Semaglutide versus placebo in people with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a pooled analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: In the STEP-HFpEF (NCT04788511) and STEP-HFpEF DM (NCT04916470) trials, the GLP-1 receptor agonist semaglutide improved symptoms, physical limitations, bodyweight, and exercise function in people with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. In this prespecified pooled analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM trials, we aimed to provide a more definitive assessment of the effects of semaglutide across a range of outcomes and to test whether these effects were consistent across key patient subgroups. METHODS: We conducted a prespecified pooled analysis of individual patient data from STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials at 129 clinical research sites in 18 countries. In both trials, eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, had heart failure with a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 45%, a BMI of at least 30 kg/m2, New York Heart Association class II-IV symptoms, and a Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS; a measure of heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations) of less than 90 points. In STEP-HFpEF, people with diabetes or glycated haemoglobin A1c concentrations of at least 6·5% were excluded, whereas for inclusion in STEP-HFpEF DM participants had to have been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes at least 90 days before screening and to have an HbA1c of 10% or lower. In both trials, participants were randomly assigned to either 2·4 mg semaglutide once weekly or matched placebo for 52 weeks. The dual primary endpoints were change from baseline to week 52 in KCCQ-CSS and bodyweight in all randomly assigned participants. Confirmatory secondary endpoints included change from baseline to week 52 in 6-min walk distance, a hierarchical composite endpoint (all-cause death, heart failure events, and differences in changes in KCCQ-CSS and 6-min walk distance); and C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations. Heterogeneity in treatment effects was assessed across subgroups of interest. We assessed safety in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. FINDINGS: Between March 19, 2021 and March 9, 2022, 529 people were randomly assigned in STEP-HFpEF, and between June 27, 2021 and Sept 2, 2022, 616 were randomly assigned in STEP-HFpEF DM. Overall, 1145 were included in our pooled analysis, 573 in the semaglutide group and 572 in the placebo group. Improvements in KCCQ-CSS and reductions in bodyweight between baseline and week 52 were significantly greater in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group (mean between-group difference for the change from baseline to week 52 in KCCQ-CSS 7·5 points [95% CI 5·3 to 9·8]; p<0·0001; mean between-group difference in bodyweight at week 52 -8·4% [-9·2 to -7·5]; p<0·0001). For the confirmatory secondary endpoints, 6-min walk distance (mean between-group difference at week 52 17·1 metres [9·2 to 25·0]) and the hierarchical composite endpoint (win ratio 1·65 [1·42 to 1·91]) were significantly improved, and CRP concentrations (treatment ratio 0·64 [0·56 to 0·72]) were significantly reduced, in the semaglutide group compared with the placebo group (p<0·0001 for all comparisons). For the dual primary endpoints, the efficacy of semaglutide was largely consistent across multiple subgroups, including those defined by age, race, sex, BMI, systolic blood pressure, baseline CRP, and left ventricular ejection fraction. 161 serious adverse events were reported in the semaglutide group compared with 301 in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: In this prespecified pooled analysis of the STEP-HFpEF and STEP-HFpEF DM trials, semaglutide was superior to placebo in improving heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations, and reducing bodyweight in participants with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. These effects were largely consistent across patient demographic and clinical characteristics. Semaglutide was well tolerated. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

Semaglutide in Patients with Obesity-Related Heart Failure and Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Obesity and type 2 diabetes are prevalent in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and are characterized by a high symptom burden. No approved therapies specifically target obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in persons with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients who had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, a body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) of 30 or more, and type 2 diabetes to receive once-weekly semaglutide (2.4 mg) or placebo for 52 weeks. The primary end points were the change from baseline in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS; scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating fewer symptoms and physical limitations) and the change in body weight. Confirmatory secondary end points included the change in 6-minute walk distance; a hierarchical composite end point that included death, heart failure events, and differences in the change in the KCCQ-CSS and 6-minute walk distance; and the change in the C-reactive protein (CRP) level. RESULTS: A total of 616 participants underwent randomization. The mean change in the KCCQ-CSS was 13.7 points with semaglutide and 6.4 points with placebo (estimated difference, 7.3 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1 to 10.4; P<0.001), and the mean percentage change in body weight was -9.8% with semaglutide and -3.4% with placebo (estimated difference, -6.4 percentage points; 95% CI, -7.6 to -5.2; P<0.001). The results for the confirmatory secondary end points favored semaglutide over placebo (estimated between-group difference in change in 6-minute walk distance, 14.3 m [95% CI, 3.7 to 24.9; P = 0.008]; win ratio for hierarchical composite end point, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.29 to 1.94; P<0.001]; and estimated treatment ratio for change in CRP level, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.80; P<0.001]). Serious adverse events were reported in 55 participants (17.7%) in the semaglutide group and 88 (28.8%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and type 2 diabetes, semaglutide led to larger reductions in heart failure-related symptoms and physical limitations and greater weight loss than placebo at 1 year. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; STEP-HFpEF DM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04916470.).

Identification and therapy for patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: An expert opinion of the Heart Failure Association of the Polish Cardiac Society.

Diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) may be challenging owing to the heterogeneous clinical presentation and comorbidities in this population of patients, along with the limited availability of standard diagnostic tools, including natriuretic peptide tests and functional testing. This expert opinion summarizes the current state of knowledge on the identification and therapy for patients with HFpEF based on recent European and American recommendations. This expert opinion aims to aid clinicians in HFpEF management.

Protocolized Natriuresis-Guided Decongestion Improves Diuretic Response: The Multicenter ENACT-HF Study.

BACKGROUND: The use of urinary sodium to guide diuretics in acute heart failure is recommended by experts and the most recent European Society of Cardiology guidelines. However, there are limited data to support this recommendation. The ENACT-HF study (Efficacy of a Standardized Diuretic Protocol in Acute Heart Failure) investigated the feasibility and efficacy of a standardized natriuresis-guided diuretic protocol in patients with acute heart failure and signs of volume overload. METHODS: ENACT-HF was an international, multicenter, open-label, pragmatic, 2-phase study, comparing the current standard of care of each center with a standardized diuretic protocol, including urinary sodium to guide therapy. The primary end point was natriuresis after 1 day. Secondary end points included cumulative natriuresis and diuresis after 2 days of treatment, length of stay, and in-hospital mortality. All end points were adjusted for baseline differences between both treatment arms. RESULTS: Four hundred one patients from 29 centers in 18 countries worldwide were included in the study. The natriuresis after 1 day was significantly higher in the protocol arm compared with the standard of care arm (282 versus 174 mmol; adjusted mean ratio, 1.64; P<0.001). After 2 days, the natriuresis remained higher in the protocol arm (538 versus 365 mmol; adjusted mean ratio, 1.52; P<0.001), with a significantly higher diuresis (5776 versus 4381 mL; adjusted mean ratio, 1.33; P<0.001). The protocol arm had a shorter length of stay (5.8 versus 7.0 days; adjusted mean ratio, 0.87; P=0.036). In-hospital mortality was low and did not significantly differ between the 2 arms (1.4% versus 2.0%; P=0.852). CONCLUSIONS: A standardized natriuresis-guided diuretic protocol to guide decongestion in acute heart failure was feasible, safe, and resulted in higher natriuresis and diuresis, as well as a shorter length of stay.

Quality of life in heart failure: New data, new drugs and devices.

Quality of life (QoL) is a therapeutic goal in heart failure. There are many EBM therapies for improving QoL. In this study, data is presented on new pharmacotherapies and devices that impact QoL in the heart failure population.

Semaglutide in Patients With Obesity and Heart Failure Across Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: Many therapies for heart failure (HF) have shown differential impact across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). OBJECTIVES: In this prespecified analysis, the authors assessed the effects of semaglutide across the baseline LVEF strata in patients with the obesity phenotype of HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in the STEP-HFpEF (Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with obesity and HFpEF) trial. METHODS: STEP-HFpEF randomized 529 patients (263 semaglutide; 266 placebo). For this prespecified analysis, patients were categorized into 3 groups based on LVEF: 45% to 49% (n = 85), 50% to 59% (n = 215), and ≥60% (n = 229). RESULTS: At 52 weeks, semaglutide improved the dual primary endpoints of Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (estimated treatment difference: EF [ejection fraction] 45%-49%: 5.0 points [95% CI: -2.7 to 12.8 points], EF 50%-59%: 9.8 points [95% CI: 5.0 to 14.6 points], and EF ≥60%: 7.4 points [95% CI: 2.8 to 12.0 points]; P interaction = 0.56) and body weight (EF: 45%-49%: -7.6 [95% CI: -10.7 to -4.4], EF 50%-59%: -10.6 [95% CI: -12.6 to -8.6] and EF ≥60%: -11.9 [95% CI: -13.8 to -9.9]; P interaction = 0.08), to a similar extent across LVEF categories. Likewise, LVEF did not influence the benefit of semaglutide on confirmatory secondary endpoints: 6-minute walk distance (P interaction = 0.19), hierarchal composite endpoint (P interaction = 0.43), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (P interaction = 0.26); or exploratory endpoint of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (P interaction = 0.96). Semaglutide was well-tolerated across LVEF categories. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HFpEF and obesity, semaglutide 2.4 mg improved symptoms, physical limitations, and exercise function, and reduced inflammation and body weight to a similar extent across LVEF categories. These data support treatment with semaglutide in patients with the obesity phenotype of HFpEF regardless of LVEF. (Research Study to Investigate How Well Semaglutide Works in People Living With Heart Failure and Obesity [STEP-HFpEF]; NCT04788511).

Tailoring guideline-directed medical therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A practical guide.

According to the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines, the four pillars of medical therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) include sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors. However, in clinical practice, concomitant use of all four drug groups in target doses is often limited by their intolerance or fear of potential complications. Herein, we present strategies to initiate or modify HFrEF therapy in frequent but challenging clinical scenarios (symptomatic hypotension, atrial fibrillation, kidney disease or worsening renal function, hyperkalemia) in a way that does not lead to unnecessary reduction or cessation of life-saving treatment.

Tailoring guideline-directed medical therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A practical guide.

According to the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines, the four pillars of medical therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) include sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor-nephrilysin inhibitors. However, in clinical practice, concomitant use of all four drug groups in target doses is often limited by their intolerance or fear of potential complications. Herein, we present strategies to initiate or modify HFrEF therapy in frequent but challenging clinical scenarios (symptomatic hypotension, atrial fibrillation, kidney disease or worsening renal function, hyperkalemia) in a way that does not lead to unnecessary reduction or cessation of life-saving medications.

Semaglutide in Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction and Obesity.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction is increasing in prevalence and is associated with a high symptom burden and functional impairment, especially in persons with obesity. No therapies have been approved to target obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. METHODS: We randomly assigned 529 patients who had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and a body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) of 30 or higher to receive once-weekly semaglutide (2.4 mg) or placebo for 52 weeks. The dual primary end points were the change from baseline in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS; scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating fewer symptoms and physical limitations) and the change in body weight. Confirmatory secondary end points included the change in the 6-minute walk distance; a hierarchical composite end point that included death, heart failure events, and differences in the change in the KCCQ-CSS and 6-minute walk distance; and the change in the C-reactive protein (CRP) level. RESULTS: The mean change in the KCCQ-CSS was 16.6 points with semaglutide and 8.7 points with placebo (estimated difference, 7.8 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.8 to 10.9; P<0.001), and the mean percentage change in body weight was -13.3% with semaglutide and -2.6% with placebo (estimated difference, -10.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -11.9 to -9.4; P<0.001). The mean change in the 6-minute walk distance was 21.5 m with semaglutide and 1.2 m with placebo (estimated difference, 20.3 m; 95% CI, 8.6 to 32.1; P<0.001). In the analysis of the hierarchical composite end point, semaglutide produced more wins than placebo (win ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.15; P<0.001). The mean percentage change in the CRP level was -43.5% with semaglutide and -7.3% with placebo (estimated treatment ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.72; P<0.001). Serious adverse events were reported in 35 participants (13.3%) in the semaglutide group and 71 (26.7%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and obesity, treatment with semaglutide (2.4 mg) led to larger reductions in symptoms and physical limitations, greater improvements in exercise function, and greater weight loss than placebo. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; STEP-HFpEF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04788511.).

Semaglutide in HFpEF across obesity class and by body weight reduction: a prespecified analysis of the STEP-HFpEF trial.

In the STEP-HFpEF trial, semaglutide improved symptoms, physical limitations and exercise function and reduced body weight in patients with obesity phenotype of heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). This prespecified analysis examined the effects of semaglutide on dual primary endpoints (change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS) and body weight) and confirmatory secondary endpoints (change in 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), hierarchical composite (death, HF events, change in KCCQ-CSS and 6MWD) and change in C-reactive protein (CRP)) across obesity classes I-III (body mass index (BMI) 30.0-34.9 kg m-2, 35.0-39.9 kg m-2 and ≥40 kg m-2) and according to body weight reduction with semaglutide after 52 weeks. Semaglutide consistently improved all outcomes across obesity categories (P value for treatment effects × BMI interactions = not significant for all). In semaglutide-treated patients, improvements in KCCQ-CSS, 6MWD and CRP were greater with larger body weight reduction (for example, 6.4-point (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.1, 8.8) and 14.4-m (95% CI: 5.5, 23.3) improvements in KCCQ-CSS and 6MWD for each 10% body weight reduction). In participants with obesity phenotype of HFpEF, semaglutide improved symptoms, physical limitations and exercise function and reduced inflammation and body weight across obesity categories. In semaglutide-treated patients, the magnitude of benefit was directly related to the extent of weight loss. Collectively, these data support semaglutide-mediated weight loss as a key treatment strategy in patients with obesity phenotype of HFpEF. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04788511 .

Expert opinion of the Heart Failure Association of the Polish Society of Cardiology, the College of Family Physicians in Poland, and the Polish Society of Family Medicine on the peri discharge management of patients with heart failure.

Despite advances in the treatment of heart failure (HF), the rate of hospitalisation for exacerbations of the disease remains high. One of the underlying reasons is that recommended guidelines for the management of HF are still too rarely followed in daily practice. Disease exacerbation requiring inpatient treatment is always afactor that worsens the prognosis, and thus signals disease progression. This is also akey moment when therapy should be modified for HF exacerbation, or initiated in the case of newly diagnosed disease. Inpatient treatment and the peri­discharge period is the time when the aetiology and mechanism of HF decompensation should be established. Therapy should be individualised based on aetiology, HF phenotype, and comorbidities; it should take into account the possibilities of modern treatment. According to the recommendations of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), patients with HF should receive multidisciplinary management. Cooperation between the various members of the multidisciplinary team taking care of patients with HF improves the efficiency and quality of treatment. This document expands and details the information on the peri­discharge management of HF contained in the 2021 ESC guidelines and the 2022 American Heart Association (AHA)/American College of Cardiology (ACC)/Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA) guidelines.

Pharmacotherapy of heart failure A.D. 2023. Expert opinion of Working Group on Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy, Polish Cardiac Society.

Heart failure (HF) remains one of the most common causes of hospitalization and mortality among Polish patients. The position of the Section of Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy presents the currently applicable options for pharmacological treatment of HF based on the latest European and American guidelines from 2021-2022 in relation to Polish healthcare conditions. Treatment of HF varies depending on its clinical presentation (acute/chronic) or left ventricular ejection fraction. Initial treatment of symptomatic patients with features of volume overload is based on diuretics, especially loop drugs. Treatment aimed at reducing mortality and hospitalization should include drugs blocking the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, preferably angiotensin receptor antagonist/neprilysin inhibitor, i.e. sacubitril/valsartan, selected beta-blockers (no class effect - options include bisoprolol, metoprolol succinate, or vasodilatory beta-blockers - carvedilol and nebivolol), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, and sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitor (flozin), constituting the 4 pillars of pharmacotherapy. Their effectiveness has been confirmed in numerous prospective randomized trials. The current HF treatment strategy is based on the fastest possible implementation of all four mentioned classes of drugs due to their independent additive action. It is also important to individualize therapy according to comorbidities, blood pressure, resting heart rate, or the presence of arrhythmias. This article emphasizes the cardio- and nephroprotective role of flozins in HF therapy, regardless of ejection fraction value. We propose practical guidelines for the use of medicines, profile of adverse reactions, drug interactions, as well as pharmacoeconomic aspects. The principles of treatment with ivabradine, digoxin, vericiguat, iron supplementation, or antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy are also discussed, along with recent novel drugs including omecamtiv mecarbil, tolvaptan, or coenzyme Q10 as well as progress in the prevention and treatment of hyperkalemia. Based on the latest recommendations, treatment regimens for different types of HF are discussed.

Comparison of the population of Polish patients participating in the TRANSITION study with the international population: a post hoc analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Heart failure (HF) patients discharged from a hospital are at a high risk of death and rehospitalization. Scarce data are available on the use of sacubitril / valsartan in this population in Poland. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of sacubitril / valsartan in the group of Polish patients who participated in the TRANSITION study with the patients recruited at other sites. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a post hoc secondary analysis of the TRANSITION study comparing sacubitril / valsartan initiation pre- vs postdischarge in 991 patients hospitalized for acute decompensated HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The Polish subgroup consisted of 104 patients. RESULTS: Significant differences were identified in the characteristics of Polish vs non­Polish populations. At baseline, the Polish population showed higher proportion of men, higher body mass index, lower heart rate, N­terminal pro-B­type natriuretic peptide and high­sensitivity troponin T levels, and significantly lower New York Heart Association class. The Polish patients were better managed in terms of implanted electrotherapy devices, percutaneous coronary interventions, and drug therapy, and were more often hospitalized. The primary end point of achieving the target dose of sacubitril / valsartan at treatment week 10 was met by 45.6% of the Polish patients and 48.4% of the non­Polish population (P = 0.61). Approximately 90% of the Polish patients received and maintained any sacubitril / valsartan dose for 2 weeks over 10­week treatment vs 87.5% of the non­Polish patients (P = 0.36). The rate of permanent sacubitril / valsartan treatment discontinuation was low in both Polish (3.9%) and non­Polish populations (6.4%) (P = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: Sacubitril / valsartan can be used safely in the early period after an episode of acute HF both in the Polish and non­Polish patients with HFrEF, and the likelihood to achieve the maximum dose is the same despite significant differences between the studied populations.

Comprehensive care for people living with heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-Integration of palliative care with disease-specific care: From guidelines to practice.

Heart failure (HF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are the leading global epidemiological, clinical, social, and economic burden. Due to similar risk factors and overlapping pathophysiological pathways, the coexistence of these two diseases is common. People with severe COPD and advanced chronic HF (CHF) develop similar symptoms that aggravate if evoking mechanisms overlap. The coexistence of COPD and CHF limits the quality of life (QoL) and worsens symptom burden and mortality, more than if only one of them is present. Both conditions progress despite optimal, guidelines directed treatment, frequently exacerbate, and have a similar or worse prognosis in comparison with many malignant diseases. Palliative care (PC) is effective in QoL improvement of people with CHF and COPD and may be a valuable addition to standard treatment. The current guidelines for the management of HF and COPD emphasize the importance of early integration of PC parallel to disease-modifying therapies in people with advanced forms of both conditions. The number of patients with HF and COPD requiring PC is high and will grow in future decades necessitating further attention to research and knowledge translation in this field of practice. Care pathways for people living with concomitant HF and COPD have not been published so far. It can be hypothesized that overlapping of symptoms and similarity in disease trajectories allow to draw a model of care which will address symptoms and problems caused by either condition.

New therapeutic options for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and acute decompensated heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) are at severe risk of death and rehospitalization. Several clinical studies have been designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of new molecules administered before discharge or shortly after ADHF. The aim of this article is to summarize current knowledge on recently published findings on treatment of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and ADHF. METHODS: We performed a thorough search for literature pertaining to our review via the PubMed database. RESULTS: In this review, we summarize original papers concerning the efficacy and safety of new molecules in patients with HFrEF and ADHF. CONCLUSIONS: Peri-discharge initiation of treatment with new molecules is possible and safe for patients with HFrEF and ADHF. New molecules, if administered before discharge or shortly after, reduce the risk of cardiovascular death or worsening heart failure within the vulnerable phase, and are also nephroprotective.