Safety, Tolerability and efficacy of Rapid Optimization, helped by NT-proBNP and GDF-15, of Heart Failure therapies (STRONG-HF): rationale and design for a multicentre, randomized, parallel-group study

Titration of Medications After Acute Heart Failure Is Safe, Tolerated, and Effective Regardless of Risk

BACKGROUND

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) decisions may be less affected by single patient variables such as blood pressure or kidney function and more by overall risk profile. In STRONG-HF (Safety, tolerability and efficacy of up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies for acute heart failure), high-intensity care (HIC) in the form of rapid uptitration of heart failure (HF) GDMT was effective overall, but the safety, tolerability and efficacy of HIC across the spectrum of HF severity is unknown. Evaluating this with a simple risk-based framework offers an alternative and more clinically translatable approach than traditional subgroup analyses.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to assess safety, tolerability, and efficacy of HIC according to the simple, powerful, and clinically translatable MAGGIC (Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic) HF risk score.

METHODS

In STRONG-HF, 1,078 patients with acute HF were randomized to HIC (uptitration of treatments to 100% of recommended doses within 2 weeks of discharge and 4 scheduled outpatient visits over the 2 months after discharge) vs usual care (UC). The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death or first HF rehospitalization at day 180. Baseline HF risk profile was determined by the previously validated MAGGIC risk score. Treatment effect was stratified according to MAGGIC risk score both as a categorical and continuous variable.

RESULTS

Among 1,062 patients (98.5%) with complete data for whom a MAGGIC score could be calculated at baseline, GDMT use at baseline was similar across MAGGIC tertiles. Overall GDMT prescriptions achieved for individual medication classes were higher in the HIC vs UC group and did not differ by MAGGIC risk score tertiles (interaction nonsignificant). The incidence of all-cause death or HF readmission at day 180 was, respectively, 16.3%, 18.9%, and 23.2% for MAGGIC risk score tertiles 1, 2, and 3. The HIC arm was at lower risk of all-cause death or HF readmission at day 180 (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.50-0.86) and this finding was robust across MAGGIC risk score modeled as a categorical (HR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.62-0.68 in tertiles 1, 2, and 3; interaction nonsignificant) for all comparisons and continuous (interaction nonsignificant) variable. The rate of adverse events was higher in the HIC group, but this observation did not differ based on MAGGIC risk score tertile (interaction nonsignificant).

CONCLUSIONS

HIC led to better use of GDMT and lower HF-related morbidity and mortality compared with UC, regardless of the underlying HF risk profile. (Safety, Tolerability and Efficacy of Rapid Optimization, Helped by NT-proBNP testinG, of Heart Failure Therapies [STRONG-HF]; NCT03412201).

High-intensity care for GDMT titration

Heart failure (HF) is a systemic disease associated with a high risk of morbidity, mortality, increased risk of hospitalizations, and low quality of life. Therefore, effective, systemic treatment strategies are necessary to mitigate these risks. In this manuscript, we emphasize the concept of high-intensity care to optimize guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in HF patients. The document highlights the importance of achieving optimal recommended doses of GDMT medications, including beta-blockers, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitors to improve patient outcomes, achieve effective, sustainable decongestion, and improve patient quality of life. The document also discusses potential obstacles to GDMT optimization, such as clinical inertia, physiological limitations, comorbidities, non-adherence, and frailty. Lastly, it also attempts to provide possible future scenarios of high-intensive care that could improve patient outcomes.

Therapy duration and improvement of ventricular function in de novo heart failure: the Heart Failure Optimization study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In patients with de novo heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is expected to occur when started on guideline-recommended medical therapy. However, improvement may not be completed within 90 days.

METHODS

Patients with HFrEF and LVEF ≤ 35% prescribed a wearable cardioverter-defibrillator between 2017 and 2022 from 68 sites were enrolled, starting with a registry phase for 3 months and followed by a study phase up to 1 year. The primary endpoints were LVEF improvement > 35% between Days 90 and 180 following guideline-recommended medical therapy initiation and the percentage of target dose reached at Days 90 and 180.

RESULTS

A total of 598 patients with de novo HFrEF [59 years (interquartile range 51-68), 27% female] entered the study phase. During the first 180 days, a significant increase in dosage of beta-blockers, renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists was observed (P < .001). At Day 90, 46% [95% confidence interval (CI) 41%-50%] of study phase patients had LVEF improvement > 35%; 46% (95% CI 40%-52%) of those with persistently low LVEF at Day 90 had LVEF improvement > 35% by Day 180, increasing the total rate of improvement > 35% to 68% (95% CI 63%-72%). In 392 patients followed for 360 days, improvement > 35% was observed in 77% (95% CI 72%-81%) of the patients. Until Day 90, sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias were observed in 24 wearable cardioverter-defibrillator carriers (1.8%). After 90 days, no sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia occurred in wearable cardioverter-defibrillator carriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuous optimization of guideline-recommended medical therapy for at least 180 days in HFrEF is associated with additional LVEF improvement > 35%, allowing for better decision-making regarding preventive implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy.

Characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of early vs. late enrollees of the STRONG-HF trial

BACKGROUND

The STRONG-HF trial showed that high-intensity care (HIC) consisting of rapid up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and close follow-up reduced all-cause death or heart failure (HF) readmission at 180 days compared to usual care (UC). We hypothesized that significant differences in patient characteristics, management, and outcomes over the enrolment period may exist.

METHODS

Two groups of the 1,078 patients enrolled in STRONG-HF were created according to the order of enrolment within center. The early group consisted of the first 10 patients enrolled at each center (N = 342) and the late group consisted of the following patients (N = 736).

RESULTS

Late enrollees were younger, had more frequently reduced ejection fraction, slightly lower NT-proBNP and creatinine levels compared with early enrollees. The primary outcome occurred less frequently in early compared to late enrollees (15% vs. 21%, aHR 0.65, 95% CI 0.42-0.99, P = .044). No treatment-by-enrolment interaction was seen in respect to the average percentage of optimal dose of GDMT after randomization, which was consistently higher in early and late patients randomized to HIC compared to UC. The higher use of renin-angiotensin-inhibitors in the HIC arm was more pronounced in the late enrollees both after randomization (interaction-P = .013) and at 90 days (interaction-P < .001). No interaction was observed for safety events. Patients randomized late to UC displayed a trend toward more severe outcomes (26% vs. 16%, P = .10), but the efficacy of HIC showed no interaction with the enrolment group (aHR 0.77, 95% CI 0.35-1.67 in early and 0.58, 95% CI 0.40-0.83 in late enrollees, adjusted interaction-P = .51) with similar outcomes in the HIC arm in late and early enrollees (16% vs. 13%, P = .73).

CONCLUSIONS

Late enrollees have different clinical characteristics and higher event rates compared to early enrollees. GDMT implementation in the HIC arm robustly achieved similar doses with consistent efficacy in early and late enrollees, mitigating the higher risk of adverse outcome in late enrollees.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03412201.

Effects of Rapid Uptitration of Neurohormonal Blockade on Effective, Sustainable Decongestion and Outcomes in STRONG-HF

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive uptitration of neurohormonal blockade targets fundamental mechanisms underlying development of congestion and may be an additional approach for decongestion after acute heart failure (AHF).

OBJECTIVES

This hypothesis was tested in the STRONG-HF (Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Rapid Optimization, Helped by N-Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide Testing of Heart Failure Therapies) trial.

METHODS

In STRONG-HF, patients with AHF were randomized to the high-intensity care (HIC) arm with fast up-titration of neurohormonal blockade or to usual care (UC). Successful decongestion was defined as an absence of peripheral edema, pulmonary rales, and jugular venous pressure <6 cm.

RESULTS

At baseline, the same proportion of patients in both arms had successful decongestion (HIC 48% vs UC 46%; P = 0.52). At day 90, higher proportion of patients in the HIC arm (75%) experienced successful decongestion vs the UC arm (68%) (P = 0.0001). Each separate component of the congestion score was significantly better in the HIC arm (all, P < 0.05). Additional markers of decongestion also favored the HIC: weight reduction (adjusted mean difference: -1.36 kg; 95% CI: -1.92 to -0.79 kg), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level, and lower orthopnea severity (all, P < 0.001). More effective decongestion was achieved despite a lower mean daily dose of loop diuretics at day 90 in the HIC arm. Among patients with successful decongestion at baseline, those in the HIC arm had a significantly better chance of sustaining decongestion at day 90. Successful decongestion in all subjects was associated with a lower risk of 180-day HF readmission or all-cause death (HR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.27-0.59; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In STRONG-HF, intensive uptitration of neurohormonal blockade was associated with more efficient and sustained decongestion at day 90 and a lower risk of the primary endpoint.

Safety Indicators in Patients Receiving High-intensity Care After Hospital Admission for Acute Heart Failure: The STRONG-HF Trial

BACKGROUND

Safety, Tolerability and Efficacy of Rapid Optimization, Helped by NT-proBNP Testing, of Heart Failure Therapies (STRONG-HF) demonstrated the safety and efficacy of rapid up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) with high-intensity care (HIC) compared with usual care in patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (HF). In the HIC group, the following safety indicators were used to guide up-titration: estimated glomerular filtration rate of <30 mL/min/1.73 m2, serum potassium of >5.0 mmol/L, systolic blood pressure (SBP) of <95 mmHg, heart rate of <55 bpm, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide concentration of >10% higher than predischarge values.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We examined the impact of protocol-specified safety indicators on achieved dose of GDMT and clinical outcomes. Three hundred thirteen of the 542 patients in the HIC arm (57.7%) met ≥1 safety indicator at any follow-up visit 1-6 weeks after discharge. As compared with those without, patients meeting ≥1 safety indicator had more severe HF symptoms, lower SBP, and higher heart rate at baseline and achieved a lower average percentage of GDMT optimal doses (mean difference vs the HIC arm patients not reaching any safety indicator, -11.0% [95% confidence interval [CI] -13.6 to -8.4%], P < .001). The primary end point of 180-day all-cause death or HF readmission occurred in 15.0% of patients with any safety indicator vs 14.2% of those without (adjusted hazard ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.48-1.46, P = .540). None of each of the safety indicators, considered alone, was significantly associated with the primary end point, but an SBP of <95 mm Hg was associated with a trend toward increased 180-day all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 2.68, 95% CI 0.94-7.64, P = .065) and estimated glomerular filtration rate decreased to <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 with more HF readmissions (adjusted hazard ratio 3.60, 95% CI 1.22-10.60, P = .0203). The occurrence of a safety indicator was associated with a smaller 90-day improvement in the EURO-QoL 5-Dimension visual analog scale (adjusted mean difference -3.32 points, 95% CI -5.97 to -0.66, P = .015).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with acute HF enrolled in STRONG-HF in the HIC arm, the occurrence of any safety indicator was associated with the administration of slightly lower GDMT doses and less improvement in quality of life, but with no significant increase in the primary outcome of 180-day HF readmission or death when appropriately addressed according to the study protocol.

Impact of Rapid Up-Titration of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapies on Quality of Life: Insights From the STRONG-HF Trial

BACKGROUND

This analysis provides details on baseline and changes in quality of life (QoL) and its components as measured by EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, as well as association with objective outcomes, applying high-intensity heart failure (HF) care in patients with acute HF.

METHODS

In STRONG-HF trial (Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Rapid Optimization, Helped by NT-proBNP Testing, of Heart Failure Therapies) patients with acute HF were randomized just before discharge to either usual care or a high-intensity care strategy of guideline-directed medical therapy up-titration. Patients ranked their state of health on the EQ-5D visual analog scale score ranging from 0 (the worst imaginable health) to 100 (the best imaginable health) at baseline and at 90 days follow-up.

RESULTS

In 1072 patients with acute HF with available assessment of QoL (539/533 patients assigned high-intensity care/usual care) the mean baseline EQ-visual analog scale score was 59.2 (SD, 15.1) with no difference between the treatment groups. Patients with lower baseline EQ-visual analog scale (meaning worse QoL) were more likely to be women, self-reported Black and non-European (P<0.001). The strongest independent predictors of a greater improvement in QoL were younger age (P<0.001), no HF hospitalization in the previous year (P<0.001), lower NYHA class before hospital admission (P<0.001) and high-intensity care treatment (mean difference, 4.2 [95% CI, 2.5-5.8]; P<0.001). No statistically significant heterogeneity in the benefits of high-intensity care was seen across patient subgroups of different ages, with left ventricular ejection fraction above or below 40%, NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) and systolic blood pressure above or below the median value. The treatment effect on the primary end point did not vary significantly across baseline EQ-visual analog scale (Pinteraction=0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Early up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapy significantly improves all dimensions of QoL in patients with HF and improves prognosis regardless of baseline self-assessed health status. The likelihood of achieving optimal doses of HF medications does not depend on baseline QoL.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03412201.

Blood pressure and intensive treatment up-titration after acute heart failure hospitalization: Insights from the STRONG-HF trial

AIMS

A high-intensity care (HIC) strategy with rapid guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) up-titration and close follow-up visits improved outcomes, compared to usual care (UC), in patients recently hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF). Hypotension is a major limitation to GDMT implementation. We aimed to assess the impact of baseline systolic blood pressure (SBP) on the effects of HIC versus UC and the role of early SBP changes in STRONG-HF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1075 patients hospitalized for AHF with SBP ≥100 mmHg were included in STRONG-HF. For the purpose of this post-hoc analysis, patients were stratified by tertiles of baseline SBP (<118, 118-128, and ≥129 mmHg) and, in the HIC arm, by tertiles of changes in SBP from the values measured before discharge to those measured at 1 week after discharge (≥2 mmHg increase, ≤7 mmHg decrease to <2 mmHg increase, and ≥8 mmHg decrease). The primary endpoint was 180-day heart failure rehospitalization or death. The effect of HIC versus UC on the primary endpoint was independent of baseline SBP evaluated as tertiles (pinteraction = 0.77) or as a continuous variable (pinteraction = 0.91). In the HIC arm, patients with increased, stable and decreased SBP at 1 week reached 83.5%, 76.2% and 75.3% of target doses of GDMT at day 90. The risk of the primary endpoint was not significantly different between patients with different SBP changes at 1 week (adjusted p = 0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

In STRONG-HF, the benefits of HIC versus UC were independent of baseline SBP. Rapid GDMT up-titration was performed also in patients with an early SBP drop, resulting in similar 180-day outcome as compared to patients with stable or increased SBP.

Early changes in renal function during rapid up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapy following an admission for acute heart failure

AIM

In this subgroup analysis of STRONG-HF, we explored the association between changes in renal function and efficacy of rapid up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) according to a high-intensity care (HIC) strategy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In patients randomized to the HIC arm (n = 542), renal function was assessed at baseline and during follow-up visits. We studied the association with clinical characteristics and outcomes of a decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at week 1, defined as ≥15% decrease from baseline. Patients in the usual care group (n = 536) were seen at day 90. The treatment effect of HIC versus usual care was independent of baseline eGFR (p-interaction = 0.4809). A decrease in eGFR within 1 week occurred in 77 (15.5%) patients and was associated with more rales on examination (p = 0.004), and a higher New York Heart Association class at the corresponding visit. Following the decrease in eGFR at 1 week, lower average optimal doses of GDMT were prescribed during follow-up (p = 0.0210) and smaller reductions in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide occurred (geometrical mean 0.81 in no eGFR decrease vs 1.12 in GFR decrease, p = 0.0003). The rate of heart failure (HF) readmission or death at 180 days was 12.3% in no eGFR decrease versus 18.5% in eGFR decrease (p = 0.2274) and HF readmissions were 7.8% versus 16.6% (p = 0.0496).

CONCLUSIONS

In the STRONG-HF study, HIC reduced 180-day HF readmission or death regardless of baseline eGFR. An early decrease in eGFR during rapid up-titration of GDMT was associated with more evidence of congestion, yet lower doses of GDMT during follow-up.

Non-cardiac comorbidities and intensive up-titration of oral treatment in patients recently hospitalized for heart failure: Insights from the STRONG-HF trial

AIMS

To assess the potential interaction between non-cardiac comorbidities (NCCs) and the efficacy and safety of high-intensity care (HIC) versus usual care (UC) in the STRONG-HF trial, including stable patients with improved but still elevated natriuretic peptides.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In the trial, eight NCCs were reported: anaemia, diabetes, renal dysfunction, severe liver disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease/asthma, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, psychiatric/neurological disorders, and malignancies. Patients were classified by NCC number (0, 1, 2 and ≥3). The treatment effect of HIC versus UC on the primary endpoint, 180-day death or heart failure (HF) rehospitalization, was compared by NCC number and by each individual comorbidity. Among the 1078 patients, the prevalence of 0, 1, 2 and ≥3 NCCs was 24.3%, 39.8%, 24.5% and 11.4%, respectively. Achievement of full doses of HF therapies at 90 and 180 days in the HIC was similar irrespective of NCC number. In HIC, the primary endpoint occurred in 10.0%, 16.6%, 13.6% and 26.2%, in those with 0, 1, 2 and ≥3 NCCs, respectively, as compared to 19.1%, 25.4%, 23.3% and 26.2% in UC (interaction-p = 0.80). The treatment benefit of HIC versus UC on the primary endpoint did not differ significantly by each individual comorbidity. There was no significant treatment interaction by NCC number in quality-of-life improvement (p = 0.98) or the incidence of serious adverse events (p = 0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

In the STRONG-HF trial, NCCs neither limited the rapid up-titration of HF therapies, nor attenuated the benefit of HIC on the primary endpoint. In the context of a clinical trial, the benefit-risk ratio favours the rapid up-titration of HF therapies even in patients with multiple NCCs.

Guideline-directed medical therapy for HFrEF: sequencing strategies and barriers for life-saving drug therapy

Multiple landmark trials have helped to advance the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) significantly over the past decade. These trials have led to the introduction of four main drug classes into the 2021 ESC guideline, namely angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitors/angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. The life-saving effect of these therapies has been shown to be additive and becomes apparent within weeks, which is why maximally tolerated or target doses of all drug classes should be strived for as quickly as possible. Recent evidence, such as the STRONG-HF trial, demonstrated that rapid drug implementation and up-titration is superior to the traditional and more gradual step-by-step approach where valuable time is lost to up-titration. Accordingly, multiple rapid drug implementation and sequencing strategies have been proposed to significantly reduce the time needed for the titration process. Such strategies are urgently needed since previous large-scale registries have shown that guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) implementation is a challenge. This challenge is reflected by generally low adherence rates, which can be attributed to factors considering the patient, health care system, and local hospital/health care provider. This review of the four medication classes used to treat HFrEF seeks to present a thorough overview of the data supporting current GDMT, discuss the obstacles to GDMT implementation and up-titration, and identify multiple sequencing strategies that could improve GDMT adherence. Sequencing strategies for GDMT implementation. GDMT: guideline-directed medical therapy; ACEi: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; ARB: Angiotensin II receptor blocker; ARNi: angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor; BB: beta-blocker; MRA: mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist; SGLT2i: sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor.

NT-proBNP and high intensity care for acute heart failure: the STRONG-HF trial

AIMS

STRONG-HF showed that rapid up-titration of guideline-recommended medical therapy (GRMT), in a high intensity care (HIC) strategy, was associated with better outcomes compared with usual care. The aim of this study was to assess the role of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) at baseline and its changes early during up-titration.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1077 patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (HF) and with a >10% NT-proBNP decrease from screening (i.e. admission) to randomization (i.e. pre-discharge), were included. Patients in HIC were stratified by further NT-proBNP changes, from randomization to 1 week later, as decreased (≥30%), stable (<30% decrease to ≤10% increase), or increased (>10%). The primary endpoint was 180-day HF readmission or death. The effect of HIC vs. usual care was independent of baseline NT-proBNP. Patients in the HIC group with stable or increased NT-proBNP were older, with more severe acute HF and worse renal and liver function. Per protocol, patients with increased NT-proBNP received more diuretics and were up-titrated more slowly during the first weeks after discharge. However, by 6 months, they reached 70.4% optimal GRMT doses, compared with 80.3% for those with NT-proBNP decrease. As a result, the primary endpoint at 60 and 90 days occurred in 8.3% and 11.1% of patients with increased NT-proBNP vs. 2.2% and 4.0% in those with decreased NT-proBNP (P = 0.039 and P = 0.045, respectively). However, no difference in outcome was found at 180 days (13.5% vs. 13.2%; P = 0.93).

CONCLUSION

Among patients with acute HF enrolled in STRONG-HF, HIC reduced 180-day HF readmission or death regardless of baseline NT-proBNP. GRMT up-titration early post-discharge, utilizing increased NT-proBNP as guidance to increase diuretic therapy and reduce the GRMT up-titration rate, resulted in the same 180-day outcomes regardless of early post-discharge NT-proBNP change.

Patient profiles in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: Prevalence, characteristics, treatments and outcomes in a real-world heart failure population

AIMS

The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology has recently proposed to optimize guideline-directed medical treatments according to patient's profiles. The aim of this analysis was to investigate prevalence/characteristics/treatments/outcomes for individual profiles.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) enrolled in the Swedish Heart Failure Registry (SwedeHF) between 2013 and 2021 were considered. Among 108 profiles generated by combining different strata of renal function (by estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR]), systolic blood pressure (sBP), heart rate, atrial fibrillation (AF) status and presence of hyperkalaemia, 93 were identified in our cohort. Event rates for a composite of cardiovascular (CV) mortality or first HF hospitalization were calculated for each profile. The nine most frequent profiles accounting for 70.5% of the population had eGFR 30-60 or ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m2 , sBP 90-140 mmHg and no hyperkalaemia. Heart rate and AF were evenly distributed. The highest risk of CV mortality/first HF hospitalization was observed in those with concomitant eGFR 30-60 ml/min/1.73 m2 and AF. We also identified nine profiles with the highest event rates, representing only 5% of the study population, characterized by no hyperkalaemia, even distribution among the sBP strata, predominance of eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73 m2 and AF. The three profiles with eGFR 30-60 ml/min/1.73 m2 also showed sBP <90 mmHg.

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world cohort, most patients fit in a few easily identifiable profiles; the nine profiles at highest risk of mortality/morbidity accounted for only 5% of the population. Our data might contribute to identifying profile-tailored approaches to guide drug implementation and follow-up.

Sex-specific analysis of the rapid up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies after a hospitalization for acute heart failure: Insights from the STRONG-HF trial

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of rapid up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) in men and women hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

In STRONG-HF, AHF patients were randomized just prior to discharge to either usual care (UC) or a high-intensity care (HIC) strategy of GDMT up-titration. In these analyses, we compared the implementation, efficacy, and safety of the HIC strategy between men and women. In the randomized AHF population, 416/1078 (39%) were women. By day 90, a higher proportion of both sexes in the HIC group had been up-titrated to full doses of GDMT compared to UC. Overall, there were no differences in the primary endpoint between the sexes. The primary endpoint, 180-day heart failure readmission or death, occurred in 15.8% HIC women versus 23.5% women in the UC group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-1.13) and in 14.9% HIC men versus 23.5% UC men (adjusted HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.88) (adjusted interaction p = 0.65). There was no significant treatment-by-sex interaction in quality-of-life improvement or in adverse events, including serious or fatal adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The results of the current analyses suggest that a rapid up-titration of GDMT immediately after an AHF hospitalization can and should be implemented similarly in men and women, as it results in reduction of 180-day all-cause death or heart failure readmission, quality-of-life improvement in both men and women with a similar safety profile.

Safety, tolerability and efficacy of up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies for acute heart failure in elderly patients: A sub-analysis of the STRONG-HF randomized clinical trial

AIMS

STRONG-HF examined a high-intensity care (HIC) strategy of rapid up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and close follow-up after acute heart failure (AHF) admission. We assess the role of age on efficacy and safety of HIC.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Hospitalized AHF patients, not treated with optimal GDMT were randomized to HIC or usual care. The primary endpoint of 180-day death or HF readmission occurred equally in older (>65 years, n = 493, 74 ± 5 years) and younger patients (53 ± 11 years, adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-1.43, p = 0.89). Older patients received slightly lower GDMT to day 21, but same doses at day 90 and 180. The effect of HIC on the primary endpoint was numerically higher in younger (aHR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32-0.82) than older patients (aHR 0.73, 95% CI 0.46-1.15, adjusted interaction p = 0.30), partially related to COVID-19 deaths. After exclusion of COVID-19 deaths, the effect of HIC was similar in younger (aHR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32-0.82) and older patients (aHR 0.63, 95% CI 0.32-1.02, adjusted interaction p = 0.56), with no treatment-by-age interaction (interaction p = 0.57). HIC induced larger improvements in quality of life to day 90 in younger (EQ-VAS adjusted-mean difference 5.51, 95% CI 3.20-7.82) than in older patients (1.77, 95% CI -0.75 to 4.29, interaction p = 0.032). HIC was associated with similar rates of adverse events in older and younger patients.

CONCLUSION

High-intensity care after AHF was safe and resulted in a significant reduction of all-cause death or HF readmission at 180 days across the study age spectrum. Older patients have smaller benefits in terms of quality of life.

Uptitrating Treatment After Heart Failure Hospitalization Across the Spectrum of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Acute heart failure (AHF) is associated with a poor prognosis regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). STRONG-HF showed the efficacy and safety of a strategy of rapid uptitration of oral treatment for heart failure (HF) and close follow-up (high-intensity care), compared with usual care, in patients recently hospitalized for AHF and enrolled independently from their LVEF.

OBJECTIVES

In this study, we sought to assess the impact of baseline LVEF on the effects of high-intensity care vs usual care in STRONG-HF.

METHODS

The STRONG-HF trial enrolled patients hospitalized for AHF with any LVEF and not treated with full doses of renin-angiotensin inhibitors, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. High-intensity care with uptitration of oral medications was performed independently from LVEF. The primary endpoint was the composite of HF rehospitalization or all-cause death at day 180.

RESULTS

Among the 1,078 patients randomized, 731 (68%) had LVEF ≤40% and 347 (32%) had LVEF >40%. The treatment benefit of high-intensity care vs usual care on the primary endpoint was consistent across the whole LVEF spectrum (interaction P with LVEF as a continuous variable = 0.372). Mean difference in the EQ-5D visual analog scale change from baseline to day 90 between treatment arms was slightly greater at higher LVEF values, but with no interaction between LVEF as a continuous variable and the treatment strategy (interaction P = 0.358). Serious adverse events were also independent from LVEF.

CONCLUSIONS

Rapid uptitration of oral medications for HF and close follow-up reduce 180-day death and HF rehospitalization after AHF hospitalization independently from LVEF. (Safety, Tolerability and Efficacy of Rapid Optimization, Helped by NT-ProBNP Testing, of Heart Failure Therapies [STRONG-HF]; NCT03412201).

Virtual Care Team Guided Management of Patients With Heart Failure During Hospitalization

BACKGROUND

Scalable and safe approaches for heart failure guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) optimization are needed.

OBJECTIVES

The authors assessed the safety and effectiveness of a virtual care team guided strategy on GDMT optimization in hospitalized patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS

In a multicenter implementation trial, we allocated 252 hospital encounters in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% to a virtual care team guided strategy (107 encounters among 83 patients) or usual care (145 encounters among 115 patients) across 3 centers in an integrated health system. In the virtual care team group, clinicians received up to 1 daily GDMT optimization suggestion from a physician-pharmacist team. The primary effectiveness outcome was in-hospital change in GDMT optimization score (+2 initiations, +1 dose up-titrations, -1 dose down-titrations, -2 discontinuations summed across classes). In-hospital safety outcomes were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee.

RESULTS

Among 252 encounters, the mean age was 69 ± 14 years, 85 (34%) were women, 35 (14%) were Black, and 43 (17%) were Hispanic. The virtual care team strategy significantly improved GDMT optimization scores vs usual care (adjusted difference: +1.2; 95% CI: 0.7-1.8; P < 0.001). New initiations (44% vs 23%; absolute difference: +21%; P = 0.001) and net intensifications (44% vs 24%; absolute difference: +20%; P = 0.002) during hospitalization were higher in the virtual care team group, translating to a number needed to intervene of 5 encounters. Overall, 23 (21%) in the virtual care team group and 40 (28%) in usual care experienced 1 or more adverse events (P = 0.30). Acute kidney injury, bradycardia, hypotension, hyperkalemia, and hospital length of stay were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients hospitalized with HFrEF, a virtual care team guided strategy for GDMT optimization was safe and improved GDMT across multiple hospitals in an integrated health system. Virtual teams represent a centralized and scalable approach to optimize GDMT.

Novel Strategies to Improve Prescription of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy in Heart Failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To examine the emerging data for novel strategies being studied to improve use and dose titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for patients with heart failure (HF).

RECENT FINDINGS

There is mounting evidence to employ novel multi-pronged strategies to address HF implementation gaps.

SUMMARY

Despite high-level randomized evidence and clear national society recommendations, a large gap persists in use and dose titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure (HF). Accelerating the safe implementation of GDMT has proven to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with HF but remains an ongoing challenge for patients, clinicians, and health systems. In this review, we examine the emerging data for novel strategies to improve the use of GDMT including the use of multidisciplinary team-based approaches, nontraditional patient encounters, patient messaging/engagement, remote patient monitoring, and electronic health record (EHR)-based clinical alerts. While societal guidelines and implementation studies have focused on heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), expanding indications and evidence for the use of sodium glucose cotransporter2 (SGLT2i) will necessitate implementation efforts across the LVEF spectrum.

Is it time to relitigate SGLT2 Inhibitor dose for heart failure?

Over the past 40 years, we have observed the introduction of several medical therapies for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). More recently, effective medical therapy (goal-directed medical therapy; GDMT) for patients who suffer from HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has been identified in the form of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors.¹ There has also been recognition that timely and aggressive GDMT titration to target doses leads to better outcomes.² This becomes more complex as the number of drug up-titrations increases (such as with β blockade at 4 doses), and corresponds to lower target dose achievement, even in Canadian centres of excellence.^3,4 Thus, there is interest in use of simplified dosage regimens, provided there is no significant benefit left unrealized.⁵ To define this tension, one must be able to identify the optimal dosage for any given medication.

Safety, tolerability and efficacy of up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies for acute heart failure (STRONG-HF): a multinational, open-label, randomised, trial

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of evidence for dose and pace of up-titration of guideline-directed medical therapies after admission to hospital for acute heart failure.

METHODS

In this multinational, open-label, randomised, parallel-group trial (STRONG-HF), patients aged 18-85 years admitted to hospital with acute heart failure, not treated with full doses of guideline-directed drug treatment, were recruited from 87 hospitals in 14 countries. Before discharge, eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1), stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction (≤40% vs >40%) and country, with blocks of size 30 within strata and randomly ordered sub-blocks of 2, 4, and 6, to either usual care or high-intensity care. Usual care followed usual local practice, and high-intensity care involved the up-titration of treatments to 100% of recommended doses within 2 weeks of discharge and four scheduled outpatient visits over the 2 months after discharge that closely monitored clinical status, laboratory values, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentrations. The primary endpoint was 180-day readmission to hospital due to heart failure or all-cause death. Efficacy and safety were assessed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (ie, all patients validly randomly assigned to treatment). The primary endpoint was assessed in all patients enrolled at hospitals that followed up patients to day 180. Because of a protocol amendment to the primary endpoint, the results of patients enrolled on or before this amendment were down-weighted. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03412201, and is now complete.

FINDINGS

Between May 10, 2018, and Sept 23, 2022, 1641 patients were screened and 1078 were successfully randomly assigned to high-intensity care (n=542) or usual care (n=536; ITT population). Mean age was 63·0 years (SD 13·6), 416 (39%) of 1078 patients were female, 662 (61%) were male, 832 (77%) were White or Caucasian, 230 (21%) were Black, 12 (1%) were other races, one (<1%) was Native American, and one (<1%) was Pacific Islander (two [<1%] had missing data on race). The study was stopped early per the data and safety monitoring board's recommendation because of greater than expected between-group differences. As of data cutoff (Oct 13, 2022), by day 90, a higher proportion of patients in the high-intensity care group had been up-titrated to full doses of prescribed drugs (renin-angiotensin blockers 278 [55%] of 505 vs 11 [2%] of 497; β blockers 249 [49%] vs 20 [4%]; and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists 423 [84%] vs 231 [46%]). By day 90, blood pressure, pulse, New York Heart Association class, bodyweight, and NT-proBNP concentration had decreased more in the high-intensity care group than in the usual care group. Heart failure readmission or all-cause death up to day 180 occurred in 74 (15·2% down-weighted adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimate) of 506 patients in the high-intensity care group and 109 (23·3%) of 502 patients in the usual care group (adjusted risk difference 8·1% [95% CI 2·9-13·2]; p=0·0021; risk ratio 0·66 [95% CI 0·50-0·86]). More adverse events by 90 days occurred in the high-intensity care group (223 [41%] of 542) than in the usual care group (158 [29%] of 536) but similar incidences of serious adverse events (88 [16%] vs 92 [17%]) and fatal adverse events (25 [5%] vs 32 [6%]) were reported in each group.

INTERPRETATION

An intensive treatment strategy of rapid up-titration of guideline-directed medication and close follow-up after an acute heart failure admission was readily accepted by patients because it reduced symptoms, improved quality of life, and reduced the risk of 180-day all-cause death or heart failure readmission compared with usual care.

FUNDING

Roche Diagnostics.

[Decompensated heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: overcoming barriers to improve prognosis in the "vulnerable" period after discharge]

Frequency of hospitalizations for decompensated heart failure (HF) and associated costs are steadily increasing worldwide. An episode of HF is a risk marker, reflects a change in the course of disease, a high probability of adverse events, and requirement for using all options to improve the prognosis. This article discusses barriers and ways to overcome them in managing HF patients with low ejection fraction. An evidence-based, disease-modifying therapy exists for this HF phenotype. Administration of the therapy along with additional, novel drugs that improve outcomes, and organization of medical care are essential during the "vulnerable period" after discharge from the hospital.

The Clinical Value of GDF15 and Its Prospective Mechanism in Sepsis

Growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF15) is involved in the occurrence and development of many diseases, and there are few studies on its relationship with sepsis. This article aims to explore the clinical value of GDF15 in sepsis and to preliminarily explore its prospective regulatory effect on macrophage inflammation and its functions. We recruited 320 subjects (132 cases in sepsis group, 93 cases in nonsepsis group, and 95 cases in control group), then detected the serum GDF15 levels and laboratory indicators, and further investigated the correlation between GDF15 and laboratory indicators, and also analyzed the clinical value of GDF15 in sepsis diagnosis, severity assessment, and prognosis. In vitro, we used LPS to stimulate THP-1 and RAW264.7 cells to establish the inflammatory model, and detected the expression of GDF15 in the culture medium and cells under the inflammatory state. After that, we added GDF15 recombinant protein (rGDF15) pretreatment to explore its prospective regulatory effect on macrophage inflammation and its functions. The results showed that the serum GDF15 levels were significantly increased in the sepsis group, which was correlated with laboratory indexes of organ damage, coagulation indexes, inflammatory factors, and SOFA score. GDF15 also has a high AUC in the diagnosis of sepsis, which can be further improved by combining with other indicators. The dynamic monitoring of GDF15 levels can play an important role in the judgment and prognosis of sepsis. In the inflammatory state, the expression of intracellular and extracellular GDF15 increased. GDF15 can reduce the levels of cytokines, inhibit M1 polarization induced by LPS, and promote M2 polarization. Moreover, GDF15 also enhances the phagocytosis and bactericidal function of macrophages. Finally, we observed a decreased level of the phosphorylation of JAK1/STAT3 signaling pathway and the nuclear translocation of NF-κB p65 with the pretreatment of rGDF15. In summary, our study found that GDF15 has good clinical application value in sepsis and plays a protective role in the development of sepsis by regulating the functions of macrophages and inhibiting the activation of JAK1/STAT3 pathway and nuclear translocation of NF-κB p65.

Circulating heart failure biomarkers beyond natriuretic peptides: review from the Biomarker Study Group of the Heart Failure Association (HFA), European Society of Cardiology (ESC)

New biomarkers are being evaluated for their ability to advance the management of patients with heart failure. Despite a large pool of interesting candidate biomarkers, besides natriuretic peptides virtually none have succeeded in being applied into the clinical setting. In this review, we examine the most promising emerging candidates for clinical assessment and management of patients with heart failure. We discuss high-sensitivity cardiac troponins (Tn), procalcitonin, novel kidney markers, soluble suppression of tumorigenicity 2 (sST2), galectin-3, growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15), cluster of differentiation 146 (CD146), neprilysin, adrenomedullin (ADM), and also discuss proteomics and genetic-based risk scores. We focused on guidance and assistance with daily clinical care decision-making. For each biomarker, analytical considerations are discussed, as well as performance regarding diagnosis and prognosis. Furthermore, we discuss potential implementation in clinical algorithms and in ongoing clinical trials.

Growth differentiation factor-15, a novel systemic biomarker of oxidative stress, inflammation, and cellular aging: Potential role in cardiovascular diseases

Growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) is a cytokine upregulated in multiple pathological conditions where oxidative stress, endothelial dysfunction, tissue aging, and chronic inflammation are the hallmarks. GDF-15 has many sources of production, including cardiac and vascular myocytes, endothelial cells, adipocytes and macrophages in response to metabolic stress, oncogenic transformation and the burden of proinflammatory cytokines or reactive oxygen species. Although the main sources of GDF-15 are extracardiac tissues, it has been shown to be elevated in many cardiac disorders. In experimental models of heart disease, GDF-15 release is induced after an ischemic insult and in pressure overload scenarios. Likewise, in recent years, an increasing body of evidence has emerged linking GDF-15 to the risk of mortality in acute coronary syndromes, atrial fibrillation and heart failure. Additionally, GDF-15 has been shown to add prognostic information beyond other conventional biomarkers such as natriuretic peptides and cardiac troponins. Further studies are needed to assess whether the incorporation of GDF-15 into clinical practice can improve cardiovascular outcomes.

Growth differentiation factor-15, treatment with liraglutide, and clinical outcomes among patients with heart failure

AIMS

Associations between growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15), cardiovascular outcomes, and exercise capacity among patients with a recent hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are unknown. We utilized data from the 'Functional Impact of GLP-1 for Heart Failure Treatment' (FIGHT) study to address these knowledge gaps.

METHODS AND RESULTS

FIGHT was a randomized clinical trial testing the effect of liraglutide (vs. placebo) among 300 participants with HFrEF and a recent HHF. Multivariable regression models evaluated associations between baseline GDF-15 and change in GDF-15 (per 1000 pg/mL increase from baseline to 30 days) with clinical outcomes (at 180 days) and declines in exercise capacity (6 min walk distance ≥ 45 m). At baseline (n = 249), median GDF-15 value was 3221 pg/mL (interquartile range 1938-5511 pg/mL). Participants in the highest tertile of baseline GDF-15 were more likely to be male and have more co-morbidities. After adjustment, an increase in GDF-15 over 30 days was associated with higher risk of death or HHF [hazard ratio 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-1.64]. In addition, higher baseline GDF-15 (per 1000 pg/mL until 6000 pg/mL) and an increase in GDF-15 over 30 days were associated with declining 6 min walk distance (odds ratio 1.26, 95% CI 1.02-1.55 and odds ratio 1.37, 95% CI 1.12-1.69, respectively). GDF-15 levels remained stable among participants randomized to liraglutide.

CONCLUSIONS

An increase in GDF-15 over 30 days among patients in HFrEF was independently associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and declining exercise capacity. These results support the value of longitudinal GDF-15 trajectory in informing risk of heart failure disease progression.

Readmission following both cardiac and non-cardiac acute dyspnoea is associated with a striking risk of death

Aims

Readmission and mortality are the most common and often combined endpoints in acute heart failure (AHF) trials, but an association between these two outcomes is poorly investigated. The aim of this study was to determine whether unplanned readmission is associated with a greater subsequent risk of death in patients with acute dyspnoea due to cardiac and non‐cardiac causes.

Methods and results

Derivation cohort (1371 patients from the LEDA study) and validation cohort (1986 patients from the BASEL V study) included acute dyspnoea patients admitted to the emergency department. Cox regression analysis was used to determine the association of 6 month readmission and the risk of 1 year all‐cause mortality in AHF and non‐AHF patients and those readmitted due to cardiovascular and non‐cardiovascular causes. In the derivation cohort, 666 (49%) of patients were readmitted at 6 months and 282 (21%) died within 1 year. Six month readmission was associated with an increased 1 year mortality risk in both the derivation cohort [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 3.0 (95% confidence interval, CI 2.2–4.0), P < 0.001] and the validation cohort (aHR 1.8, 95% CI 1.4–2.2, P < 0.001). The significant association was similarly observed in AHF (aHR 3.2, 95% CI 2.1–4.9, P < 0.001) and other causes of acute dyspnoea (aHR 2.9, 95% CI 1.9–4.5, P < 0.001), and it did not depend on the aetiology [aHR 2.2, 95% CI 1.6–3.1 for cardiovascular readmissions; aHR 4.1, 95% CI 2.9–5.7 for non‐cardiovascular readmissions (P < 0.001 for both)] or timing of readmission.

Conclusion​s

Our study demonstrated a long‐lasting detrimental association between readmission and death in AHF and non‐AHF patients with acute dyspnoea. These patients should be considered ‘vulnerable patients’ that require personalized follow‐up for an extended period.

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.

Temporal trends in mortality and readmission after acute heart failure: a systematic review and meta-regression in the past four decades

AIMS

Acute heart failure (AHF) is frequent and life-threatening disease. However, innovative AHF therapies have remained limited, and care is based on experts' opinion. Temporal trends and benefits of long-term oral cardiovascular medications on AHF outcomes remain uncertain.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018099885). A systematic review ranging from 1980 to 2017, searched AHF studies with more than 100 patients that reported death and/or readmission. Primary outcomes were temporal trends, assessed by meta-regression, for 30-day or 1-year all-cause death and/or readmission rates. Secondary outcomes were temporal trends of oral cardiovascular therapies and their influence on primary outcomes. Among the 45 143 studies screened, 285 were included, representing 15 million AHFs. In the past decades, though mortality and readmission remain high, there was a decline in 30-day all-cause death [odds ratio (OR) for a 10-year increment: 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.91; P = 0.004] that persisted at 1 year (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.77-0.96; P = 0.007), while 30-day and 1-year all-cause readmission rate remained roughly unchanged. Trends of primary outcomes were linear and did not differ among continents. Decline in 1-year all-cause death rate correlated with high proportions of oral or beta-blockers, especially when combined with oral renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors, but not with diuretics while trends in readmission remained unchanged with these therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Although AHF outcomes remain poor, the present study revealed global favourable trends of survival after AHF episodes probably associated with greater use of oral neurohormonal antagonists. The present study urges to implement the combination of oral renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors and beta-blockers in patients at risk of AHF.

Circulating Soluble ST2 Predicts All-Cause Mortality in Severe Heart Failure Patients with an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator

Background

Heart failure (HF) is the terminal stage of all cardiovascular events. Although implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapies have reduced mortality among the high-risk HF population, it is necessary to determine whether certain factors can predict mortality even after cardiac device implantation. Growth stimulation expressed gene 2 (ST2) is an emerging biomarker for HF patient stratification in different clinical settings.

Aims

This study aimed to investigate the relationship between baseline soluble ST2 (sST2) levels in serum and the clinical outcomes of high-risk HF patients with device implantation.

Methods

Between January 2017 and August 2018, we prospectively recruited consecutive patients implanted with an ICD for heart failure, with LVEF ≤35% as recommended, and analyzed the basic characteristics, baseline serum sST2, and NT-proBNP levels, with at least 1-year follow-up. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint.

Results

During a 643-day follow-up, all-cause mortality occurred in 16 of 150 patients (10.67%). Incidence of all-cause mortality increased significantly in patients with sST2 levels above 34.98846 ng/ml (16.00% vs. 5.33%, P = 0.034). After adjusting the model (age, gender, device implantation, prevention of sudden death, LVEDD, LVEF, WBC and CLBBB, hsTNT, etiology, and eGFR) and the model combined with NT-proBNP, the risk of all-cause death was increased by 2.5% and 1.9%, respectively, per ng/ml of sST2. The best sST2 cutoff for predicting all-cause death was 43.42671 ng/ml (area under the curve: 0.72, sensitive: 0.69, and specificity: 0.69). Compared to patients with sST2 levels below 43.42671 ng/ml, the risk of all-cause mortality was higher in those with values above the threshold (5.1% vs. 21.2%, P = 0.002). ST2 level ≥43.42671 ng/ml was an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (HR: 3.30 [95% CI 1.02–10.67]). Age (HR: 1.06 [95% CI: 1.01–1.12]) and increased NT-proBNP per 100 (HR: 1.02 [95% CI: 1.01–1.03]) were also associated with all-cause mortality in ICD patients.

Conclusions

sST2 level was associated with risk of all-cause mortality, and a threshold of 43.43 ng/ml showed good distinguishing performance to predict all-cause mortality in patients with severe heart failure, recommended for ICD implantation. Patients with sST2 levels more than 43.42671 ng/ml even after ICD implantation should therefore be monitored carefully.

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.

Acute heart failure: More questions than answers

Acute heart failure (AHF) is a life-threatening condition with a dramatic burden in terms of symptoms, morbidity and mortality. It is a specific syndrome requiring urgent, life-saving treatment. Multiple specific pathophysiologic mechanisms may be involved, including congestion, inflammation, and neurohormonal activation. This process eventually leads to symptoms, end-organ damage, and adverse outcomes. Clinical presentation varies, but it almost universally includes worsening of congestion associated with different degrees of hypoperfusion. Due to substantial early symptoms burden and high morbidity and mortality, patients with AHF require intensive monitoring and intravenous treatment. However, beyond variable improvement in congestion, none of the available intravenous therapies for AHF was shown to improve longer term outcomes. Although oral treatment with guideline-directed therapies for stable patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) before discharge may fully prevent subsequent episodes, proof that this strategy may benefit patients is lacking. First, most patients with AHF have preserved EF (HFpEF) where no therapies have been shown to be effective. Second, all therapies developed for patients with HFrEF were tested for efficacy on outcomes in patients who were stable without recent AHF. Hence, the implementation of these chronic therapies during an AHF episode is untested. Third, the problem to better treat AHF patients in their early phase remains crucial with treatment strategies largely untested, yet. Further studies targeting AHF specific mechanisms, such as inflammation and end-organ damage, and finding effective intravenous drugs remain therefore warranted.