Generalizable Approach to Quantifying Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Quantifying guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) intensity is foundational for improving heart failure (HF) care. Existing measures discount dose intensity or use inconsistent weighting. METHODS: The Kansas City Medical Optimization (KCMO) score is the average of total daily to target dose percentages for eligible GDMT, reflecting the percentage of optimal GDMT prescribed (range, 0-100). In Change the Management of Patients With HF, we computed KCMO, HF collaboratory (0-7), and modified HF Collaboratory (0-100) scores for each patient at baseline and for 1-year change in established GDMT at the time (mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, ß-blocker, ACE [angiotensin-converting enzyme] inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor). We compared baseline and 1-year change distributions and the coefficient of variation (SD/mean) across scores. RESULTS: Among 4532 patients at baseline, mean KCMO, HF collaboratory, and modified HF Collaboratory scores were 38.8 (SD, 25.7), 3.4 (1.7), and 42.2 (22.2), respectively. The mean 1-year change (n=4061) for KCMO was -1.94 (17.8); HF collaborator, -0.11 (1.32); and modified HF Collaboratory, -1.35 (19.8). KCMO had the highest coefficient of variation (0.66), indicating greater variability around the mean than the HF collaboratory (0.49) and modified HF Collaboratory (0.53) scores, reflecting higher resolution of the variability in GDMT intensity across patients. CONCLUSIONS: KCMO measures GDMT intensity by incorporating dosing and treatment eligibility, provides more granularity than existing methods, is easily interpretable (percentage of ideal GDMT), and can be adapted as performance measures evolve. Further study of its association with outcomes and its usefulness for quality assessment and improvement is needed.

ß-Blocker Use and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With COPD Following Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Importance: While ß-blockers are associated with decreased mortality in cardiovascular disease (CVD), exacerbation-prone patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who received metoprolol in the Beta-Blockers for the Prevention of Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (BLOCK-COPD) trial experienced increased risk of exacerbations requiring hospitalization. However, the study excluded individuals with established indications for the drug, raising questions about the overall risk and benefit in patients with COPD following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Objective: To investigate whether ß-blocker prescription at hospital discharge is associated with increased risk of mortality or adverse cardiopulmonary outcomes in patients with COPD and AMI. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, longitudinal cohort study with 6 months of follow-up enrolled patients aged 35 years or older with COPD who underwent cardiac catheterization for AMI at 18 BLOCK-COPD network hospitals in the US from June 2020 through May 2022. Exposure: Prescription for any ß-blocker at hospital discharge. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to the composite outcome of death or all-cause hospitalization or revascularization. Secondary outcomes included death, hospitalization, or revascularization for CVD events, death or hospitalization for COPD or respiratory events, and treatment for COPD exacerbations. Results: Among 3531 patients who underwent cardiac catheterization for AMI, prevalence of COPD was 17.1% (95% CI, 15.8%-18.4%). Of 579 total patients with COPD and AMI, 502 (86.7%) were prescribed a ß-blocker at discharge. Among the 562 patients with COPD included in the final analysis, median age was 70.0 years (range, 38.0-94.0 years) and 329 (58.5%) were male; 553 of the 579 patients (95.5%) had follow-up information. Among those discharged with ß-blockers, there was no increased risk of the primary end point of all-cause mortality, revascularization, or hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 95% CI, 0.66-1.54; P = .96) or of cardiovascular events (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.65-1.92; P = .69), COPD-related or respiratory events (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.34-1.66; P = .48), or treatment for COPD exacerbations (rate ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.53-1.91; P = .98). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, ß-blocker prescription at hospital discharge was not associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes in patients with COPD and AMI. These findings support use of ß-blockers in patients with COPD and recent AMI.

Beta blockers are associated with lower all-cause mortality among HFpEF patients.

BACKGROUND: The evidence regarding beta blocker (BB) benefit in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains inconclusive, leading to consideration of BB withdrawal in this population. OBJECTIVES: In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the association of BB on all-cause mortality in HFpEF patients. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective cohort study of 20,206 patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) ≥ 50% who were hospitalized with decompensated HF between January 2011 and March 2020. Survival is reported at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years. A secondary analysis comparing mortality for patients on BB with additional indications including hypertension (HTN), coronary artery disease (CAD), and atrial fibrillation (AF) was completed. Mortality was compared between patients on BB and additional therapies of spironolactone or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEi/ARBs). RESULTS: BB showed lower all-cause mortality at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years (p < 0.0001). This association with lower all-cause mortality was validated by a supplementary propensity score-matched analysis. At 3 years, there was significant mortality reduction with addition of BB to either spironolactone (p = 0.0359) or ACEi/ARBs (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In a large single-center retrospective registry, BB use was associated with lower mortality in HFpEF patients with a recent decompensated HF hospitalization. The mortality benefit persisted in those treated with spironolactone or ACEi/ARBs, and in those with AF. This provocative data further highlights the uncertainty of the benefit of BB use in this cohort and calls for re-consideration of BB withdrawal, especially in those tolerating it well, without conclusive, large, and randomized trials showing lack of benefit or harm.

What to do with foundation therapies for heart failure for patients with end-stage kidney disease on haemodialysis.

There is a significant burden of cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality in the end-stage kidney disease population, driven by traditional and non-traditional risk factors. Despite its prevalence, heart failure is difficult to diagnose in the dialysis population due to overlapping clinical presentations, limitations of investigations, and the impact on the cardiorenal axis. 'Foundation therapies' are the key medications which improve patient outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and include beta-blockers, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. They are underutilised in the dialysis population due to the exclusion of chronic kidney disease patients from major trials and legitimate clinical concerns e.g. hyperkalaemia, intradialytic hypotension and residual kidney function preservation. A coordinated cardiorenal multidisciplinary approach can guide appropriate diagnostic considerations (biomarkers interpretation, imaging, addressing unique complications of kidney disease), optimise dialysis management (prescription length, frequency and ultrafiltration targets) and when at euvolaemia facilitate the stepwise introduction of appropriate foundation therapies.

Integrated metabolomics analysis reveals mechanistic insights into variability in blood pressure response to thiazide diuretics and beta blockers.

Hypertensive patients with a higher proportion of genetic West African ancestry (%GWAA) have better blood pressure (BP) response to thiazide diuretics (TDs) and worse response to ß-blockers (BBs) than those with lower %GWAA, associated with their lower plasma renin activity (PRA). TDs and BBs are suggested to reduce BP in the long term through vasodilation via incompletely understood mechanisms. This study aimed at identifying pathways underlying ancestral differences in PRA, which might reflect pathways underlying BP-lowering mechanisms of TDs and BBs. Among hypertensive participants enrolled in the Pharmacogenomics Evaluation of Antihypertensive Responses (PEAR) and PEAR-2 trials, we previously identified 8 metabolites associated with baseline PRA and 4 metabolic clusters (including 39 metabolites) that are different between those with GWAA <45% versus ≥45%. In the current study, using Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA), we integrated these signals. Three overlapping metabolic signals within three significantly enriched pathways were identified as associated with both PRA and %GWAA: ceramide signaling, sphingosine 1- phosphate signaling, and endothelial nitric oxide synthase signaling. Literature indicates that the identified pathways are involved in the regulation of the Rho kinase cascade, production of the vasoactive agents nitric oxide, prostacyclin, thromboxane A2, and endothelin 1; the pathways proposed to underlie TD- and BB-induced vasodilatation. These findings may improve our understanding of the BP-lowering mechanisms of TDs and BBs. This might provide a possible step forward in personalizing antihypertensive therapy by identifying patients expected to have robust BP-lowering effects from these drugs.

Prospective benchmarking of an observational analysis in the SWEDEHEART registry against the REDUCE-AMI randomized trial.

Prospective benchmarking of an observational analysis against a randomized trial increases confidence in the benchmarking process as it relies exclusively on aligning the protocol of the trial and the observational analysis, while the trials findings are unavailable. The Randomized Evaluation of Decreased Usage of Betablockers After Myocardial Infarction (REDUCE-AMI, ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03278509) trial started recruitment in September 2017 and results are expected in 2024. REDUCE-AMI aimed to estimate the effect of long-term use of beta blockers on the risk of death and myocardial following a myocardial infarction with preserved left ventricular systolic ejection fraction. We specified the protocol of a target trial as similar as possible to that of REDUCE-AMI, then emulated the target trial using observational data from Swedish healthcare registries. Had everyone followed the treatment strategy as specified in the target trial protocol, the observational analysis estimated a reduction in the 5-year risk of death or myocardial infarction of 0.8 percentage points for beta blockers compared with no beta blockers; effects ranging from an absolute reduction of 4.5 percentage points to an increase of 2.8 percentage points in the risk of death or myocardial infarction were compatible with our data under conventional statistical criteria. Once results of REDUCE-AMI are published, we will compare the results of our observational analysis against those from the trial. If this prospective benchmarking is successful, it supports the credibility of additional analyses using these observational data, which can rapidly deliver answers to questions that could not be answered by the initial trial. If benchmarking proves unsuccessful, we will conduct a "postmortem" analysis to identify the reasons for the discrepancy. Prospective benchmarking shifts the investigator focus away from an endeavour to use observational data to obtain similar results as a completed randomized trial, to a systematic attempt to align the design and analysis of the trial and the observational analysis.

Probable interacción farmacológica entre sulfonilurea y betabloqueante en paciente con DM-II. Un reporte de caso / Probable pharmacological interaction between sulfonylurea and beta blocker in patients with DM-II. A case report

El estudio presenta el caso de una mujer de 47 años con diabetes tipo 2 (DM-II), hipertensión y anemia, tratada con metformina, glibenclamida, metoprolol y hierro/ácido fólico. Se identificó una interacción farmacológica entre glibenclamida y metoprolol, causando síntomas de hipoglucemia por la tarde. La evaluación mediante la Escala de Probabilidad de Interacciones Farmacológicas (EPIF) de Horn sugirió una interacción probable. El análisis farmacocinético reveló que el tiempo en el cual se alcanzan las concentraciones máximas de ambos fármacos coincidía con el inicio de los síntomas. Se implementó un nuevo horario de medicación que resolvió los síntomas. La interacción farmacológica se atribuyó al bloqueo de los efectos adrenérgicos por el metoprolol, comprometiendo la capacidad de contrarrestar la acción de la insulina liberada por la glibenclamida. Se resalta la importancia de la vigilancia, la toma de decisiones informadas y la implementación de estrategias preventivas para garantizar la seguridad y eficacia del tratamiento farmacológico en pacientes con condiciones clínicas específicas, como la DM-II y enfermedades cardiovasculares concomitantes.(AU)

Beta-Blockers after Myocardial Infarction and Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Most trials that have shown a benefit of beta-blocker treatment after myocardial infarction included patients with large myocardial infarctions and were conducted in an era before modern biomarker-based diagnosis of myocardial infarction and treatment with percutaneous coronary intervention, antithrombotic agents, high-intensity statins, and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system antagonists. METHODS: In a parallel-group, open-label trial performed at 45 centers in Sweden, Estonia, and New Zealand, we randomly assigned patients with an acute myocardial infarction who had undergone coronary angiography and had a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 50% to receive either long-term treatment with a beta-blocker (metoprolol or bisoprolol) or no beta-blocker treatment. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or new myocardial infarction. RESULTS: From September 2017 through May 2023, a total of 5020 patients were enrolled (95.4% of whom were from Sweden). The median follow-up was 3.5 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.7). A primary end-point event occurred in 199 of 2508 patients (7.9%) in the beta-blocker group and in 208 of 2512 patients (8.3%) in the no-beta-blocker group (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 1.16; P = 0.64). Beta-blocker treatment did not appear to lead to a lower cumulative incidence of the secondary end points (death from any cause, 3.9% in the beta-blocker group and 4.1% in the no-beta-blocker group; death from cardiovascular causes, 1.5% and 1.3%, respectively; myocardial infarction, 4.5% and 4.7%; hospitalization for atrial fibrillation, 1.1% and 1.4%; and hospitalization for heart failure, 0.8% and 0.9%). With regard to safety end points, hospitalization for bradycardia, second- or third-degree atrioventricular block, hypotension, syncope, or implantation of a pacemaker occurred in 3.4% of the patients in the beta-blocker group and in 3.2% of those in the no-beta-blocker group; hospitalization for asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in 0.6% and 0.6%, respectively; and hospitalization for stroke in 1.4% and 1.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute myocardial infarction who underwent early coronary angiography and had a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (≥50%), long-term beta-blocker treatment did not lead to a lower risk of the composite primary end point of death from any cause or new myocardial infarction than no beta-blocker use. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; REDUCE-AMI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03278509.).

The clinical value of ß-blockers in patients with stable angina.

Stable angina, one manifestation of chronic coronary syndrome (CCS), is characterised by intermittent episodes of insufficient blood supply to the myocardium, provoking symptoms of myocardial ischaemia, particularly chest pain. These attacks usually occur during exercise or stress. Anti-ischaemic drugs are the mainstay of pharmacologic management of CCS with symptoms of angina. ß-blockers reduce heart rate and myocardial contractility, thus reducing myocardial oxygen consumption. These drugs have been shown to ameliorate the frequency of anginal attacks and to improve exercise capacity in these patients. Current management guidelines include ß-blockers as a first-line management option for most patients with CCS and symptoms of myocardial ischaemia, alongside dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCB). The presence of comorbid angina and heart failure is a strong indication for starting with a ß-blocker. ß-blockers are also useful in the management of angina symptoms accompanied by a high heart rate, hypertension (with or without a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system [RAS] blocker or CCB), or microvascular angina (with a RAS blocker and a statin). A ß-blocker is not suitable for a patient with low heart rate (<50 bpm), although use of a ß-blocker may be supported by a pacemaker if the ß-blocker is strongly indicated) and should be used at a low dose only in patients with low blood pressure.

ß-blockers are not all the same: pharmacologic similarities and differences, potential combinations and clinical implications.

ß-blockers are a heterogeneous class, with individual agents distinguished by selectivity for ß1- vs. ß2- and α-adrenoceptors, presence or absence of partial agonist activity at one of more ß-receptor subtype, presence or absence of additional vasodilatory properties, and lipophilicity, which determines the ease of entry the drug into the central nervous system. Cardioselectivity (ß1-adrenoceptor selectivity) helps to reduce the potential for adverse effects mediated by blockade of ß2-adrenoceptors outside the myocardium, such as cold extremities, erectile dysfunction, or exacerbation of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. According to recently updated guidelines from the European Society of Hypertension, ß-blockers are included within the five major drug classes recommended as the basis of antihypertensive treatment strategies. Adding a ß-blocker to another agent with a complementary mechanism may provide a rational antihypertensive combination that minimizes the adverse impact of induced sympathetic overactivity for optimal blood pressure-lowering efficacy and clinical outcomes benefit.

Safety and tolerability of ß-blockers: importance of cardioselectivity.

Cardioselective ß-blockade is generally well tolerated in practice and contraindications to this therapy are uncommon. ß-blockers are a diverse therapeutic class, and their individual tolerability profiles are influenced strongly by their pharmacodynamic effects across different adrenergic receptors. Bisoprolol, probably the ß-blocker with the highest selectivity for blockade of ß1- vs. ß2-adrenoceptors, does not block ß2-adrenoceptors to an appreciable extent at doses in therapeutic use. Side-effects often attributed to ß-blockers, such as erectile dysfunction and adverse metabolic effects are uncommon with bisoprolol and other ß-blockers used at doses which only block ß1-adrenoceptors. Cautious use of a cardioselective ß-blocker is not contraindicated in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma and the outcomes benefits of ß-blockers in patients with coronary heart disease or heart failure are also apparent in patients with concurrent COPD. Starting with a low dose and titrating upwards carefully is important for optimising the tolerability of a ß-blocker. Most people with hypertension will receive combination antihypertensive therapy in practice, and the low-dose combination therapy approach provides a useful strategy for optimising the efficacy and tolerability of a regimen that includes a ß-blocker, compared with up-titrating an existing monotherapy.

Heart failure management with ß-blockers: can we do better?

Heart failure (HF) is associated with disabling symptoms, poor quality of life, and a poor prognosis with substantial excess mortality in the years following diagnosis. Overactivation of the sympathetic nervous system is a key feature of the pathophysiology of HF and is an important driver of the process of adverse remodelling of the left ventricular wall that contributes to cardiac failure. Drugs which suppress the activity of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, including ß-blockers, are foundation therapies for the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and despite a lack of specific outcomes trials, are also widely used by cardiologist in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Today, expert opinion has moved away from recommending that treatment for HF should be guided solely by the LVEF and interventions should rather address signs and symptoms of HF (e.g. oedema and tachycardia), the severity of HF, and concomitant conditions. ß-blockers improve HF symptoms and functional status in HF and these agents have demonstrated improved survival, as well as a reduced risk of other important clinical outcomes such as hospitalisation for heart failure, in randomised, placebo-controlled outcomes trials. In HFpEF, ß-blockers are anti-ischemic and lower blood pressure and heart rate. Moreover, ß-blockers also reduce mortality in the setting of HF occurring alongside common comorbid conditions, such as diabetes, CKD (of any severity), and COPD. Higher doses of ß-blockers are associated with better clinical outcomes in populations with HF, so that ensuring adequate titration of therapy to their maximal (or maximally tolerated) doses is important for ensuring optimal outcomes for people with HF. In principle, a patient with HF could have combined treatment with a ß-blocker, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor/neprilysin inhibitor, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, and a SGLT2 inhibitor, according to tolerability.

Enteropathy and intestinal malabsorption in patients treated with antihypertensive drugs. A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate differences in the incidence of enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption in patients taking angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), calcium channel blocker (CCB), and beta blockers (BBs) at a single center in Korea. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we utilized data from the Yangsan electronic medical records to identify 129,169 patients. These individuals were prescribed olmesartan, other ARBs, ACEI, CCB, and BBs between November 2008 and February 2021. RESULTS: Of the 44,775 patients, 51 (0.11%) were observed to have enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption. Compared with the ACEI group, the adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for enteropathy and intestinal malabsorption were OR=1.313 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.188-6.798], p=0.893) for olmesartan, OR=0.915 (95% CI: [0.525-1.595], p=0.754) for the other ARBs, OR=0.928 (95% CI: [0.200-4.307]; p=0.924) for the CCB, and OR=0.663 (95% CI: [0.151-2.906]; p=0.586) for the BBs group. These findings were adjusted for factors such as age, gender, duration of antihypertensive medication, and comorbidities. CONCLUSION: In a retrospective cohort study of patients on antihypertensive medications, no significant difference was found in the incidence of enteropathy or intestinal malabsorption when ACEI was compared to olmesartan, other ARBs, CCB, and BBs.