Patiromer for the management of hyperkalemia in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: the DIAMOND trial.

AIMS: To investigate the impact of patiromer on the serum potassium level and its ability to enable specified target doses of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi) use in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1642 patients with HFrEF and current or a history of RAASi-related hyperkalemia were screened and 1195 were enrolled in the run-in phase with patiromer and optimization of the RAASi therapy [≥50% recommended dose of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, and 50 mg of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) spironolactone or eplerenone]. Specified target doses of the RAASi therapy were achieved in 878 (84.6%) patients; 439 were randomized to patiromer and 439 to placebo. All patients, physicians, and outcome assessors were blinded to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was between-group difference in the adjusted mean change in serum potassium. Five hierarchical secondary endpoints were assessed. At the end of treatment, the median (interquartile range) duration of follow-up was 27 (13-43) weeks, the adjusted mean change in potassium was +0.03 mmol/l in the patiromer group and +0.13 mmol/l in the placebo group [difference in the adjusted mean change between patiromer and placebo: -0.10 mmol/l (95% confidence interval, CI -0.13, 0.07); P < 0.001]. Risk of hyperkalemia >5.5 mmol/l [hazard ratio (HR) 0.63; 95% CI 0.45, 0.87; P = 0.006), reduction of MRA dose (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.45, 0.87; P = 0.006), and total adjusted hyperkalemia events/100 person-years (77.7 vs. 118.2; HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.53, 0.81; P < 0.001) were lower with patiromer. Hyperkalemia-related morbidity-adjusted events (win ratio 1.53, P < 0.001) and total RAASi use score (win ratio 1.25, P = 0.048) favored the patiromer arm. Adverse events were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Concurrent use of patiromer and high-dose MRAs reduces the risk of recurrent hyperkalemia (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03888066).

Patiromer for the management of hyperkalaemia in patients receiving renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors for heart failure: design and rationale of the DIAMOND trial.

AIMS: In patients with current or a history of hyperkalaemia, treatment with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) is often compromised. Patiromer, a novel potassium (K+ ) binder, may improve serum K+ levels and adherence to RAASi. METHODS: The DIAMOND trial will enroll ∼820 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF; ejection fraction ≤40%). Patients meeting the screening criteria will enter a single-blinded run-in phase where they will be started or continued on a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) titrated to 50 mg/day and other RAASi therapy to ≥50% target dose, and patiromer. Patiromer will be titrated up to a maximum three packs/day (8.4 g/pack) to achieve optimal doses of RAASi without hyperkalaemia. The run-in phase will last up to 12 weeks, following which patients will undergo double-blind randomization in a 1:1 ratio to receive either continued patiromer or placebo (patiromer withdrawal). The primary endpoint is the mean difference in serum K+ from randomization between patiromer and placebo arms. Secondary endpoints will include hyperkalaemia events with K+ value >5.5 mEq/L, durable enablement of MRA at target dose, investigator-reported adverse events of hyperkalaemia, hyperkalaemia-related clinical endpoints and an overall RAASi use score (using a 0-8-point scale) comprising all-cause death, occurrence of cardiovascular hospitalization or usage of comprehensive heart failure medication. CONCLUSION: The DIAMOND trial is designed to determine if patiromer can favourably impact K+ control in patients with HFrEF with hyperkalaemia or a history of hyperkalaemia leading to RAASi therapy compromise, and in turn improve RAASi use.

Baseline characteristics of patients in the PARALLAX trial: insights into quality of life and exercise capacity in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

AIMS: We sought to describe the baseline characteristics of PARALLAX [a randomized controlled trial of sacubitril/valsartan vs. individualized medical therapy in heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)]; compare PARALLAX to recent HFpEF trials; and examine the clinical characteristics associated with quality of life (QOL) and 6-min walk test distance (6MWD). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 2566 patients with HF and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >40% were randomized, of whom 96% had an LVEF ≥45%. Multivariable linear regression was used to determine characteristics associated with Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS) and 6MWD. Mean age was 73 ± 8 years, 51% were female, and comorbidities were common. Of the QOL measures tested in PARALLAX, the Short Form Health Survey-36 physical functioning score was most closely correlated with 6MWD (R = 0.41, P < 0.001), and outperformed the KCCQ physical limitation score (R = 0.33) and KCCQ-CSS (R = 0.31) on multivariable analyses. Female sex, higher body mass index, history of coronary artery disease, lower LVEF, and higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were associated with worse (lower) KCCQ-CSS; older age, female sex, higher body mass index, diabetes, coronary artery disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, prior HF hospitalization, lower LVEF, and higher NT-proBNP were associated with shorter 6MWD (P < 0.05 for all associations). CONCLUSIONS: PARALLAX is the largest HFpEF study to date to examine 6MWD together with QOL. The KCCQ-CSS and 6MWD were modestly correlated, and several factors were associated with worse values of both. These results provide insight into the association between QOL and exercise capacity in HFpEF.

Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibition versus individualized RAAS blockade: design and rationale of the PARALLAX trial.

AIMS: Although the effect of the angiotensin receptor blocker neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan on heart failure (HF) hospitalizations and cardiovascular death has been evaluated, its effects on functional capacity in patients with HF and ejection fraction (EF) >40% has yet to be determined. In addition, no prior studies have compared sacubitril/valsartan with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor therapy. We sought to compare the effect of ARNI to background-medication-based individualized comparators (BMICs) on N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), functional capacity [6 min walk distance (6MWD)], symptoms, and quality of life [Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ)] in patients with HF and EF >40% in a randomized clinical trial. METHODS: PARALLAX is a prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind multicentre clinical trial in patients with chronic symptomatic HF with EF >40%, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-IV symptoms, elevated natriuretic peptides, and evidence of structural heart disease. Eligible patients are randomized to sacubitril/valsartan vs. BMIC for cardiovascular and related co-morbidities. BMIC includes (i) enalapril, (ii) valsartan, and (iii) placebo depending on the type of medical therapy prior to enrolment. The primary endpoints are the change in plasma NT-proBNP concentration from baseline to 12 weeks and the change from baseline in 6MWD distance at 24 weeks. The secondary endpoints assess quality of life and symptom burden. CONCLUSIONS: PARALLAX will determine if sacubitril/valsartan compared with standard medical therapy for co-morbidities improves NT-proBNP levels, exercise capacity, quality of life, and symptom burden in HF patients with EF >40%.

Effects of Serelaxin in Patients with Acute Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Serelaxin is a recombinant form of human relaxin-2, a vasodilator hormone that contributes to cardiovascular and renal adaptations during pregnancy. Previous studies have suggested that treatment with serelaxin may result in relief of symptoms and in better outcomes in patients with acute heart failure. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial, we enrolled patients who were hospitalized for acute heart failure and had dyspnea, vascular congestion on chest radiography, increased plasma concentrations of natriuretic peptides, mild-to-moderate renal insufficiency, and a systolic blood pressure of at least 125 mm Hg, and we randomly assigned them within 16 hours after presentation to receive either a 48-hour intravenous infusion of serelaxin (30 µg per kilogram of body weight per day) or placebo, in addition to standard care. The two primary end points were death from cardiovascular causes at 180 days and worsening heart failure at 5 days. RESULTS: A total of 6545 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. At day 180, death from cardiovascular causes had occurred in 285 of the 3274 patients (8.7%) in the serelaxin group and in 290 of the 3271 patients (8.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.15; P = 0.77). At day 5, worsening heart failure had occurred in 227 patients (6.9%) in the serelaxin group and in 252 (7.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.07; P = 0.19). There were no significant differences between the groups in the incidence of death from any cause at 180 days, the incidence of death from cardiovascular causes or rehospitalization for heart failure or renal failure at 180 days, or the length of the index hospital stay. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients who were hospitalized for acute heart failure, an infusion of serelaxin did not result in a lower incidence of death from cardiovascular causes at 180 days or worsening heart failure at 5 days than placebo. (Funded by Novartis Pharma; RELAX-AHF-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01870778.).

Effects of serelaxin on the outcome of patients with or without substantial peripheral edema: A subgroup analysis from the RELAX-AHF trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute heart failure (AHF) is a heterogeneous disorder, with most of the patients presenting with breathlessness along with varying degrees of peripheral edema. The presence of peripheral edema suggests that volume overload is the cause of decompensation leading to AHF, whereas breathlessness in the absence of edema may reflect a "vascular phenotype." This analysis investigated the characteristics, therapeutic response, and outcome of patients with AHF, with and without overt peripheral edema in the RELAX-AHF trial. METHODS: Physician-assessed edema scores at baseline were used to categorize the population into those with no/mild edema (score 0 or 1+) and moderate/severe edema (score 2+ or 3+). The effect of serelaxin vs placebo was assessed within each subgroup. RESULTS: Patients with moderate/severe edema (n = 583; 50.5%) were more likely to have severe dyspnea, orthopnea (>30°), rales (≥1/3), and elevated jugular venous pressure (>6 cm) than the patients with little or no peripheral edema (n=571; 49.5%). The relative benefits of serelaxin in terms of reduction in breathlessness, lower diuretic requirements, decreased length of initial hospital stay and days in intensive care unit/cardiac care unit, and improved prognosis (180-day cardiovascular and all-cause mortality) were generally similar for patients with or without peripheral edema. However, because patients with moderate/severe peripheral edema had worse outcomes, the absolute benefit was generally greater than in patients with no/mild edema. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, patients with AHF and moderate/severe peripheral edema have a worse prognosis but appear to receive similar relative benefit and perhaps greater absolute benefit from serelaxin administration.

[Chest pain unit--viable option when risk of cardiac etiology is modest. Multitudinous patient population brought together for structured survey and care at appropriate level]. / Bröstsmärtsenhet--bra alternativ vid låg risk för kardiell genes. Spridd patientgrupp samlas för strukturerad utredning och vård på rätt nivå.

Chest pain is a common reason for visiting emergency wards. It is often difficult to confirm or exclude ischemic heart disease even without objective signs and atypical symptoms. These patients are usually admitted to the hospital for a variable number of days and the investigational plan can vary even in the same hospital. We have opened a protocol-ruled chest pain unit for these low risk patients. Biochemical markers are analysed on point of care instruments at admittance and after four and ten hours. Continuous ST-analysis is available. An exercise test is performed after ten hours. During the first year 1424 patients were admitted and spent in median 24 hours at the unit. The main diagnosis at discharge were unspecified chest pain in 36% of the patients, ischemic heart disease (35%) and an other diagnosis (29%).