Assessing the Role of Rare Genetic Variation in Patients With Heart Failure.

Importance: Sequencing studies have identified causal genetic variants for distinct subtypes of heart failure (HF) such as hypertrophic or dilated cardiomyopathy. However, the role of rare, high-impact variants in HF, for which ischemic heart disease is the leading cause, has not been systematically investigated. Objective: To assess the contribution of rare variants to all-cause HF with and without reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective analysis of clinical trials and a prospective epidemiological resource (UK Biobank). Whole-exome sequencing of patients with HF was conducted from the Candesartan in Heart Failure-Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity (CHARM) and Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure (CORONA) clinical trials. Data were collected from March 1999 to May 2003 for the CHARM studies and September 2003 to July 2007 for the CORONA study. Using a gene-based collapsing approach, the proportion of patients with HF and controls carrying rare and presumed deleterious variants was compared. The burden of pathogenic variants in known cardiomyopathy genes was also investigated to assess the diagnostic yield. Exome sequencing data were generated between January 2018 and October 2018, and analysis began October 2018 and ended April 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Odds ratios and P values for genes enriched for rare and presumed deleterious variants in either patients with HF or controls and diagnostic yield of pathogenic variants in known cardiomyopathy genes. Results: This study included 5942 patients with HF and 13 156 controls. The mean (SD) age was 68.9 (9.9) years and 4213 (70.9%) were male. A significant enrichment of protein-truncating variants in the TTN gene (P = 3.35 × 10-13; odds ratio, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.96-3.31) that was further increased after restriction to variants in exons constitutively expressed in the heart (odds ratio, 4.52; 95% CI, 3.10-6.68). Validation using UK Biobank data showed a similar enrichment (odds ratio, 4.97; 95% CI, 3.94-6.19 after restriction). In the clinical trials, 201 of 5916 patients with HF (3.4%) had a pathogenic or likely pathogenic cardiomyopathy variant implicating 21 different genes. Notably, 121 of 201 individuals (60.2%) had ischemic heart disease as the clinically identified etiology for the HF. Individuals with HF and preserved ejection fraction had only a slightly lower yield than individuals with midrange or reduced ejection fraction (20 of 767 [2.6%] vs 15 of 392 [3.8%] vs 166 of 4757 [3.5%]). Conclusions and Relevance: An increased burden of diagnostic mendelian cardiomyopathy variants in a broad group of patients with HF of mostly ischemic etiology compared with controls was observed. This work provides further evidence that mendelian genetic conditions may represent an important subset of complex late-onset diseases such as HF, irrespective of the clinical presentation.

Impact of Renal Impairment on Beta-Blocker Efficacy in Patients With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Moderate and moderately severe renal impairment are common in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction, but whether beta-blockers are effective is unclear, leading to underuse of life-saving therapy. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate patient prognosis and the efficacy of beta-blockers according to renal function using estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). METHODS: Analysis of 16,740 individual patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <50% from 10 double-blind, placebo-controlled trials was performed. The authors report all-cause mortality on an intention-to-treat basis, adjusted for baseline covariates and stratified by heart rhythm. RESULTS: Median eGFR at baseline was 63 (interquartile range: 50 to 77) ml/min/1.73 m2; 4,584 patients (27.4%) had eGFR 45 to 59 ml/min/1.73 m2, and 2,286 (13.7%) 30 to 44 ml/min/1.73 m2. Over a median follow-up of 1.3 years, eGFR was independently associated with mortality, with a 12% higher risk of death for every 10 ml/min/1.73 m2 lower eGFR (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10% to 15%; p < 0.001). In 13,861 patients in sinus rhythm, beta-blockers reduced mortality versus placebo; adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.73 for eGFR 45 to 59 ml/min/1.73 m2 (95% CI: 0.62 to 0.86; p < 0.001) and 0.71 for eGFR 30 to 44 ml/min/1.73 m2 (95% CI: 0.58 to 0.87; p = 0.001). The authors observed no deterioration in renal function over time in patients with moderate or moderately severe renal impairment, no difference in adverse events comparing beta-blockers with placebo, and higher mortality in patients with worsening renal function on follow-up. Due to exclusion criteria, there were insufficient patients with severe renal dysfunction (eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73 m2) to draw conclusions. In 2,879 patients with atrial fibrillation, there was no reduction in mortality with beta-blockers at any level of eGFR. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction <50% and sinus rhythm should receive beta-blocker therapy even with moderate or moderately severe renal dysfunction.

Heart rate, pulse pressure and mortality in patients with myocardial infarction complicated by heart failure.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between heart rate (HR), pulse pressure (PP), and their association with mortality in a population of high-risk patients following acute myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS: We performed an analysis in 22,398 patients included in "The High-Risk Myocardial Infarction Database Initiative", a database of clinical trials evaluating pharmacologic interventions in patients with MI complicated by signs of heart failure (HF) or left ventricular dysfunction. We found an interaction between HR and PP. Based on median HR and median PP, patients were divided in four categories: (1) HR < 75 bpm and PP ≥ 50 mm Hg (reference), (2) HR < 75 bpm and PP < 50 mm Hg, (3) HR ≥ 75 bpm and PP ≥ 50 mm Hg, and (4) HR ≥ 75 bpm and PP < 50 mm Hg. The association between these categories and outcomes was studied using a Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 24 (18-33) months, 3561 (16%) patients died of all-causes and 3048 (14%) patients of cardiovascular (CV) causes. In multivariate analysis, patients from the fourth category had the highest risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio of 1.69; 95% CI: 1.53-1.86) and CV mortality (hazard ratio of 1.78; 95% CI: 1.60-1.97). CONCLUSIONS: There is an interaction between HR and PP in patients with HF following MI, with the highest risk being conferred by a clinical status with both an elevated HR and a lower PP. These findings identify a high-risk population likely to require an aggressive diagnostic and management strategy.

Treatment with insulin is associated with worse outcome in patients with chronic heart failure and diabetes.

AIMS: Up to one-third of patients with diabetes mellitus and heart failure (HF) are treated with insulin. As insulin causes sodium retention and hypoglycaemia, its use might be associated with worse outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined two datasets: 24 012 patients with HF from four large randomized trials and an administrative database of 4 million individuals, 103 857 of whom with HF. In the former, survival was examined using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for baseline variables and separately for propensity scores. Fine-Gray competing risk regression models were used to assess the risk of hospitalization for HF. For the latter, a case-control nested within a population-based cohort study was conducted with propensity score. Prevalence of diabetes mellitus at study entry ranged from 25.5% to 29.5% across trials. Insulin alone or in combination with oral hypoglycaemic drugs was prescribed at randomization to 24.4% to 34.5% of the patients with diabetes. The rates of death from any cause and hospitalization for HF were higher in patients with vs. without diabetes, and highest of all in patients prescribed insulin [propensity score pooled hazard ratio for all-cause mortality 1.27 (1.16-1.38), for HF hospitalization 1.23 (1.13-1.33)]. In the administrative registry, insulin prescription was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death [odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.87-2.19] and rehospitalization for HF (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.32-1.53). CONCLUSIONS: Whether insulin use is associated with poor outcomes in HF should be investigated further with controlled trials, as should the possibility that there may be safer alternative glucose-lowering treatments for patients with HF and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Beta-blockers for heart failure with reduced, mid-range, and preserved ejection fraction: an individual patient-level analysis of double-blind randomized trials.

Aims: Recent guidelines recommend that patients with heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 40-49% should be managed similar to LVEF ≥ 50%. We investigated the effect of beta-blockers according to LVEF in double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Methods and results: Individual patient data meta-analysis of 11 trials, stratified by baseline LVEF and heart rhythm (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT0083244; PROSPERO: CRD42014010012). Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and cardiovascular death over 1.3 years median follow-up, with an intention-to-treat analysis. For 14 262 patients in sinus rhythm, median LVEF was 27% (interquartile range 21-33%), including 575 patients with LVEF 40-49% and 244 ≥ 50%. Beta-blockers reduced all-cause and cardiovascular mortality compared to placebo in sinus rhythm, an effect that was consistent across LVEF strata, except for those in the small subgroup with LVEF ≥ 50%. For LVEF 40-49%, death occurred in 21/292 [7.2%] randomized to beta-blockers compared to 35/283 [12.4%] with placebo; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.59 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-1.03]. Cardiovascular death occurred in 13/292 [4.5%] with beta-blockers and 26/283 [9.2%] with placebo; adjusted HR 0.48 (95% CI 0.24-0.97). Over a median of 1.0 years following randomization (n = 4601), LVEF increased with beta-blockers in all groups in sinus rhythm except LVEF ≥50%. For patients in atrial fibrillation at baseline (n = 3050), beta-blockers increased LVEF when < 50% at baseline, but did not improve prognosis. Conclusion: Beta-blockers improve LVEF and prognosis for patients with heart failure in sinus rhythm with a reduced LVEF. The data are most robust for LVEF < 40%, but similar benefit was observed in the subgroup of patients with LVEF 40-49%.

Heart rate prediction of outcome in heart failure following myocardial infarction depend on heart rhythm status an analysis from the high-risk myocardial infarction database initiative.

BACKGROUND: Heart rate has been reported to be associated with adverse outcome in heart failure (HF) and myocardial infarction (MI), but conflicting evidence exists regarding its impact in patients with associated atrial fibrillation (AF). OBJECTIVES: We investigated the differential impact of heart rate on clinical outcomes according to the presence or absence of AF in patients with reduced systolic function and/or HF after MI. METHODS: We studied the association of heart rate with outcome using Cox-models in a merged dataset (n=28,771) of four randomized trials (CAPRICORN, EPHESUS, OPTIMAAL, and VALIANT). RESULTS: At baseline, 3736 (13%) patients had AF. We identified a significant interaction between AF and heart rate, and a decreasing effect of heart rate with time, heart rate being less associated with outcome after 1year of follow-up (both p for interaction <0.001). We report associations with outcome separately in patients with and without AF. In addition, as neutral associations with outcome after 1year were estimated after adjustment on confounding factors, only association for the first year follow-up were provided. 10-bpm increase in heart rate conferred increased risk for all-cause mortality (1.27 [1.21 to 1.33], p<0.0001), CV-mortality (1.28 [1.22 to 1.34], p<0.0001), and HF-hospitalisation (1.25 [1.19 to 1.31], p<0.0001) in patients without AF. In contrast, in patients with AF, the incremental risk for 10-bpm increase in heart rate was attenuated for all-cause (1.14 [1.06 to 1.23], p=0.0007), CV-mortality (1.12 [1.03 to 1.22], p=0.006), and HF-hospitalisation (1.16 [1.07 to 1.26], p=0.0006, p for interaction with AF <0.001 for all outcomes). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with reduced systolic function and/or HF post-MI, higher heart rate predicts increased major cardiovascular events during the first year following MI in patients without AF. This association is markedly attenuated in subjects with AF.

Declining Risk of Sudden Death in Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The risk of sudden death has changed over time among patients with symptomatic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction with the sequential introduction of medications including angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists. We sought to examine this trend in detail. METHODS: We analyzed data from 40,195 patients who had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and were enrolled in any of 12 clinical trials spanning the period from 1995 through 2014. Patients who had an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator at the time of trial enrollment were excluded. Weighted multivariable regression was used to examine trends in rates of sudden death over time. Adjusted hazard ratios for sudden death in each trial group were calculated with the use of Cox regression models. The cumulative incidence rates of sudden death were assessed at different time points after randomization and according to the length of time between the diagnosis of heart failure and randomization. RESULTS: Sudden death was reported in 3583 patients. Such patients were older and were more often male, with an ischemic cause of heart failure and worse cardiac function, than those in whom sudden death did not occur. There was a 44% decline in the rate of sudden death across the trials (P=0.03). The cumulative incidence of sudden death at 90 days after randomization was 2.4% in the earliest trial and 1.0% in the most recent trial. The rate of sudden death was not higher among patients with a recent diagnosis of heart failure than among those with a longer-standing diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of sudden death declined substantially over time among ambulatory patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction who were enrolled in clinical trials, a finding that is consistent with a cumulative benefit of evidence-based medications on this cause of death. (Funded by the China Scholarship Council and the University of Glasgow.).

A history of diabetes predicts outcomes following myocardial infarction: an analysis of the 28 771 patients in the High-Risk MI Database.

AIMS: To examine the impact of diabetes mellitus on long-term clinical outcomes in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) complicated by clinical signs of heart failure (HF) or left ventricular dysfunction (LVD). METHODS AND RESULTS: The High-Risk MI Database consists of individual data from 28 771 patients and was created by merging four large recent randomized clinical trials (VALIANT, EPHESUS, OPTIMAAL, and CAPRICORN) that each examined the impact of pharmacological interventions following MI in patients with evidence of HF or LVD. The mean age of patients was 65 years, 70% were male, and almost 94% Caucasian. Overall, 7368 (26%) had a history of diabetes. All the major outcomes were adjudicated by independent end-point committees. Strong and highly significant associations were found with all major clinical outcomes. Diabetes was associated with an increased risk for all-cause death [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.37; confidence interval (CI) 1.28-1.46; P < 0.001]. The higher risk for all-cause death was largely mediated by higher risk for cardiovascular death (adjusted HR 1.38; CI 1.27-1.48; P < 0.001) predominantly due to a substantially increased risk for fatal re-infarction (adjusted HR 1.78; CI 1.42-2.23; P < 0.001). Additionally, diabetes was associated with an increased risk for hospitalizations, particularly HF hospitalization (adjusted HR 1.50; CI 1.39-1.63; P < 0.001). There were also elevated risks for composite outcomes, particularly death or hospitalization due to HF (adjusted HR 1.48; CI 1.38-1.59; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The risk for adverse outcomes associated with diabetes remains elevated even after debut of coronary artery disease in patients with MI complicated by clinical signs of HF or LVD. This association is particularly strong for HF-related outcomes.

Heart Rate and Rhythm and the Benefit of Beta-Blockers in Patients With Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between mortality and heart rate remains unclear for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in either sinus rhythm or atrial fibrillation (AF). OBJECTIVES: This analysis explored the prognostic importance of heart rate in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in randomized controlled trials comparing beta-blockers and placebo. METHODS: The Beta-Blockers in Heart Failure Collaborative Group performed a meta-analysis of harmonized individual patient data from 11 double-blind randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, analyzed with Cox proportional hazard ratios (HR) modeling heart rate measured at baseline and approximately 6 months post-randomization. RESULTS: A higher heart rate at baseline was associated with greater all-cause mortality for patients in sinus rhythm (n = 14,166; adjusted HR: 1.11 per 10 beats/min; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07 to 1.15; p < 0.0001) but not in AF (n = 3,034; HR: 1.03 per 10 beats/min; 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.08; p = 0.38). Beta-blockers reduced ventricular rate by 12 beats/min in both sinus rhythm and AF. Mortality was lower for patients in sinus rhythm randomized to beta-blockers (HR: 0.73 vs. placebo; 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.79; p < 0.001), regardless of baseline heart rate (interaction p = 0.35). Beta-blockers had no effect on mortality in patients with AF (HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.81 to 1.12; p = 0.58) at any heart rate (interaction p = 0.48). A lower achieved resting heart rate, irrespective of treatment, was associated with better prognosis only for patients in sinus rhythm (HR: 1.16 per 10 beats/min increase, 95% CI: 1.11 to 1.22; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of pre-treatment heart rate, beta-blockers reduce mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in sinus rhythm. Achieving a lower heart rate is associated with better prognosis, but only for those in sinus rhythm.

Limited Added Value of Circulating Inflammatory Biomarkers in Chronic Heart Failure.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate whether a panel of biomarkers improved prognostication in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction of ischemic origin using a systematized approach according to suggested requirements for validation of new biomarkers. BACKGROUND: Modeling combinations of multiple circulating markers could potentially identify patients with HF at particularly high risk and aid in the selection of individualized therapy. METHODS: From a panel of 20 inflammatory and extracellular matrix biomarkers, 2 different biomarker panels were created and added to the Seattle HF score and the prognostic model from the CORONA (Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure) study (n = 1,497), which included conventional clinical characteristics and C-reactive protein and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide. Interactions with statin treatment were also assessed. RESULTS: The two models-model 1 (endostatin, interleukin 8, soluble ST2, troponin T, galectin 3, and chemokine [C-C motif] ligand 21) and model 2 (troponin T, soluble ST2, galectin 3, pentraxin 3, and soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor 2)-significantly improved the CORONA and Seattle HF models but added only modestly to their Harrell's C statistic and net reclassification index. In addition, rosuvastatin had no effect on the levels of a wide range of inflammatory and extracellular matrix markers, but there was a tendency for patients with a lower level of biomarkers in the 2 panels to have a positive effect from statin treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In the specific HF patient population studied, a multimarker approach using the particular panel of biomarkers measured was of limited clinical value for identifying future risk of adverse outcomes.

High-Intensity Interval Training in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Small studies have suggested that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) is superior to moderate continuous training (MCT) in reversing cardiac remodeling and increasing aerobic capacity in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The present multicenter trial compared 12 weeks of supervised interventions of HIIT, MCT, or a recommendation of regular exercise (RRE). METHODS: Two hundred sixty-one patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% and New York Heart Association class II to III were randomly assigned to HIIT at 90% to 95% of maximal heart rate, MCT at 60% to 70% of maximal heart rate, or RRE. Thereafter, patients were encouraged to continue exercising on their own. Clinical assessments were performed at baseline, after the intervention, and at follow-up after 52 weeks. Primary end point was a between-group comparison of change in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter from baseline to 12 weeks. RESULTS: Groups did not differ in age (median, 60 years), sex (19% women), ischemic pathogenesis (59%), or medication. Change in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter from baseline to 12 weeks was not different between HIIT and MCT (P=0.45); left ventricular end-diastolic diameter changes compared with RRE were -2.8 mm (-5.2 to -0.4 mm; P=0.02) in HIIT and -1.2 mm (-3.6 to 1.2 mm; P=0.34) in MCT. There was also no difference between HIIT and MCT in peak oxygen uptake (P=0.70), but both were superior to RRE. However, none of these changes was maintained at follow-up after 52 weeks. Serious adverse events were not statistically different during supervised intervention or at follow-up at 52 weeks (HIIT, 39%; MCT, 25%; RRE, 34%; P=0.16). Training records showed that 51% of patients exercised below prescribed target during supervised HIIT and 80% above target in MCT. CONCLUSIONS: HIIT was not superior to MCT in changing left ventricular remodeling or aerobic capacity, and its feasibility remains unresolved in patients with heart failure. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00917046.

Low YKL-40 in chronic heart failure may predict beneficial effects of statins: analysis from the controlled rosuvastatin multinational trial in heart failure (CORONA).

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if YKL-40 can provide prognostic information in patients with ischemic heart failure (HF) and identify patients who may benefit from statin therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The association between serum YKL-40 and predefined outcome was evaluated in 1344 HF patients assigned to rosuvastatin or placebo. RESULTS: YKL-40 was not associated with outcome in adjusted analysis. In YKL-40 tertile 1, an effect on the primary outcome (HR 0.50, p = 0.006) and CV death (HR 0.54, p = 0.040) was seen by rosuvastatin in adjusted analysis. CONCLUSIONS: A beneficial modification of outcome was observed with statin therapy in patients with low YKL-40 levels.

Loop diuretics, renal function and clinical outcome in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.

AIM: We aimed to study the relationships of loop diuretic dose with renal function and clinical outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure (HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Loop diuretic dose at baseline was recorded in patients included in the Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure (CORONA). The relationship to change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) over time and to the first occurrence of the composite outcome of cardiovascular (CV) death or hospitalization owing to HF was examined in propensity score matched cohorts. Of the 5011 patients, 2550, 745, and 449 were receiving >80 mg (high), 41-80 mg (medium) and ≤40 mg (low) of loop diuretics in furosemide equivalent daily dosages, respectively, which were used to assemble 229, 385, and 1045 pairs of propensity-matched high, medium, and low dose cohorts. Compared with matched no loop diuretic groups, eGFR declined 0.3 ± 0.2, 0.3 ± 0.3 and 1.2 ± 0.5 mL/min/1.73 m(2) /year in the low-, medium-, and high-dose groups, respectively. Compared with matched no loop diuretic groups, hazard ratios (HR) (95% confidence intervals) for outcome associated with low-, medium- and high-dose groups were 1.71 (1.41-2.06), 1.99 (1.50-2.64), and 2.94 (1.95-4.41), respectively. Higher loop diuretic dose was particularly associated with increased risk for hospitalization owing to HF: HR 4.80 (2.75-8.37), P < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: The use of loop diuretics was associated with a slightly greater rate of decline in eGFR, which did not vary significantly by diuretic dose.Loop diuretic dose was associated with higher risks of (CV) mortality and predominantly hospitalization owing to HF, which appeared to be higher among those receiving higher daily doses.

Secreted Frizzled Related Protein 3 in Chronic Heart Failure: Analysis from the Controlled Rosuvastatin Multinational Trial in Heart Failure (CORONA).

BACKGROUND: We have previously demonstrated an association between increased sFRP3 expression and adverse outcome in a population of HF irrespective of cause and left ventricular ejection fraction. In this study we evaluated the prognostic value of sFRP3 in older patients with chronic systolic HF of ischemic origin. METHODS: We evaluated sFRP3, by tertiles, as a risk factor for the primary endpoint (cardiovascular [CV] mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke), all-cause mortality, CV mortality, death from worsening HF (WHF), any coronary event, including sudden death, as well as hospitalizations for CV causes and WHF in 1444 patients from the CORONA population, randomly assigned to 10 mg rosuvastatin or placebo. RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier curves for the primary endpoint, as well as all-cause- and CV mortality revealed a markedly better survival for patients with sFRP3 levels in the middle tertile of compared to the 1st and 3rd tertile. In multivariable Cox-regression, after full adjustment including high-sensitive CRP and NT-proBNP, a lower event rate for the primary end point, all cause and CV mortality was observed for patients with tertile 2 sFRP3 levels (HR 0.57 [0.44-0.74], 0.55 [0.44-0.74] and 0.52 [0.39-0.69]; p<0.001), as well as for the number of coronary events (HR 0.62 [0.47-0.82], p = 0.001) and sudden death (HR 0.55 [0.37-0.82], p = 0.002). Applying sFRP3 values to the fully adjusted regression model resulted in highly significant continuous net reclassification improvements for the primary endpoint, all cause and CV mortality, coronary events and sudden death (range 0.24-0.31; p≤0.002 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Intermediate serum sFRP3 levels are associated with better survival and fewer CV events than low or high sFRP3 levels, independently of conventional risk factors, in older patients with chronic systolic HF of ischemic origin. Our study suggests that balanced Wnt activity might confer protective effects in a clinical HF setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00206310.

Risk of Stroke in Chronic Heart Failure Patients Without Atrial Fibrillation: Analysis of the Controlled Rosuvastatin in Multinational Trial Heart Failure (CORONA) and the Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Insufficienza Cardiaca-Heart Failure (GISSI-HF) Trials.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to describe the incidence and predictors of stroke in patients who have heart failure without atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We pooled 2 contemporary heart failure trials, the Controlled Rosuvastatin in Multinational Trial Heart Failure (CORONA) and the Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Insufficienza cardiaca-Heart Failure trial (GISSI-HF). Of the 9585 total patients, 6054 did not have AF. Stroke occurred in 165 patients (4.7%) with AF and in 206 patients (3.4%) without AF (rates 16.8/1000 patient-years and 11.1/1000 patient-years, respectively). Using Cox proportional-hazards models, we identified the following independent predictors of stroke in patients without AF (ranked by χ(2) value): age (hazard ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.63 per 10 years), New York Heart Association class (1.60, 1.21-2.12 class III/IV versus II), diabetes mellitus treated with insulin (1.87, 1.22-2.88), body mass index (0.74, 0.60-0.91 per 5 kg/m(2) up to 30), and previous stroke (1.81, 1.19-2.74). N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (available in 2632 patients) was also an independent predictor of stroke (hazard ratio, 1.31; 1.11-1.57 per log unit) when added to this model. With the use of a risk score formulated from these predictors, we found that patients in the upper third of risk had a rate of stroke that approximated the risk in patients with AF. CONCLUSIONS: A small number of demographic and clinical variables identified a subset of patients who have heart failure without AF at a high risk of stroke.

Comparison of outcomes after hospitalization for worsening heart failure, myocardial infarction, and stroke in patients with heart failure and reduced and preserved ejection fraction.

AIMS: To investigate the prognostic significance of hospitalization for worsening heart failure (WHF), myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke in patients with chronic heart failure (HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 5011 patients with HF and reduced EF (HF-REF) in the CORONA trial and 4128 patients with HF and preserved EF (HF-PEF) in the I-Preserve trial. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for death were estimated for 0-30 days and ≥31 days after first post-randomization WHF, MI, or stroke used as a time-dependent variable, compared with patients with none of these events. In CORONA, 1616 patients (32%) had post-randomization first events (1223 WHF, 216 MI, 177 stroke), and the adjusted HR for mortality ≤30 days after an event was: WHF 7.21 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.05-25.40], MI 23.08 (95% CI 6.44-82.71), and stroke 32.15 (95% CI 8.93-115.83). The HR for mortality at >30 days was: WHF 3.62 (95% CI 3.11-4.21), MI 4.41 (95% CI 3.23-6.02), and stroke 3.19 (95% CI 2.21-4.61). In I-Preserve, 896 patients (22%) experienced a post-randomization event (638 WHF, 111 MI, 147 stroke). The HR for mortality ≤30 days was WHF 31.77 (95% CI 7.60-132.81), MI 154.77 (95% CI 34.21-700.17), and stroke 223.30 (95% CI 51.42-969.78); for >30 days it was WHF 3.36 (95% CI 2.79-4.05), MI 3.29 (95% CI 2.14-5.06), and stroke 5.13 (95% CI 3.61-7.29). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with both HF-REF and HF-PEF, hospitalization for WHF was associated with high early and late mortality. The early relative risk of death was not as great as following MI or stroke, but the longer term relative risk of death was similar following all three types of event. Numerically, more deaths occurred following WHF because it was a much more common event.

Exercise-induced vasodilation in healthy males: A marker of reduced endothelial function.

OBJECTIVES: Reduced arterial vasodilatatory capacity is a marker of coronary heart disease. The aim was to investigate if the difference between the vasodilatory response before and after exercise, as assessed by non-invasive methodology, is related to endothelial and inflammatory biomarkers. DESIGN: Post-ischemic hyperemia after 5 min of arterial occlusion was examined before and after a bicycle test with strain-gauge plethysmography (measuring peak reactive hyperemia in the forearm) and peripheral arterial tonometry (PAT hyperemia ratio: measuring pulse waves in the index finger relative to the contra-lateral index finger) in 30 healthy males. A low PAT hyperemia ratio or a low peak reactive hyperemia reflects endothelial dysfunction. Inflammatory and endothelial biomarkers were assessed. RESULTS: A low peak reactive hyperemia and a low PAT hyperemia ratio before the bicycle test was associated with a high percentage increase in peak reactive hyperemia after exercise (r = - 0.68, p < 0.001; r = - 0.35, p = 0.06, respectively). Asymmetric dimethylarginine and interleukin-10 were associated with the percentage increase in peak reactive hyperemia in multiple linear regression analyses (ß: 165 (confidence interval [CI], 34-296), p = 0.02; ß: 19 (CI, - 0.5-39), p = 0.06, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The difference in the vasodilatory response before and after exercise, as assessed by non-invasive methodology, is related to endothelial and inflammatory biomarkers in healthy males.