How Should We Sequence the Treatments for Heart Failure and a Reduced Ejection Fraction?: A Redefinition of Evidence-Based Medicine

Evaluating sacubitril/valsartan as a treatment option for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and preserved ejection fraction

INTRODUCTION

Sacubitril/valsartan is the first-in-class angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor approved in 2015 for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). On 16 February 2021, the Food and Drug Administration acknowledged that "Benefits are most clearly evident in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction below normal," thus potentially extending the use in subjects with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

AREAS COVERED

The authors outline the regulatory history, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and risk-benefit profile of sacubitril/valsartan in HFrEF and HFpEF. A critical cross-trial comparison is presented, including sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), together with an insight into the latest European Society of Cardiology guidelines, where the new category of heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction is introduced.

EXPERT OPINION

Sacubitril/valsartan is a foundation of the pharmacological armamentarium in HFrEF to counteract the neuro-hormonal changes and reverse cardiac remodeling, together with beta-blockers, SGLT2i and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. The optimal sequence algorithm is an evolving issue, and the authors provide the reader with their personal perspective. A multidisciplinary management is encouraged to minimize the therapeutic inertia and manage tolerability issues, thus supporting adherence. Pragmatic trials, pharmacovigilance, and high-quality real-world evidence are crucial toward personalized safe prescribing of sacubitril/valsartan.

Empagliflozin and heart failure: position paper of the experts on the results of the online meeting and discussion of the EMPEROR-Preserved Trial

At an international online expert meeting held on September 16, 2021, the results of the empagliflozin research program EMPA-REG Outcome, EMPEROR-Reduced and EMPEROR-Preserved were reviewed. We analyzed cardiovascular and renal outcomes during the treatment with empagliflozin in patients with chronic heart failure, regardless of the presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The positive results of the EMPEROR-Preserved study are updated and their significance for clinical practice is discussed. Several proposals have been adopted that will accelerate the introduction of empagliflozin therapy into practice in patients with heart failure and overcome clinical inertia.

Chronic heart failure – modification of treatment paradigm

The relevance of chronic heart failure (CHF) remains high. Despite significant advances in basic therapy for CHF patients, the prognosis remains poor. The prescription of inhibitors of sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 dapagliflozin made it possible to change the paradigm of treatment of patients with CHF with low left ventricular ejection fraction.

Foundational drugs for HFrEF: the growing evidence for a rapid sequencing strategy

In randomised, placebo- or active-controlled trials in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), each of the combination of a neprilysin inhibitor and an angiotensin-receptor blocker (i.e. sacubitril/valsartan), a beta blocker, a mineralocorticoidreceptor antagonist and a sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor have been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality, firmly establishing the role of these five agents, prescribed as four pills, as foundational therapy for HFrEF. Traditionally, the guideline-advocated strategy for the initiation of these therapies was based on the historical order in which the landmark clinical trials were performed, and the requirement to uptitrate each individual drug to the target dose (or maximally tolerated dose below this) prior to initiation of another therapy. This process could take six months or more to complete, during which time patients would not be taking one or more of these life-saving drugs. Recently an alternative, evidence-based, rapid three-step sequencing strategy has been proposed with the aim of establishing HFrEF patients on low-doses of all four foundational treatments within four weeks. This strategy is based on the premise that the benefits of each of these therapies are independent and additive to the others, the benefits are apparent at low doses early following initiation, and a specific ordering of therapies may increase likelihood of tolerance of others. This article will outline this novel rapid-sequencing strategy and provide an evidence-based framework to support its adoption into clinical practice.

Prognostic Benefit of New Drugs for HFrEF: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: The new heart failure (HF) therapies of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), vericiguat, and omecamtiv mecarbil do not act primarily through the neuro-hormonal blockade, but have shown clinical benefits in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, their respective efficacies remain unclear. Our aim was to evaluate the relative efficacy of new drugs for HFrEF. Methods: We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SGLT2i, vericiguat, omecamtiv mecarbil, and placebo in HFrEF patients. The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular death (CVD) or HF hospitalization (CVD-HF); secondary endpoints were CVD, all-cause death, and HF hospitalization (HFH). Results: Twelve RCTs (n = 23,861 patients) were included. A significant reduction in CVD-HF was observed with SGLT2i compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71–0.83), vericiguat (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75–0.93), and omecamtiv mecarbil (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.72–0.88). No significant difference was observed between vericiguat and omecamtiv mecarbil (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.87–1.04). SGLT2i were superior to placebo and omecamtiv mecarbil for all individual secondary endpoints (CVD, all-cause death, and HFH), and also to vericiguat for HFH. SGLT2i ranked as the most effective therapy for all endpoints, and vericiguat, omecamtiv mecarbil, and placebo ranked as the second, third, and last options, respectively, for the primary endpoint. Conclusions: In patients with HFrEF on standard-of-care therapy, SGLT2i therapy was associated with a reduced risk of CVD-HF compared to placebo, vericiguat, and omecamtiv mecarbil. Furthermore, SGLT2i were superior to placebo and omecamtiv mecarbil for CVD, all-cause death, and HFH, and also to vericiguat for HFH.

Heart Failure Spending Function: An Investment Framework for Sequencing and Intensification of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapies

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is managed with increasing numbers of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT). Benefits tend to be additive. Burdens can also be additive. We propose a heart failure spending function as a conceptual framework for tailored intensification of GDMT that maximizes therapeutic opportunity while limiting adverse events and patient burden. Each patient is conceptualized to have reserve in physiological and psychosocial domains, which can be spent for a future return on investment. Key domains are blood pressure, heart rate, serum creatinine, potassium, and out-of-pocket costs. For each patient, GDMT should be initiated and intensified in a sequence that prioritizes medications with the greatest expected cardiac benefit while drawing on areas where the patient has ample reserves. When reserve is underspent, patients fail to gain the full benefit of GDMT. Conversely, when a reserve is fully spent, addition of new drugs or higher doses that draw upon a domain will lead to patient harm. The benefit of multiple agents drawing upon varied physiological domains should be balanced against cost and complexity. Thresholds for overspending are explored, as are mechanisms for implementing these concepts into routine care, but further health care delivery research is needed to validate and refine clinical use of the spending function. The heart failure spending function also suggests how newer therapies may be considered in terms of relative value, prioritizing agents that draw on different spending domains from existing GDMT.

Biosensor-based profiling to track cellular signalling in patient-derived models of dilated cardiomyopathy

Dilated cardiomyopathies (DCM) represent a diverse group of cardiovascular diseases impacting the structure and function of the myocardium. To better treat these diseases, we need to understand the impact of such cardiomyopathies on critical signalling pathways that drive disease progression downstream of receptors we often target therapeutically. Our understanding of cellular signalling events has progressed substantially in the last few years, in large part due to the design, validation and use of biosensor-based approaches to studying such events in cells, tissues and in some cases, living animals. Another transformative development has been the use of human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) to generate disease-relevant models from individual patients. We highlight the importance of going beyond monocellular cultures to incorporate the influence of paracrine signalling mediators. Finally, we discuss the recent coalition of these approaches in the context of DCM. We discuss recent work in generating patient-derived models of cardiomyopathies and the utility of using signalling biosensors to track disease progression and test potential therapeutic strategies that can be later used to inform treatment options in patients.

In-hospital Initiation and Up-titration of Guideline-directed Medical Therapies for Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Implementation of guideline-directed medical therapy for patients with heart failure is suboptimal. The use of guideline-directed medical therapy improves minimally after heart failure hospitalisation, despite this event clearly indicating increased risk of further hospitalisation and death. In-hospital initiation and titration of guideline-directed medical therapies is one potential strategy to fill these gaps in care, both in the acute vulnerable period after hospital discharge and in the long term. The purpose of this article is to review the knowledge gaps in best practices of in-hospital initiation and up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies, the benefits and risks of in-hospital initiation and post-discharge focused titration of guideline-directed medical therapies, the recent literature evaluating these practices, and propose strategies to apply these principles to the care of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Optimization of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction prognosis-modifying drugs: A 2021 heart failure expert consensus paper

Heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is associated with high rates of hospitalization and death. It also has a negative impact on patients' functional capacity and quality of life, as well as on healthcare costs. In recent years, new HFrEF prognosis-modifying drugs have emerged, leading to intense debate within the international scientific community toward a paradigm shift for the management of HFrEF. In this article, we report the contribution of a Portuguese HF expert panel to the ongoing debate. Based on the most recently published clinical evidence, and the panel members' clinical judgment, three key principles are highlighted: (i) sacubitril/valsartan should be preferred as first-line therapy for HFrEF, instead of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker; (ii) the four foundation HFrEF drugs are the angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor, beta-adrenergic blocking agents, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors, regardless of the presence of type-2 diabetes mellitus; (iii) these four HFrEF drug classes should be introduced over a short-term period of four to six weeks, guided by a safety protocol, followed by a dose up-titration period of 8 weeks.

[Practical approach of dapagliflozin for the treatment of heart failure. Role of primary care physician]

Despite traditional treatments, morbidity and mortality of patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction remains unacceptably high. Traditionally, guidelines recommended a step by step approach in the management of this population. However, this approach could delay the prescription of some drugs with proven efficacy on morbidity and prognosis. As current HF guidelines recommend, an initial comprehensive approach with the aim of targeting all neurohormonal systems that are implied in the etiopathogenesis of HF seems necessary. The DAPA-HF trial demonstrated that dapagliflozin markedly reduces the risk of HF hospitalization, and also improves prognosis. Consequently, dapagliflozin should be considered as a first-line therapy in the management of these patients. On the other hand, primary care physicians are essential for the prevention and treatment of patients with HF and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. As a result, it is mandatory that they know when and how dapagliflozin should be used. In this review, a practical approach for an appropriate use of this drug is provided.

Comparing Sacubitril/Valsartan Against Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors in Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In recent trials, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors proved effective as treatment for heart failure. However, the relative efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan against SGLT2 inhibitor in patients with heart failure remains unknown. Hence, we performed a network meta-analysis to compare the effects of sacubitril/valsartan against SGLT2 inhibitors on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with heart failure.

METHODS

Four electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, SCOPUS) were searched for randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) published from 1st January 2000 to 25th September 2021. Two additional systematic reviews were conducted for RCTs of enalapril and valsartan to establish a common comparator arm. Frequentist network meta-analysis models were utilised to summarise the studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-five RCTs were included, comprising a combined cohort of 47,275 patients. Network meta-analysis demonstrated that compared to SGLT2 inhibitors, sacubitril/valsartan achieved a larger hazard rate reduction in the composite of heart failure hospitalisation and cardiovascular death (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.86; 95% CI 0.75-0.98), cardiovascular death (HR: 0.78; 95% CI 0.65-0.94), and a larger mean change in systolic blood pressure at 8 or more months (weighted mean difference [WMD]: - 7.08 mmHg; 95% CI - 8.28 to - 5.89). There were no significant differences in treatment effects across heart failure hospitalisation, all-cause mortality, diastolic blood pressure at 12 weeks, and systolic blood pressure at 2-4 months. In patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, sacubitril/valsartan achieved a 20% hazard rate reduction for cardiovascular death compared to SGLT2 inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with heart failure, sacubitril/valsartan was demonstrated to be superior to SGLT2 inhibitors in the treatment effect for the composite of heart failure hospitalisation and cardiovascular death, cardiovascular death, and long-term blood pressure.

Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, and Management of Native Atrioventricular Valve Regurgitation in Heart Failure Patients

Atrioventricular regurgitation is frequent in the setting of heart failure. It is due to atrial and ventricular remodelling, as well as rhythmic disturbances and loss of synchrony. Once atrioventricular regurgitation develops, it can aggravate the underlying heart failure, and further participate and aggravate its own severity. Its presence is therefore concomitantly a surrogate of advance disease and a predictor of mortality. Heart failure management, including medical therapy, cardiac resynchronization therapy, and restoration of sinus rhythm, are the initial steps to reduce atrioventricular regurgitation. In the current review, we analyse the current data assessing the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and impact of non-valvular intervention on atrioventricular regurgitation including medical treatment, cardiac resynchronization and atrial fibrillation ablation.

Recent advances in pharmacological treatment of heart failure

BACKGROUND

Over the last years, several trials offered new evidence on heart failure (HF) treatment.

DESIGN AND RESULTS

For HF with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, type 2 sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitors, aside from sacubitril-valsartan, demonstrated extraordinary efficacy in ameliorating patients' prognosis. Some new molecules (eg vericiguat, omecamtiv mecarbil and ferric carboxymaltose) correct iron deficiency and have shown to be capable of furthering reducing the burden of HF hospitalisation. Finally, there is new evidence on the possible therapeutic approaches of HF patients with mid-range or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction.

CONCLUSIONS

This review aimed to revise the main novelties in the field of HF therapy and focus on how the daily clinical approach to patient treatment is changing.

Towards precision medicine in heart failure

The number of therapies for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction has nearly doubled in the past decade. In addition, new therapies for HF caused by hypertrophic and infiltrative disease are emerging rapidly. Indeed, we are on the verge of a new era in HF in which insights into the biology of myocardial disease can be matched to an understanding of the genetic predisposition in an individual patient to inform precision approaches to therapy. In this Review, we summarize the biology of HF, emphasizing the causal relationships between genetic contributors and traditional structure-based remodelling outcomes, and highlight the mechanisms of action of traditional and novel therapeutics. We discuss the latest advances in our understanding of both the Mendelian genetics of cardiomyopathy and the complex genetics of the clinical syndrome presenting as HF. In the phenotypic domain, we discuss applications of machine learning for the subcategorization of HF in ways that might inform rational prescribing of medications. We aim to bridge the gap between the biology of the failing heart, its diverse clinical presentations and the range of medications that we can now use to treat it. We present a roadmap for the future of precision medicine in HF.

Drug Layering in Heart Failure: Phenotype-Guided Initiation

Medications with proven benefit in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction are recommended, according to prospective large clinical trials, in the stable patient after careful up-titration in a strict sequential order. Although the relevance of careful clinical up-titration is unproven, there is evidence that after recompensation and shortly after hospital discharge, the rate of cardiovascular death and hospitalization is high. Clinical studies provided evidence that the onset of treatment effects is rapid, occurring within 28 days with most of these drugs used, and in some trials, early treatment after discharge or already started in the hospital has provided benefits. Therefore, early treatment without deferring it to the stable outpatient may be useful to reduce cardiac-related events further. This expert opinion proposes treatment layering according to individual patient phenotypes involving heart rate, blood pressure, impaired renal function, and electrolyte disturbances, as well as dedicated subgroups of patients with specific requirements for treatment initiation. This complements other approaches that suggest starting sequential treatment according to the size of treatment effects of drugs, specific cardiac diseases, and patient wishes. Patient phenotyping may guide personalized drug layering in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction that provides the best outcomes, whereas pragmatic clinical trials are warranted to scrutinize the effectiveness of these approaches.

Are Post Hoc Analyses on Subgroups Sufficient to Support New Treatment Algorithms of Heart Failure? The Case of SGLT2 Inhibitors Associated with Sacubitril/Valsartan

The use of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has been strongly supported by the results of recent randomized clinical trials. Upon this evidence, international recommendations and consensus documents propose the inclusion of SGLT2i among the first-line classes for HFrEF management. Subsequent analyses of treatment subgroups have been performed to investigate the effects of SGLT2i in patients treated with first-line classes including sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val), showing a consistent reduction of cardiovascular outcomes with a good safety profile of SGLT2i in combination with the other classes. Accordingly, SGLT2i are recommended also in combination with Sac/Val. This association, however, may require caution before being translated into guideline-directed medical therapy in clinical practice, since the proportion of patients receiving Sac/Val and SGLT2i in the available studies was poorly represented. In order to support an effective and safe sequencing or a simultaneous initiation of these 2 drug classes, pragmatic and real-world clinical studies would be helpful.

Looking for a Tailored Therapy for Heart Failure: Are We Capable of Treating the Patient Instead of the Disease?

After almost a decade of stagnation in clinical research for HF treatment, five large randomized trials recently published have supported the use of four new classes of drugs, namely: angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor, sodium-glucose co-transporters 2 inhibitors, soluble guanylate cyclase modulators, and myosin activators. Each treatment has proved to be beneficial for both long-term outcomes and quality of life. Beside their clinical relevance, all these novel treatments have a different mechanism of action beyond the usual neuro-hormonal blockage. These different pathways, together with the unquestionable clinical evidence, advocate a re-thinking of HF treatment and of the appropriate drug to integrate with the existing standard therapy, according to different characteristics of HFrEF patients. This study aimed to offer a synthetic overview of the mechanisms of action of the new drugs and to propose a more personalized approach, considering patients' characteristics and safety profiles. To this end, we have identified seven profiles for patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and two for pre-discharge patients.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Sacubitril-Valsartan Compared with Enalapril Treatment in Patients with Acute Decompensated Heart Failure in Thailand

BACKGROUND

Sacubitril-valsartan is effective in reducing the N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level of hospitalized patients with acute decompensated heart failure, with a high acquisition cost compared with enalapril treatment.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the cost utility of sacubitril-valsartan compared with enalapril for acute decompensated heart failure treatment.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed to project the total costs, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of early initiation, and a 2-month delay of sacubitril-valsartan treatment and enalapril treatment in hospitalized patients with acute decompensated heart failure over a lifetime horizon from a Thai healthcare system perspective. Clinical inputs were mainly derived from the PIONEER-HF and PARADIGM-HF trials, together with Thai epidemiological data. Cost data were based on the Thai population. All costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% annually. A series of sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Compared with enalapril, sacubitril-valsartan incurred a higher total cost per year (THB 42,994 [US$1367.48] vs THB 19,787 [US$629.37]), and it gained more QALYs (4.969 vs 4.755). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was THB 108,508/QALY (US$3451.26/QALY). Early initiation of sacubitril-valsartan treatment was more cost effective than delayed treatment. Sensitivity analyses revealed that at a level of willingness to pay of THB 160,000/QALY (US$5089/QALY), sacubitril-valsartan was a cost-effective strategy of about 60%.

CONCLUSIONS

Sacubitril-valsartan is cost effective in patients with acute decompensated heart failure. However, the results are highly dependent on the long-term cardiovascular mortality, and they are applicable only to Thailand or countries with a similarly structured healthcare system. Long-term registries should be pursued to decrease the uncertainty around long-term mortality.

Optimization of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction prognosis-modifying drugs: A 2021 heart failure expert consensus paper

Heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is associated with high rates of hospitalization and death. It also has a negative impact on patients' functional capacity and quality of life, as well as on healthcare costs. In recent years, new HFrEF prognosis-modifying drugs have emerged, leading to intense debate within the international scientific community toward a paradigm shift for the management of HFrEF. In this article, we report the contribution of a Portuguese HF expert panel to the ongoing debate. Based on the most recently published clinical evidence, and the panel members' clinical judgment, three key principles are highlighted: (i) sacubitril/valsartan should be preferred as first-line therapy for HFrEF, instead of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker; (ii) the four foundation HFrEF drugs are the angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor, beta-adrenergic blocking agents, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors, regardless of the presence of type-2 diabetes mellitus; (iii) these four HFrEF drug classes should be introduced over a short-term period of four to six weeks, guided by a safety protocol, followed by a dose up-titration period of 8 weeks.

Vericiguat for Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Purpose of Review

The nitric oxide (NO)-soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC)-cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) pathway plays an important role in the regulation of cardiovascular function, and it is disrupted in heart failure (HF), resulting in decreased protection against myocardial injury. Impaired NO-sGC-cGMP signaling in HF is secondary to reduced NO bioavailability and altered redox state of sGC, which becomes less responsive to NO. The sGC activator cinaciguat increases cGMP levels by direct NO-independent activation of sGC and may be particularly effective in conditions of increased oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction, and therefore reduced NO levels, at the expense of a greater risk of hypotension. Conversely, sGC stimulators (riociguat and vericiguat) enhance sGC sensitivity to endogenous NO, thus exerting a more physiological action.

Recent Findings

Clinical trials have suggested the benefit of vericiguat in patients with high-risk HF; in particular, a lower incidence of death from cardiovascular causes or HF hospitalization.

Summary

Adding vericiguat may be considered in individual patients with HF, and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) particularly those at higher risk of HF hospitalization.

New Drugs for Heart Failure: What is the Evidence in Older Patients?

Heart failure (HF) is a major public health concern, with a high prevalence in the older population. The majority of randomized clinical trials evaluating new emerging pharmacologic agents for HF (eg, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, intravenous iron for deficiency treatment, transthyretin stabilizers, soluble guanylate cyclase stimulators, cardiac myosin activators, and new potassium binders) have found positive results on various clinical outcomes, particularly in patients with reduced ejection fraction. These treatments might have an important role in the management of older patients as well. Nevertheless, trials demonstrating benefit of these drugs have involved patients significantly younger (on average, approximately 10 years) and fewer comorbidities than those commonly encountered in clinical practice. We describe the recent evidence regarding the newest HF drugs and their applicability to older individuals in terms of efficacy and safety, and we discuss their effects on outcomes particularly valuable to older patients, such as preservation of cognitive function, functional status, independence, and quality of life. Although available subgroup analyses seem to confirm efficacy and safety across the age spectrum for some of these drugs, their effects on older patients centered outcomes often have been neglected. Future HF trials should be designed to include older patients more representative of the real clinical practice, to overcome generalizability biases.

Timely and individualized heart failure management: need for implementation into the new guidelines

Due to remarkable improvements in heart failure (HF) management over the last 30 years, a significant reduction in mortality and hospitalization rates in HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has been observed. Currently, the optimization of guideline-directed chronic HF therapy remains the mainstay to further improve outcomes for patients with HFrEF to reduce mortality and HF hospitalization. This includes established device therapies, such as implantable defibrillators and cardiac resynchronization therapies, which improved patients' symptoms and prognosis. Over the last 10 years, new HF drugs have merged targeting various pathways, such as those that simultaneously suppress the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and the breakdown of endogenous natriuretic peptides (e.g., sacubitril/valsartan), and those that inhibit the If channel and, thus, reduce heart rate (e.g., ivabradine). Furthermore, the treatment of patient comorbidities (e.g., iron deficiency) has shown to improve functional capacity and to reduce hospitalization rates, when added to standard therapy. More recently, other potential treatment mechanisms have been explored, such as the sodium/glucose co-transporter inhibitors, the guanylate cyclase stimulators and the cardiac myosin activators. In this review, we summarize the novel developments in HFrEF pharmacological and device therapy and discuss their implementation strategies into practice to further improve outcomes.

ANMCO POSITION PAPER: on administration of type 2 sodium-glucose co-transporter inhibitors to prevent heart failure in diabetic patients and to treat heart failure patients with and without diabetes

This ANMCO (Associazione Nazionale Medici Cardiologi Ospedalieri) position paper aims to analyse the complex action of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors at the level of the kidney and cardiovascular system, focusing on the effect that these molecules have shown in the prevention and treatment of heart failure in diabetic and non-diabetic subjects. The goal was pursued by comparing the data generated with pathophysiology studies and with multicentre controlled studies in large populations. In accordance with the analysis carried out in the document, the following recommendations are issued: (i) canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, and ertugliflozin are molecules recommended for the prevention of heart failure hospitalizations in type 2 diabetic subjects; (ii) canagliflozin and dapagliflozin are recommended for the prevention of heart failure hospitalizations in type 2 diabetic subjects with severe chronic kidney disease, dapagliflozin proved to be safe and effective also in diabetic subjects; and (iii) dapagliflozin and empagliflozin are recommended to reduce the combined risk of heart failure and cardiovascular death in diabetic and non-diabetic subjects with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction.

Intersection Between Chronic Kidney Disease and Cardiovascular Disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The incidence of chronic kidney disease is increasing worldwide, and the previously decreasing incidence of cardiovascular disease has now plateaued. Understanding the intersection of both heart and kidney disease is crucial.

RECENT FINDINGS

Chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular disease share common risk factors and specific pathogenic mechanisms and impact a significant segment of the population. Patients with chronic kidney disease are more likely to have cardiovascular disease than progress to end-stage kidney disease requiring renal replacement therapy. We discuss shared risk factors and mechanisms for cardiovascular and chronic kidney disease. The following also addresses contemporary cardiovascular treatment considerations in patients with chronic kidney disease with a focus on atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and heart failure.

Cardio-Renal Benefits of SGLT2 Inhibitors in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: Mechanisms and Clinical Evidence

The heart and the kidneys are closely interconnected, and disease in one organ system can lead to disease in the other. This interdependence is illustrated in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), where worsening heart failure can lead to renal dysfunction and vice versa. Further complicating this situation is the fact that drugs that serve as guideline directed medical therapy (GDMT) for HFrEF can affect renal function. Sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are a new class of medication with an evolving role in heart failure (HF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). Initially found to have benefits in diabetics, new research established potential cardiovascular and renal benefits in patients with HF independent of their diabetic status and in populations with CKD. This has been established by landmark trials such as EMPEROR-Reduced, EMPA-TROPISM, CREDENCE, DAPA-CKD, DAPA-HF, and DEFINE-HF. Multiple mechanisms responsible for these benefits have been suggested by clinical and non-clinical studies, and involve cardiac and renal energetic efficiency, cardiac remodeling, preservation of renal function, immunomodulation, changes in hematocrit, and control of risk factors. As such, SGLT2 inhibitors have tremendous potential to improve outcomes in populations with HF and CKD. The purpose of this review is to discuss the current evidence and underlying mechanisms for the cardio-renal benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with HFrEF.

Impact of admission hyperglycaemia on clinical outcomes in non-diabetic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Aims

At present, the clinical significance of admission hyperglycaemia in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) patients remains unknown. This study was designed to evaluate the relationship between admission hyperglycaemia and clinical outcome in HFpEF patients, especially in non‐diabetic patients.

Methods and results

We enrolled 486 non‐diabetic HFpEF (left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50%) patients hospitalized due to acute decompensated heart failure from the PURSUIT‐HFpEF registry, a prospective, multicentre observational study. We divided non‐diabetic patients into two groups, an admission hyperglycaemia group whose blood glucose on admission was ≥7.0 mmol/L (148 patients) and a normoglycaemic group whose blood glucose on admission was <7.0 mmol/L (338 patients). The primary endpoint was all‐cause mortality, and the secondary endpoints were heart failure death and other causes of cardiac death. During a mean follow‐up period of 400 ± 335 days, all‐cause mortality was 69 patients. Twenty‐five patients suffered cardiac death. All‐cause mortality (P = 0.002), cardiac death (P = 0.009), and heart failure death (P = 0.001) were significantly more frequent in the admission hyperglycaemia group than in the normoglycaemic group. Admission hyperglycaemia was independently and significantly associated with all‐cause mortality and cardiac death (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.20–3.34, P = 0.008 and HR 3.03, 95% CI 1.35–6.96, P = 0.007, respectively).

Conclusions

Non‐diabetic HFpEF patients with admission hyperglycaemia when hospitalized for heart failure had poorer clinical outcomes than normoglycaemic patients.

Rapid evidence-based sequencing of foundational drugs for heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction

Foundational therapy for heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction consists of a combination of an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, a beta-blocker, a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist and a sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor. However, the conventional approach to the implementation is based on a historically-driven sequence that is not strongly evidence-based, typically requires ≥6 months, and frequently leads to major gaps in treatment. We propose a rapid sequencing strategy that is based on four principles. First, since drugs act rapidly to reduce morbidity and mortality, patients should be started on all four foundational treatments within 2-4 weeks. Second, since the efficacy of each foundational therapy is independent of treatment with the other drugs, priority can be determined by considerations of relative efficacy, safety and ease-of-use. Third, low starting doses of foundational drugs have substantial therapeutic benefits, and achievement of low doses of all four classes of drugs should take precedence over up-titration to target doses. Fourth, since drugs can influence the tolerability of other foundational agents, sequencing can be based on whether agents started earlier can enhance the safety of agents started simultaneously or later in the sequence. We propose an accelerated three-step approach, which consists of the simultaneous initiation of a beta-blocker and an SGLT2 inhibitor, followed 1-2 weeks later by the initiation of sacubitril/valsartan, and 1-2 weeks later by a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. The latter two steps can be re-ordered or compressed depending on patient circumstances. Rapid sequencing is a novel evidence-based strategy that has the potential to dramatically improve the implementation of treatments that reduce the morbidity and mortality of patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction.

Heart Failure With Mid-range Ejection Fraction: A Distinctive Subtype or a Transitional Stage?

Heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) was first proposed by Lam and Solomon in 2014, and was listed as a new subtype of heart failure (HF) in 2016 European Society of Cardiology guidelines. Since then, HFmrEF has attracted an increasing amount of attention, and the number of related studies on this topic has grown rapidly. The diagnostic criteria on the basis of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are straightforward; however, LVEF is not a static parameter, and it changes dynamically during the course of HF. Thus, HFmrEF may not be an independent disease with a uniform pathophysiological process, but rather a collection of patients with different characteristics. HFmrEF is often associated with various cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular diseases. Thus, the pathophysiological mechanisms of HFmrEF are particularly complex, and its clinical phenotypes are diverse. The complexity and heterogeneity of HFmrEF may be one reason for inconsistent results between clinical studies. In fact, whether HFmrEF is a distinctive subtype or a transitional stage between HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is controversial. In this review, we discuss the clinical characteristics, treatment and prognosis of patients with HFmrEF, as well as the differences among HFmrEF, HFrEF, and HFpEF.

Medical Therapy of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction-A Call for Comparative Research

The armamentarium of therapies for patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFREF) has increase substantially with the introduction of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor (ARNi), sodium glucose cotransport inhibitors (SGLTis), ivabradine, and Vericinguat, bringing to seven the number of potential therapies for HFREF. In the current review we highlight available data on the different classes of medications. Renin angiotensin blockers (RAASbs) and beta blockers (BBs) were shown to have very substantial effects in patients with HFREF. These medications are generic and hence relatively inexpensive. They have a 30-year track record of relatively benign short- and long-term safety profiles and should remain the cornerstone of therapy for patients with HFREF. ARNis are effective in further reducing adverse effects and should replace RAASbs in symptomatic HFREF patients, despite their relatively high prices. The addition of SGLTis (congested patients), Ivabradine (tachycardic patients), and Vericinguat (hypertensive patients) should be considered in patients who remain symptomatic despite optimal doses of RAASbs/ARNis, MRAs, and BBs. Comparative studies examining the efficacy of these medications, and strategies and prioritizing some over others should be considered as, given their similar side effects on heart rate, blood pressure, and renal function, it is highly unlikely that all can be given to the same patient.

[Care of patients with chronic heart failure: an interdisciplinary challenge]

The diverse manifestations of heart failure led to complex treatment guidelines and care scenarios and therefore always require an integrated, multidisciplinary care approach. Patients with chronic heart failure suffer from a large number of cardiac and noncardiac comorbidities. For example, iron deficiency leads to decreased performance and exertional dyspnea and should be diagnosed. Psychological screening questionnaires should be used for the early detection of psychological comorbidities.ARNI and SGLT-inhibitors expand the pharmacotherapeutic possibilities and gain in importance. The constant development of diagnostic possibilities and therapeutic options must be implemented consistently into the care continuum in order to have a lasting effect. The challenge of interdisciplinary coordination can be significantly reduced through jointly agreed process logs (e. g. within the framework of integrated supply contracts or a Heart Failure Unit Network).

[Kidney as pacemaker for cardiovascular aging]

Kidney patients age faster and vascular risk factors intensify the process. Lifetime is reduced up to 16 years in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 and kidney disease. SGLT2 inhibitors play a significant role in maintaining organ function. By inhibiting the SGLT2 transporter in the proximal tubule of the kidneys, energy and water are continuously excreted and metabolic processes that are counter-regulated are set in motion. This hypometabolic adaptation supports organ functions and induces longevity. Kidney protection extends life expectancy of patients with diabetes mellitus type 2.Also patients with heart failure benefit and a 3-stage therapy is newly being discussed. The beta blocker is combined with an SGLT2 inhibitor in the first stage. In the second stage, the angiotensin receptor/neprilysin inhibitor and then a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) is used. These therapies have a complementary effect.