Conduct of Clinical Trials in the Era of COVID-19: JACC Scientific Expert Panel

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has profoundly changed clinical care and research, including the conduct of clinical trials, and the clinical research ecosystem will need to adapt to this transformed environment. The Heart Failure Academic Research Consortium is a partnership between the Heart Failure Collaboratory and the Academic Research Consortium, composed of academic investigators from the United States and Europe, patients, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the National Institutes of Health, and industry members. A series of meetings were convened to address the challenges caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, review options for maintaining or altering best practices, and establish key recommendations for the conduct and analysis of clinical trials for cardiovascular disease and heart failure. This paper summarizes the discussions and expert consensus recommendations.

Standardized definitions for evaluation of heart failure therapies: scientific expert panel from the Heart Failure Collaboratory and Academic Research Consortium

The Heart Failure Academic Research Consortium is a partnership between the Heart Failure Collaboratory (HFC) and Academic Research Consortium (ARC), comprised of leading heart failure (HF) academic research investigators, patients, United States (US) Food and Drug Administration representatives, and industry members from the US and Europe. A series of meetings were convened to establish definitions and key concepts for the evaluation of HF therapies including optimal medical and device background therapy, clinical trial design elements and statistical concepts, and study endpoints. This manuscript summarizes the expert panel discussions as consensus recommendations focused on populations and endpoint definitions; it is not exhaustive or restrictive, but designed to stimulate HF clinical trial innovation.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair in Patients With and Without Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: The COAPT Trial

BACKGROUND

In the COAPT trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients With Functional Mitral Regurgitation), treatment of heart failure (HF) patients with moderate-severe or severe secondary mitral regurgitation with transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) using the MitraClip plus guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) reduced 2-year rates of HF hospitalization and all-cause mortality compared with GDMT alone. Whether the benefits of the MitraClip extend to patients with previously implanted cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is unknown. We sought to examine the effect of prior CRT in patients enrolled in COAPT.

METHODS

Patients (N=614) with moderate-severe or severe secondary mitral regurgitation who remained symptomatic despite maximally tolerated doses of GDMT were randomized 1:1 to the MitraClip (TMVr arm) versus GDMT only (control arm). Outcomes were assessed according to prior CRT use.

RESULTS

Among 614 patients, 224 (36.5%) had prior CRT (115 and 109 randomized to TMVr and control, respectively) and 390 (63.5%) had no CRT (187 and 203 randomized to TMVr and control, respectively). Patients with CRT had similar 2-year rates of the composite of death or HF hospitalization compared with those without CRT (57.6% versus 55%, P=0.32). Death or HF hospitalization at 2 years was lower with TMVr versus control treatment in patients with prior CRT (48.6% versus 67.2%, hazard ratio, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.42-0.86]) and without CRT (42.5% versus 66.9%, hazard ratio, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.39-0.69]; adjusted P_interaction=0.23). The effects of TMVr with the MitraClip on reducing the 2-year rates of all-cause death (adjusted P_interaction=0.14) and HF hospitalization (adjusted P_interaction=0.82) were also consistent in patients with and without CRT as were improvements in quality-of-life and exercise capacity.

CONCLUSIONS

In the COAPT trial, TMVr with the MitraClip improved the 2-year prognosis of patients with HF and moderate-severe or severe secondary mitral regurgitation who remained symptomatic despite maximally tolerated GDMT, regardless of prior CRT implantation. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01626079.

Prevalence and incidence of intra-ventricular conduction delays and outcomes in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: insights from PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE

AIMS

The importance of intra-ventricular conduction delay (IVCD), the incidence of new IVCD and its relationship to outcomes in heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are not well studied. We addressed these questions in the PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE trials.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The risk of the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization and all-cause mortality were estimated by use of Cox regression according to baseline QRS duration and morphology in 11 861 patients without an intracardiac device. At baseline, 1789 (15.1%) patients had left bundle branch block (LBBB), 524 (4.4%) right bundle branch block (RBBB), 454 (3.8%) non-specific IVCD, 2588 (21.8%) 'mildly abnormal' QRS (110-129 ms) and 6506 (54.9%) QRS <110 ms. During a median follow-up of 2.5 years, the risk of the primary composite endpoint was higher among those with a wide QRS, irrespective of morphology: hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) LBBB 1.36 (1.23-1.50), RBBB 1.54 (1.31-1.79), non-specific IVCD 1.65 (1.40-1.94) and QRS 110-129 ms 1.35 (1.23-1.47), compared with QRS duration <110 ms. A total of 1234 (15.6%) patients developed new-onset QRS widening ≥130 ms (6.1 per 100 patient-years). Incident LBBB occurred in 495 (6.3%) patients (2.4 per 100 patient-years) and was associated with a higher risk of the primary composite outcome [hazard ratio 1.42 (1.12-1.82)].

CONCLUSION

In patients with HFrEF, a wide QRS was associated with worse clinical outcomes irrespective of morphology. The annual incidence of new-onset LBBB was around 2.5%, and associated with a higher risk of adverse outcomes, highlighting the importance of repeat electrocardiogram review.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT0083658 (ATMOSPHERE) and NCT01035255 (PARADIGM-HF).

Lower Rates of Heart Failure and All-Cause Hospitalizations During Pulmonary Artery Pressure-Guided Therapy for Ambulatory Heart Failure: One-Year Outcomes From the CardioMEMS Post-Approval Study

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Ambulatory hemodynamic monitoring with an implantable pulmonary artery (PA) sensor is approved for patients with New York Heart Association Class III heart failure (HF) and a prior HF hospitalization (HFH) within 12 months. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of PA pressure-guided therapy in routine clinical practice with special focus on subgroups defined by sex, race, and ejection fraction.

In-Hospital Management of Sleep Apnea During Heart Failure Hospitalization: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with increased mortality and readmissions in patients with heart failure (HF). The effect of in-hospital diagnosis and treatment of OSA during decompensated HF episodes remains unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A single-site, randomized, controlled trial of hospitalized patients with decompensated HF (n = 150) who were diagnosed with OSA during the hospitalization was undertaken. All participants received guideline-directed therapy for HF decompensation. Participants were randomized to an intervention arm which received positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy during the hospitalization (n = 75) and a control arm (n = 75). The primary outcome was discharge left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). The LVEF changed in the PAP arm from 25.5 ± 10.4 at baseline to 27.3 ± 11.9 at discharge. In the control group, LVEF was 27.3 ± 11.7 at baseline and 28.8 ± 10.5 at conclusion. There was no significant effect on LVEF of in-hospital PAP compared with controls (P = .84) in the intention-to-treat analysis. The on-treatment analysis in the intervention arm showed a significant increase in LVEF in participants who used PAP for ≥3 hours per night (n = 36, 48%) compared with those who used it less (P = .01). There was a dose effect with higher hours of use associated with more improvement in LVEF. Follow-up of readmissions at 6 months after discharge revealed a >60% decrease in readmissions for patients who used PAP ≥3 h/night compared with those who used it <3 h/night (P < .02) and compared with controls (P < .04).

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital treatment with PAP was safe but did not significantly improve discharge LVEF in patients with decompensated HF and newly diagnosed OSA. An exploratory analysis showed that adequate use of PAP was associated with higher discharge LVEF and decreased 6 months readmissions.

Conducting clinical trials in heart failure during (and after) the COVID-19 pandemic: an Expert Consensus Position Paper from the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has important implications for the safety of participants in clinical trials and the research staff caring for them and, consequently, for the trials themselves. Patients with heart failure may be at greater risk of infection with COVID-19 and the consequences might also be more serious, but they are also at risk of adverse outcomes if their clinical care is compromised. As physicians and clinical trialists, it is our responsibility to ensure safe and effective care is delivered to trial participants without affecting the integrity of the trial. The social contract with our patients demands no less. Many regulatory authorities from different world regions have issued guidance statements regarding the conduct of clinical trials during this COVID-19 crisis. However, international trials may benefit from expert guidance from a global panel of experts to supplement local advice and regulations, thereby enhancing the safety of participants and the integrity of the trial. Accordingly, the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology on 21 and 22 March 2020 conducted web-based meetings with expert clinical trialists in Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and Asia. The main objectives of this Expert Position Paper are to highlight the challenges that this pandemic poses for the conduct of clinical trials in heart failure and to offer advice on how they might be overcome, with some practical examples. While this panel of experts are focused on heart failure clinical trials, these discussions and recommendations may apply to clinical trials in other therapeutic areas.

The Use of MitraClip in Secondary Mitral Regurgitation and Heart Failure

Secondary (also known as functional) mitral regurgitation (MR) has increased substantially over the last several decades due to an increase in the prevalence of dilated cardiomyopathy (ischemic and non-ischemic). Mortality and morbidity in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy is much greater when associated with MR as compared to without MR. MR will result in further left ventricular (LV) volume overload, LV dilation, and pupillary muscle displacement resulting in deterioration of the severity of MR leading to a vicious cycle. Optimization of heart failure medical therapy, and cardiac resynchronization therapy for those that qualify, can improve severity of MR; however, significant MR will persist in certain patients. Transcatheter mitral valve repair to treat significant MR using the MitraClip (Abbott, Menlo Park, California), which grasps and coapts the posterior and anterior mitral valve leaflets, in appropriately selected patients with dilated cardiomyopathy and secondary MR has been shown to improve quality of life and prolong survival.

Long-term efficacy and safety of phrenic nerve stimulation for the treatment of central sleep apnea

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate long-term efficacy and safety of phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) in patients with moderate-to-severe central sleep apnea (CSA) through 3 years of therapy.

METHODS

Patients in the remedē System Pivotal Trial were observed every 3 months after implant until US Food and Drug Administration approval. At the time of approval and study closure, all patients completed 24 months of follow-up; 33 patients had not reached the 36-month visit. Sleep metrics (polysomnography) and echocardiographic parameters are reported at baseline, 12, 18, and 24 months, in addition to available 36-month sleep results from polygraphy. Safety was assessed through 36 months; however, analysis focused through 24 months and available 36-month results are provided.

RESULTS

Patients were assessed at 24 (n = 109) and 36 (n = 60) months. Baseline characteristics included mean age 64 years, 91% male, and mean apnea-hypopnea index 47 events per hour. Sleep metrics (apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), central apnea index, arousal index, oxygen desaturation index, rapid eye movement sleep) remained improved through 24 and 36 months with continuous use of PNS therapy. At least 60% of patients in the treatment group achieved at least 50% reduction in AHI through 24 months. Serious adverse events (SAEs) related to the remedē System implant procedure, device, or therapy through 24 months were reported by 10% of patients, no unanticipated adverse device effects or deaths, and all events resolved. No additional related SAEs were reported between 24 and 36 months.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest beneficial effects of long-term PNS in patients with CSA appear to sustain through 36 months with no new safety concerns.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01816776.

Contemporary Trends and Outcomes of Percutaneous and Surgical Mitral Valve Replacement or Repair in Patients With Cancer

In the era of emerging options for mitral valvular intervention, we sought to characterize the relative utilization, outcomes, and posthospital dispositions of patients referred for transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVRepair) and surgical mitral valve procedures (SMVP), by cancer-status. Leveraging the National Inpatient Sample, a representative national dataset, ICD-9 codes for all adults >18 years with co-morbid mitral regurgitation, and cancer without metastatic disease admitted from 2003 to 2015 were queried. TMVRepair was performed in 700 hospitalizations from 2012 to 2015, whereas SMVP was utilized during 12,863 hospitalizations from 2003 to 2015. During follow-up, we observed a proportional increase in TMVRepair utilization among cancer patients (vs noncancer), particularly in 2015 (14.2% vs 8.2%, p <0.0001). There was no difference in in-hospital mortality (1.4% vs 1.8%, p = 0.71), ischemic stroke (0.7% vs 0.6%, p = 0.97), major bleeding (8.6% vs 10.9%, p = 0.36), and home discharge (62.1% vs 65.7%, p = 0.45) by cancer-status among patients who underwent TMVRepair; but, cost of care was increased ($52,325 vs $48,832, p <0.0001). Similarly, there was no difference in in-hospital mortality (3.1% vs 3.4%, p = 0.36), ischemic stroke (2.6% vs 3.1%, p = 0.16) as well as the cost-of-care ($58,106 vs $58,844, p = 0.49) among those who underwent SMVP across the same period; but, cancer was associated with increased major bleeding (34.9% vs 30.5%, p <0.0001), and lower likelihood of home discharge (32.8% vs 38.6%, p <0.0001). In conclusion, TMVRepair and SMVP were associated with comparable in-hospital mortality and outcomes in cancer versus noncancer patients. However, cancer patients treated with SMVP experienced more frequent bleeding related complications compared with noncancer patients.

Endpoints in Heart Failure Drug Development: History and Future

Heart failure (HF) patients experience a high burden of symptoms and functional limitations, and morbidity and mortality remain high despite successful therapies. The majority of HF drugs in the United States are approved for reducing hospitalization and mortality, while only a few have indications for improving quality of life, physical function, or symptoms. Patient-reported outcomes that directly measure patient's perception of health status (symptoms, physical function, or quality of life) are potentially approvable endpoints in drug development. This paper summarizes the history of endpoints used for HF drug approvals in the United States and reviews endpoints that measure symptoms, physical function, or quality of life in HF patients.

Conceptual Considerations for Device-Based Therapy in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure

Acute decompensated heart failure remains the most common cause of hospitalization in older adults, and studies of pharmacological therapies have yielded limited progress in improving outcomes for these patients. This has prompted the development of novel device–based interventions, classified mechanistically based on the way in which they intend to improve central hemodynamics, increase renal perfusion, remove salt and water from the body, and result in clinically meaningful degrees of decongestion. In this review, we provide an overview of the pathophysiology of acute decompensated heart failure, current management strategies, and failed pharmacological therapies. We provide an in depth description of seven investigational device classes designed to target one or more of the pathophysiologic derangements in acute decompensated heart failure, denoted by the acronym DRI 2 P 2 S. Dilators decrease central pressures by increasing venous capacitance through splanchnic nerve modulation. Removers remove excess fluid through peritoneal dialysis, aquaphoresis, or hemodialysis. Inotropes directly modulate the cardiac nerve plexus to enhance ventricular contractility. Interstitial devices enhance volume removal through lymphatic duct decompression. Pushers are novel descending aorta rotary pumps that directly increase renal artery pressure. Pullers reduce central venous pressures or renal venous pressures to increase renal perfusion. Selective intrarenal artery catheters facilitate direct delivery of short acting vasodilator therapy. We also discuss challenges posed in clinical trial design for these novel device–based strategies including optimal patient selection and appropriate end points to establish efficacy.

Optimizer Smart in the treatment of moderate-to-severe chronic heart failure

Cardiac contractility modulation, also referred to as CCM™, by the Optimizer Smart device is an innovative intracardiac device-based therapy that has been recently US FDA-approved for the treatment of patients with chronic heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) between 25 and 45%, QRS <130 ms who remain symptomatic despite optimal medical therapy. Clinical trials demonstrate that CCM therapy is safe and effective in reducing heart failure hospitalization and improving heart failure symptoms, quality of life and functional performance. This novel device-based therapeutic offers benefits to patients who do not otherwise qualify for cardiac resynchronization therapy. CCM expands the indication beyond the traditional LVEF cutoff of 35% to a newer group including patients who fall in midrange LVEF group, up to 45%.