Safety profile and efficacy of ivabradine in heart failure due to Chagas heart disease: a post hoc analysis of the SHIFT trial

A systematic review and meta-analysis of mortality in chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy versus other cardiomyopathies: higher risk or fiction?

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Although multiple studies suggest that chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy (CCC) has higher mortality than other cardiomyopathies, the absence of meta-analyses supporting this perspective limits the possibility of generating robust conclusions. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the current evidence on mortality risk in CCC compared with that of other cardiomyopathies.

METHODS

PubMed/Medline and EMBASE were searched for studies comparing mortality risk between patients with CCC and those with other cardiomyopathies, including in the latter nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM), ischemic cardiomyopathy, and non-Chagas cardiomyopathy (nonCC). A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to combine the effects of the evaluated studies.

RESULTS

A total of 37 studies evaluating 17 949 patients were included. Patients with CCC had a significantly higher mortality risk compared with patients with NICM (HR, 2.04; 95%CI, 1.60-2.60; I2, 47%; 8 studies) and non-CC (HR, 2.26; 95%CI, 1.65-3.10; I2, 71%; 11 studies), while no significant association was observed compared with patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (HR, 1.72; 95%CI, 0.80-3.66; I2, 69%; 4 studies) in the adjusted-measures meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with CCC have an almost 2-fold increased mortality risk compared with individuals with heart failure secondary to other etiologies. This finding highlights the need for effective public policies and targeted research initiatives to optimally address the challenges of CCC.

Ivabradine in patients with heart failure: a systematic literature review

Background: Heart failure is a chronic disease linked with significant morbidity and mortality, and uncontrolled resting heart rate is a risk factor for adverse outcomes. This systematic literature review aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of ivabradine in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Methods: We searched electronic databases from their inception to July 2021 to include studies that reported on efficacy, safety, or PROs of ivabradine in patients with HFrEF. Results: Of 1947 records screened, 51 RCTs and 6 observational studies were identified. Ivabradine on top of background therapy demonstrated a significant reduction in composite outcomes including hospitalization for HF or cardiovascular death. In addition, observational studies suggested that ivabradine was associated with a significant reduction in mortality. Across all studies, ivabradine use on top of background therapy was associated with greater reductions in heart rate, improved EF, and improved health-related quality of life (QoL) and comparable risk of total adverse events compared to those treated with background therapy alone. Conclusions: Ivabradine on top of background therapy is beneficial for heart rate, hospitalization risk for HF, mortality, EF, and patients' QoL. Moreover, these benefits were achieved with no significant increase in the overall risk of total adverse events.

Ivabradine: pre-clinical and clinical evidence in the setting of ventricular arrhythmias

BACKGROUND

Ivabradine, an agent lowering the heart rate, acting as a funny current (If) specific inhibitor, is responsible for the sinoatrial node's spontaneous depolarization. According to current guidelines, it is indicated in specific heart failure populations and as a second-line treatment option to improve angina in chronic coronary syndromes.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The role of ivabradine in the setting of ventricular arrhythmias has been studied in both experimental and clinical studies. Specifically, experimental studies have examined the role of ivabradine in acute myocardial ischemia, reperfusion, digitalis-induced ventricular arrhythmias, and catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia showing promising results. In addition, clinical studies have shown a beneficial role of ivabradine in reducing ventricular arrhythmias. Ivabradine reduced premature ventricular contractions in combination with beta-blockers in dilated cardiomyopathy patients. Similarly, in catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, ivabradine reduced dobutamine-induced premature ventricular complexes and improved ventricular arrhythmias burden. On the other hand, current data show no beneficial role of ivabradine in reducing ventricular arrhythmias in myocardial ischemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Randomized clinical trials are needed to elucidate the role of ivabradine in reducing the burden of ventricular arrhythmias in various clinical settings. HIPPOKRATIA 2022, 26 (2):49-54.

Ivabradine and Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

ABSTRACT

This was a meta-analysis of randomized control trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effect of ivabradine on the risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) as well as its effect on the ventricular rate in patients with AF. The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and other databases were searched for RCTs of ivabradine. Thirteen trials with 37,533 patients met the inclusion criteria. The incidence of AF was significantly higher in the ivabradine treatment group than in the control group (odds ratio (OR), 1.23; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.08-1.41), although it was reduced after cardiac surgery (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.23-2.12). Regarding left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), ivabradine increased the risk of AF in both LVEF >40% (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.24 to 1.63) and LVEF ≤40% subgroups (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.98-1.37). The risk of AF was increased by both small and large cumulative doses of ivabradine (small cumulative dose: OR, 3.00; 95% CI, 0.48 to 18.93; large cumulative dose: OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83-1.34). Furthermore, ivabradine may reduce the ventricular rate in patients with AF. In conclusion, we found that both large and small cumulative doses of ivabradine were associated with an increased incidence of AF, and the effect was more marked in the LVEF >40% subgroup. Nevertheless, ivabradine therapy is beneficial for the prevention of post-operative AF. Furthermore, ivabradine may be effective in controlling the ventricular rate in patients with AF, although more RCTs are needed to support this conclusion.

Chagas heart disease: An overview of diagnosis, manifestations, treatment, and care

Chagas heart disease (CHD) affects approximately 30% of patients chronically infected with the protozoa Trypanosoma cruzi. CHD is classified into four stages of increasing severity according to electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, and clinical criteria. CHD presents with a myriad of clinical manifestations, but its main complications are sudden cardiac death, heart failure, and stroke. Importantly, CHD has a higher incidence of sudden cardiac death and stroke than most other cardiopathies, and patients with CHD complicated by heart failure have a higher mortality than patients with heart failure caused by other etiologies. Among patients with CHD, approximately 90% of deaths can be attributed to complications of Chagas disease. Sudden cardiac death is the most common cause of death (55%–60%), followed by heart failure (25%–30%) and stroke (10%–15%). The high morbimortality and the unique characteristics of CHD demand an individualized approach according to the stage of the disease and associated complications the patient presents with. Therefore, the management of CHD is challenging, and in this review, we present the most updated available data to help clinicians and cardiologists in the care of these patients. We describe the clinical manifestations, diagnosis and classification criteria, risk stratification, and approach to the different clinical aspects of CHD using diagnostic tools and pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments.

Mortality risk in chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aims

This study aimed to estimate the annual mortality risk and its determinants in chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy.

Methods and results

We conducted a systematic search in MEDLINE, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, Cochrane Library, and LILACS. Longitudinal studies published between 1 January 1946 and 24 October 2018 were included. A random‐effects meta‐analysis using the death rate over the mean follow‐up period in years was used to obtain pooled estimated annual mortality rates. Main outcomes were defined as all‐cause mortality, including cardiovascular, non‐cardiovascular, heart failure, stroke, and sudden cardiac deaths. A total of 5005 studies were screened for eligibility. A total of 52 longitudinal studies for chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy including 9569 patients and 2250 deaths were selected. The meta‐analysis revealed an annual all‐cause mortality rate of 7.9% [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.3–10.1; I² = 97.74%; T² = 0.70] among patients with chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy. The pooled estimated annual cardiovascular death rate was 6.3% (95% CI: 4.9–8.0; I² = 96.32%; T² = 0.52). The annual mortality rates for heart failure, sudden death, and stroke were 3.5%, 2.6%, and 0.4%, respectively. Meta‐regression showed that low left ventricular ejection fraction (coefficient = −0.04; 95% CI: −0.07, −0.02; P = 0.001) was associated with an increased mortality risk. Subgroup analysis based on American Heart Association (AHA) classification revealed pooled estimate rates of 4.8%, 8.7%, 13.9%, and 22.4% (P < 0.001) for B1/B2, B2/C, C, and C/D stages of cardiomyopathy, respectively.

Conclusions

The annual mortality risk in chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy is substantial and primarily attributable to cardiovascular causes. This risk significantly increases in patients with low left ventricular ejection fraction and those classified as AHA stages C and C/D.

Advanced Therapies for Ventricular Arrhythmias in Patients With Chagasic Cardiomyopathy: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

Chagas disease is caused by infection from the protozoan parasite Trypanosoma cruzi. Although it is endemic to Latin America, global migration has led to an increased incidence of Chagas in Europe, Asia, Australia, and North America. Following acute infection, up to 30% of patients will develop chronic Chagas disease, with most patients developing Chagasic cardiomyopathy. Chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy is highly arrhythmogenic, with estimated annual rates of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapies and electrical storm of 25% and 9.1%, respectively. Managing arrhythmias in patients with Chagasic cardiomyopathy is a major challenge for the clinical electrophysiologist, requiring intimate knowledge of cardiac anatomy, advanced training, and expertise. Endocardial-epicardial mapping and ablation strategy is needed to treat arrhythmias in this patient population, owing to the suboptimal long-term success rate of endocardial mapping and ablation alone. We also describe innovative approaches to improve acute and long-term clinical outcomes in patients with refractory ventricular arrhythmias following catheter ablation, such as bilateral cervicothoracic sympathectomy and bilateral renal denervation, among others.

Heart failure in the last year: progress and perspective

Research about heart failure (HF) has made major progress in the last years. We give here an update on the most recent findings. Landmark trials have established new treatments for HF with reduced ejection fraction. Sacubitril/valsartan was superior to enalapril in PARADIGM-HF trial, and its initiation during hospitalization for acute HF or early after discharge can now be considered. More recently, new therapeutic pathways have been developed. In the DAPA-HF and EMPEROR-Reduced trials, dapagliflozin and empagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary composite endpoint, compared with placebo [hazard ratio (HR) 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-0.85; P < 0.001 and HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.65-0.86; P < 0.001, respectively]. Second, vericiguat, an oral soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator, reduced the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization vs. placebo (HR 0.90; 95% CI 0.82-0.98; P = 0.02). On the other hand, both the diagnosis and treatment of HF with preserved ejection fraction, as well as management of advanced HF and acute HF, remain challenging. A better phenotyping of patients with HF would be helpful for prognostic stratification and treatment selection. Further aspects, such as the use of devices, treatment of arrhythmias, and percutaneous treatment of valvular heart disease in patients with HF, are also discussed and reviewed in this article.

Ivabradine as adjuvant treatment for chronic heart failure

BACKGROUND

Chronic heart failure is one of the most common medical conditions, affecting more than 23 million people worldwide. Despite established guideline-based, multidrug pharmacotherapy, chronic heart failure is still the cause of frequent hospitalisation, and about 50% die within five years of diagnosis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of ivabradine in individuals with chronic heart failure.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CPCI-S Web of Science in March 2020. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP. We checked reference lists of included studies. We did not apply any time or language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials in which adult participants diagnosed with chronic heart failure were randomly assigned to receive either ivabradine or placebo/usual care/no treatment. We distinguished between type of heart failure (heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction or heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction) as well as between duration of ivabradine treatment (short term (< 6 months) or long term (≥ 6 months)).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data, and checked data for accuracy. We calculated risk ratios (RR) using a random-effects model. We completed a comprehensive 'Risk of bias' assessment for all studies. We contacted authors for missing data. Our primary endpoints were: mortality from cardiovascular causes; quality of life; time to first hospitalisation for heart failure during follow-up; and number of days spent in hospital due to heart failure during follow-up. Our secondary endpoints were: rate of serious adverse events; exercise capacity; and economic costs (narrative report). We assessed the certainty of the evidence applying the GRADE methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 studies (76 reports) involving a total of 19,628 participants (mean age 60.76 years, 69% male). However, few studies contributed data to meta-analyses due to inconsistency in trial design (type of heart failure) and outcome reporting and measurement. In general, risk of bias varied from low to high across the included studies, with insufficient detail provided to inform judgement in several cases. We were able to perform two meta-analyses focusing on participants with heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and long-term ivabradine treatment. There was evidence of no difference between ivabradine and placebo/usual care/no treatment for mortality from cardiovascular causes (RR 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.11; 3 studies; 17,676 participants; I2 = 33%; moderate-certainty evidence). Furthermore, we found evidence of no difference in rate of serious adverse events amongst HFrEF participants randomised to receive long-term ivabradine compared with those randomised to placebo, usual care, or no treatment (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.00; 2 studies; 17,399 participants; I2 = 12%; moderate-certainty evidence). We were not able to perform meta-analysis for all other outcomes, and have low confidence in the findings based on the individual studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found evidence of no difference in cardiovascular mortality and serious adverse events between long-term treatment with ivabradine and placebo/usual care/no treatment in participants with heart failure with HFrEF. Nevertheless, due to indirectness (male predominance), the certainty of the available evidence is rated as moderate.

Chagas Disease and Heart Failure: An Expanding Issue Worldwide

Chagas disease, originally a South American endemic health problem, is expanding worldwide because of people migration. Its main impact is on the cardiovascular system, producing myocardial damage that frequently results in heart failure. Pathogenic pathways are mainly related to inmunoinflamatory reactions in the myocardium and, less frequently, in the gastrointestinal tract. The heart usually shows fibrosis, producing dilatation and damage of the electrogenic cardiac system. These changes result in cardiomyopathy with heart failure and frequent cardiac arrhythmias and heart blocks. Diagnosis of the disease must include a lab test to detect the parasite or its immune reactions and the usual techniques to evaluate cardiac function. Therapeutic management of Chagas heart failure does not differ significantly from the most common treatment for dilated cardiomyopathy, with special focus on arrhythmias and several degrees of heart block. Heart transplantation is reserved for end-stage cases. Major international scientific organisations are delivering recommendations for prevention and early diagnosis. This article provides an analysis of epidemiology, prevention, treatment and the relationship between Chagas disease and heart failure.

Efficacy of ivabradine for heart failure: A protocol for a systematic review of randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Previous clinical trials have reported that ivabradine can effectively treat heart failure (HF). However, no systematic review has explored its efficacy and safety for HF. This systematic review will aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ivabradine for the treatment of patients with HF.

METHODS

We will search the literature from the following electronic databases from inception to the January 31, 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, MEDILINE, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP Information, and Wanfang Data. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ivabradine for HF will be fully considered for inclusion without any restrictions. Additionally, grey literature including clinical trial registries, dissertations, and reference lists of included studies, conference abstracts will also be searched. Two researchers will review these literatures, extract data, and assess risk of bias of included RCTs separately. Data will be pooled by either fixed-effects model or random-effects model, and meta-analysis will be conducted if it is appropriate.

RESULTS

The primary outcome is all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes comprise of change in body weight, urine output, change in serum sodium, and all adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study will summary provide up-to-dated evidence for assessing the efficacy and safety of ivabradine for HF.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

It is not necessary to acquire ethical approval for this systematic review, because no individual patient data will be used in this study. The results of this systematic review will be published through peer-reviewed journals.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019120814.

Safety profile and efficacy of ivabradine in heart failure due to Chagas heart disease: a post hoc analysis of the SHIFT trial

AIMS

The SHIFT trial showed that ivabradine reduced heart rate (HR) and the risk of cardiovascular outcomes. Concerns remain over the efficacy and safety of ivabradine on heart failure (HF) due to Chagas disease (ChD). We therefore conducted a post hoc analysis of the SHIFT trial to investigate the effect of ivabradine in these patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

SHIFT was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in symptomatic systolic stable HF, HR ≥ 70 b.p.m., and in sinus rhythm. The ChD HF subgroup included 38 patients, 20 on ivabradine, and 18 on placebo. The ChD HF subgroup showed high prevalence of bundle branch right block and, compared with the overall SHIFT population, lower systolic blood pressure; higher use of diuretics, cardiac glycosides, and antialdosterone agents; and lower use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor blocker or target daily dose of beta-blocker. ChD HF presented a poor prognosis (all-cause mortality at 2 years was ~60%). The mean twice-daily dose of ivabradine was 6.26 ± 1.15 mg and placebo 6.43 ± 1.55 mg. Ivabradine reduced HR from 77.9 ± 3.8 to 62.3 ± 10.1 b.p.m. (P = 0.005) and improved functional class (P = 0.02). A trend towards reduction in all-cause death was observed in ivabradine arm vs. placebo (P = 0.07). Ivabradine was not associated with serious bradycardia, atrioventricular block, hypotension, or syncope.

CONCLUSIONS

ChD HF is an advanced form of HF with poor prognosis. Ivabradine was effective in reducing HR in these patients and improving functional class. Although our results are based on a very limited sample and should be interpreted with caution, they suggest that ivabradine may have a favourable benefit-risk profile in ChD HF patients.