT detects high-risk features such as coronary artery and aortic calcification. Dynamic changes in biomarkers, such as blood tests, CXR, CT and electrocardiogram findings, can further inform about disease severity and prognosis. Despite the vast volumes of existing evidence, several gaps exist in our understanding of COVID-19 biomarkers. First, the pathophysiological basis on which these markers can foretell prognosis in COVID-19 remains poorly understood. Second, certain under-explored tests such as thoracic impedance assessment and cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging deserve further investigation. Lastly, the prognostic values of most biomarkers in COVID-19 are derived from retrospective analyses. Prospective studies are required to validate these markers for guiding clinical decision-making and to facilitate their translation into clinical management pathways.

Single-pill combination in the management of chronic coronary syndromes: A strategy to improve treatment adherence and patient outcomes?

Chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) represents a major challenge for physicians, particularly in the context of an increasing aging population. Additionally, CCS is often underestimated and under-recognised, particularly in female patients. As patients are frequently affected by several chronic comorbidities requiring polypharmacy, this can have a negative impact on patients' adherence to treatment. To overcome this barrier, single-pill combination (SPC), or fixed-dose combination, therapies are already widely used in the management of conditions such as hypertension, dyslipidaemia, and diabetes mellitus. The use of SPC anti-anginal therapy deserves careful consideration, as it has the potential to substantially improve treatment adherence and clinical outcomes, along with reducing the failure of pharmacological treatment before considering other interventions in patients with CCS.

Evolving Management Paradigm for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Patients: JACC Review Topic of the Week.

Management of stable coronary artery disease (CAD) has been based on the assumption that flow-limiting atherosclerotic obstructions are the proximate cause of angina and myocardial ischemia in most patients and represent an important target for revascularization. However, the role of revascularization in reducing long-term cardiac events in these patients has been limited mainly to those with left main disease, 3-vessel disease with diabetes, or decreased ejection fraction. Mounting evidence indicates that nonepicardial coronary causes of angina and ischemia, including coronary microvascular dysfunction, vasospastic disorders, and derangements of myocardial metabolism, are more prevalent than flow-limiting stenoses, raising concerns that many important causes other than epicardial CAD are neither considered nor probed diagnostically. There is a need for a more inclusive management paradigm that uncouples the singular association between epicardial CAD and revascularization and better aligns diagnostic approaches that tailor treatment to the underlying mechanisms and precipitants of angina and ischemia in contemporary clinical practice.