Disconnect between the effects of serelaxin on renal function and outcome in acute heart failure.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to study whether improvement in renal function by serelaxin in patients who were hospitalized for acute heart failure (HF) might explain any potential effect on clinical outcomes. METHODS: We included 6318 patients from the RELAXin in AHF-2 (RELAX-AHF2) study. Improvement in renal function was defined as a decrease in serum creatinine of ≥ 0.3 mg/dL and ≥ 25%, or increase in estimated glomerular filtration rate of ≥ 25% between baseline and day 2. Worsening renal function (WRF) was defined as the reverse. We performed causal mediation analyses regarding 180-day all-cause mortality (ACM), cardiovascular death (CVD), and hospitalization for HF/renal failure. RESULTS: Improvement in renal function was more frequently observed with serelaxin when compared with placebo [OR 1.88 (95% CI 1.64-2.15, p < 0.0001)], but was not associated with subsequent clinical outcomes. WRF occurred less frequent with serelaxin [OR 0.70 (95% CI 0.60-0.83, p < 0.0001)] and was associated with increased risk of ACM, worsening HF and the composite of CVD and HF or renal failure hospitalization. Improvement in renal function did not mediate the treatment effect of serelaxin [CVD HR 1.01 (0.99-1.04), ACM HR 1.01 (0.99-1.03), HF/renal failure hospitalization HR 0.99 (0.97-1.00)]. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the significant improvement in renal function by serelaxin in patients with acute HF, the potential beneficial treatment effect was not mediated by improvement in renal function. These data suggest that improvement in renal function might not be a suitable surrogate marker for potential treatment efficacy in future studies with novel relaxin agents in acute HF. Central illustration. Conceptual model explaining mediation analysis; treatment efficacy of heart failure therapies mediated by renal function.

Punto de corte óptimo del antígeno carbohidrato 125 para la identificación de pacientes con bajo riesgo tras un ingreso por insuficiencia cardiaca aguda / Optimal carbohydrate antigen 125 cutpoint for identifying low-risk patients after admission for acute heart failure

Introducción y objetivos: El antígeno carbohidrato 125 (CA125) se ha mostrado útil para la estratificación del riesgo de los pacientes ingresados por insuficiencia cardiaca aguda (ICA). Se intenta determinar un punto de corte para identificar a los pacientes con bajo riesgo de muerte y muerte/reingreso por insuficiencia cardiaca 1 mes tras el ingreso por ICA. Métodos: La cohorte de derivación incluyó a 3.231 pacientes con ICA consecutivos. Se identificaron valores de corte de CA125 con un valor predictivo negativo (VPN) del 90% y una sensibilidad de hasta el 85%. La idoneidad de estos puntos de corte y el riesgo de muerte/reingreso al mes se evaluaron mediante el método de Royston-Parmar. Se seleccionó el mejor punto de corte y se validó en una cohorte del BIOSTAT-CHF (n=1.583). Resultados: En la cohorte de derivación, la mediana [intervalo intercuartílico] de CA125 fue 57 [25,3-157] U/ml. El punto de corte óptimo fue <23 U/ml (el 21,5% de los pacientes), con VPN de muerte y del objetivo compuesto del 99,3 y el 94,1% respectivamente. En los análisis multivariables, el CA125 <23 U/ml se asoció con un menores riesgos de muerte (HR=0,20; IC95%, 0,08-0,50; p <0,001) y del objetivo combinado (HR=0,63; IC95%, 950,45-0,90; p=0,009). Su capacidad para discriminar a los pacientes con riesgo bajo a 1 mes se confirmó en la cohorte de validación (VPN de muerte y del objetivo compuesto, el 98,6 y el 96,6%). La capacidad predictiva seguía siendo significativa a los 6 meses de seguimiento. Conclusiones: En pacientes ingresados por ICA, el CA125 <23 U/ml identificó un subgrupo de pacientes con bajo riesgo de eventos clínicos adversos a corto plazo que pueden no requerir un seguimiento estrecho (AU)

Introduction and objectives: Carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA125) has been shown to be useful for risk stratification in patients admitted with acute heart failure (AHF). We sought to determine a CA125 cutpoint for identifying patients at low risk of 1-month death or the composite of death/HF readmission following admission for AHF. Methods: The derivation cohort included 3231 consecutive patients with AHF. CA125 cutoff values with 90% negative predictive value (NPV) and sensitivity up to 85% were identified. The adequacy of these cutpoints and the risk of 1-month death/HF readmission was then tested using the Royston-Parmar method. The best cutpoint was selected and externally validated in a cohort of patients hospitalized from BIOSTAT-CHF (n=1583). Results: In the derivation cohort, the median [IQR] CA125 was 57 [25.3-157] U/mL. The optimal cutoff value was <23 U/mL (21.5% of patients), with NPVs of 99.3% and 94.1% for death and the composite endpoint, respectively. On multivariate survival analyses, CA125 <23 U/mL was independently associated with a lower risk of death (HR, 0.20; 95%CI, 0.08-0.50; P <.001), and the combined endpoint (HR, 0.63; 95%CI, 950.45-0.90; P=.009). The ability of this cutpoint to discriminate patients at a low 1-month risk was confirmed in the validation cohort (NPVs of 98.6% and 96.6% for death and the composite endpoint). The predicted ability of this cutoff remained significant at 6 months of follow-up. Conclusions: In patients admitted with AHF, CA125 <23 U/mL identified a subgroup at low risk of short-term adverse events, a population that may not require intense postdischarge monitoring (AU)

Determinants and clinical outcome of uptitration of ACE-inhibitors and beta-blockers in patients with heart failure: a prospective European study.

INTRODUCTION: Despite clear guidelines recommendations, most patients with heart failure and reduced ejection-fraction (HFrEF) do not attain guideline-recommended target doses. We aimed to investigate characteristics and for treatment-indication-bias corrected clinical outcome of patients with HFrEF that did not reach recommended treatment doses of ACE-inhibitors/Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and/or beta-blockers. METHODS AND RESULTS: BIOSTAT-CHF was specifically designed to study uptitration of ACE-inhibitors/ARBs and/or beta-blockers in 2516 heart failure patients from 69 centres in 11 European countries who were selected if they were suboptimally treated while initiation or uptitration was anticipated and encouraged. Patients who died during the uptitration period (n = 151) and patients with a LVEF > 40% (n = 242) were excluded. Median follow up was 21 months. We studied 2100 HFrEF patients (76% male; mean age 68 ±12), of which 22% achieved the recommended treatment dose for ACE-inhibitor/ARB and 12% of beta-blocker. There were marked differences between European countries. Reaching <50% of the recommended ACE-inhibitor/ARB and beta-blocker dose was associated with an increased risk of death and/or heart failure hospitalization. Patients reaching 50-99% of the recommended ACE-inhibitor/ARB and/or beta-blocker dose had comparable risk of death and/or heart failure hospitalization to those reaching ≥100%. Patients not reaching recommended dose because of symptoms, side effects and non-cardiac organ dysfunction had the highest mortality rate (for ACE-inhibitor/ARB: HR 1.72; 95% CI 1.43-2.01; for beta-blocker: HR 1.70; 95% CI 1.36-2.05). CONCLUSION: Patients with HFrEF who were treated with less than 50% of recommended dose of ACE-inhibitors/ARBs and beta-blockers seemed to have a greater risk of death and/or heart failure hospitalization compared with patients reaching ≥100%.