Patiromer for Heart Failure Medication Optimization in Patients With Current or Past Hyperkalemia: DIAMOND Subanalysis

BACKGROUND

For heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), suboptimal use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASis), including mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), due to hyperkalemia, may be improved by potassium binders.

OBJECTIVES

This prespecified analysis of the phase 3 DIAMOND (Patiromer for the Management of Hyperkalemia in Subjects Receiving RAASi Medications for the Treatment of Heart Failure) trial assessed the effect of patiromer in patients with HFrEF and either current or past hyperkalemia.

METHODS

Patients with HFrEF and current or past (within 1 year before enrollment) hyperkalemia (serum potassium [sK+] >5.0 mmol/L) entered a single-blind, run-in phase to optimize RAASis while receiving patiromer. They were subsequently randomized, double-blind, to continue patiromer or change to placebo.

RESULTS

Of the 1,038 patients who completed run-in, 354 (83.9%) of 422 with current hyperkalemia and 524 (85.1%) of 616 with past hyperkalemia achieved RAASi optimization and were randomized to treatment. During the double-blind phase, patiromer lowered sK+ levels compared with placebo in both the current and past hyperkalemia subgroups: difference in adjusted mean change from baseline: -0.12 (95% CI: -0.17 to -0.07) and -0.08 (95% CI: -0.12 to -0.05), respectively; Pinteraction = 0.166. Patiromer was more effective than placebo in maintaining MRA at target dose in patients with current vs past hyperkalemia (HR: 0.45 [95% CI: 0.26-0.76] vs HR: 0.85 [95% CI: 0.54-1.32]; Pinteraction = 0.031). Adverse events were similar between subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of patiromer facilitates achieving target doses of RAASis in patients with HFrEF with either current or past hyperkalemia. For those with current hyperkalemia before RAASi optimization, use of patiromer may be more beneficial in helping to maintain sK+ control and achieve MRA target dose. (Patiromer for the Management of Hyperkalemia in Subjects Receiving RAASi Medications for the Treatment of Heart Failure [DIAMOND]; NCT03888066).

Implementation of guideline-directed medical therapy for heart failure patients with reduced ejection fraction in Belgium: a Delphi panel approach

BACKGROUND

The 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines recommended a shift from a traditional hierarchical treatment for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) to a four-pillar medical therapy strategy intended for near-simultaneous initiation. However, practical guidance for implementation in clinical practice is lacking. To address this, a Delphi Panel of 12 Belgian heart failure experts aimed to obtain consensus on integrating guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in HFrEF patients in Belgian clinical practice, considering local specificities, including reimbursement criteria.

METHODS

A geographically representative sample of 12 Belgian cardiologists engaged in a three-round Delphi process, evolving from 20 open-ended questions to 39 statements. A qualitative analysis after the first round resulted in expert statements for the subsequent questionnaire, categorised into treatment for newly diagnosed and chronic HFrEF patients.

RESULTS

The Delphi consensus revealed four key findings: (i) Agreement on initiating the four medical cornerstones within 7-14 days of HFrEF diagnosis, prioritising initiation over individual class up-titration; (ii) Lack of consensus on a fixed sequence for initiation due to patient variability and national reimbursement criteria; (iii) Emphasis on treatment adjustment based on the patient's clinical presentation and comorbidities; (iv) Recognition of the crucial role of regular follow-up visits, allowing optimisation of medical therapy where appropriate.

CONCLUSION

This national Delphi consensus addresses clinical implementation of GDMT in HFrEF patients for Belgian cardiologists. The consensus highlights the importance of swift implementation of the four cornerstone medical therapies in newly diagnosed HFrEF patients, individualising treatment sequencing, and ensuring regular follow-up to optimise therapy.

Validation of a New Scoring Method to Assess the Efficacy of Rapid Initiation and Titration of Combination Pharmacotherapy for Patients Hospitalized with Acute Decompensated Heart Failure with Reduced and Mildly Reduced Ejection Fraction

Background: Despite the encouragement of early initiation and titration of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for the treatment of heart failure (HF), most patients do not receive an adequate type and dose of pharmacotherapy in the real world. Objectives: This study aimed to determine the efficacy of titrating composite GDMT in patients with HF with reduced and mildly reduced ejection fraction and to identify patient conditions that may benefit from titration of GDMT. Methods: This was a two-center, retrospective study of consecutive patients hospitalized with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). Patients were classified into two groups according to a scoring scale determined by combination and doses of four types of HF agents (ACEis/ARBs/ARNis, BBs, MRAs, and SGLT2is) at discharge. A score of 5 or greater was defined as titrated GDMT, and a score of 4 or less was regarded as sub-optimal medical therapy (MT). Results: A total of 979 ADHF patients were screened. After 553 patients were excluded based on exclusion criteria, 426 patients (90 patients in the titrated GDMT group and 336 patients in the sub-optimal MT group) were enrolled for the analysis. The median follow-up period was 612 (453-798) days. Following statistical adjustment using the propensity score weighting method, the 2-year composite endpoint (composite of cardiac death and HF rehospitalization) rate was significantly lower in the titrated GDMT group, at 19%, compared with the sub-optimal MT group: 31% (score 3-4 points) and 43% (score 0-2 points). Subgroup analysis indicated a marked benefit of titrated GDMT in particular patient subgroups: age < 80 years, BMI 19.0-24.9, eGFR > 20 mL/min/1.73 m2, and serum potassium level ≤ 5.5 mmol/L. Conclusions: Prompt initiation and dose adjustment of multiple HF medications, with careful monitoring of the patient's physiologic and laboratory values, is a prerequisite for improving the prognosis of patients with heart failure.

Heart failure management with β-blockers: can we do better?

Heart failure (HF) is associated with disabling symptoms, poor quality of life, and a poor prognosis with substantial excess mortality in the years following diagnosis. Overactivation of the sympathetic nervous system is a key feature of the pathophysiology of HF and is an important driver of the process of adverse remodelling of the left ventricular wall that contributes to cardiac failure. Drugs which suppress the activity of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, including β-blockers, are foundation therapies for the management of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and despite a lack of specific outcomes trials, are also widely used by cardiologist in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Today, expert opinion has moved away from recommending that treatment for HF should be guided solely by the LVEF and interventions should rather address signs and symptoms of HF (e.g. oedema and tachycardia), the severity of HF, and concomitant conditions. β-blockers improve HF symptoms and functional status in HF and these agents have demonstrated improved survival, as well as a reduced risk of other important clinical outcomes such as hospitalisation for heart failure, in randomised, placebo-controlled outcomes trials. In HFpEF, β-blockers are anti-ischemic and lower blood pressure and heart rate. Moreover, β-blockers also reduce mortality in the setting of HF occurring alongside common comorbid conditions, such as diabetes, CKD (of any severity), and COPD. Higher doses of β-blockers are associated with better clinical outcomes in populations with HF, so that ensuring adequate titration of therapy to their maximal (or maximally tolerated) doses is important for ensuring optimal outcomes for people with HF. In principle, a patient with HF could have combined treatment with a β-blocker, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor/neprilysin inhibitor, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, and a SGLT2 inhibitor, according to tolerability.

Drug development for major chronic health conditions-aligning with growing public health needs: Proceedings from a multistakeholder think tank

The global pharmaceutical industry portfolio is skewed towards cancer and rare diseases due to more predictable development pathways and financial incentives. In contrast, drug development for major chronic health conditions that are responsible for a large part of mortality and disability worldwide is stalled. To examine the processes of novel drug development for common chronic health conditions, a multistakeholder Think Tank meeting, including thought leaders from academia, clinical practice, non-profit healthcare organizations, the pharmaceutical industry, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), payors as well as investors, was convened in July 2022. Herein, we summarize the proceedings of this meeting, including an overview of the current state of drug development for chronic health conditions and key barriers that were identified. Six major action items were formulated to accelerate drug development for chronic diseases, with a focus on improving the efficiency of clinical trials and rapid implementation of evidence into clinical practice.

Eligibility for the 4 Pharmacological Pillars in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction at Discharge

Background Guidelines recommend using multiple drugs in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction, but there is a paucity of real-world data on the simultaneous initiation of the 4 pharmacological pillars at discharge after a decompensation event. Methods and Results A retrospective data mart, including patients diagnosed with HF, was implemented. Consecutively admitted patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction were selected through an automated approach and categorized according to the number/type of treatments prescribed at discharge. The prevalence of contraindications and cautions for HF with reduced ejection fraction treatments was systematically assessed. Logistic regression models were fitted to assess predictors of the number of treatments (≥2 versus <2 drugs) prescribed and the risk of rehospitalization. A population of 305 patients with a first episode of HF hospitalization and a diagnosis of HF with reduced ejection fraction (ejection fraction, <40%) was selected. At discharge, 49.2% received 2 current recommended drugs, β-blockers were prescribed in 93.4%, while a renin-angiotensin system inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor was prescribed in 68.2%. A mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist was prescribed in 32.5%, although none of the patients showed contraindications to mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist prescription. A sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor could be prescribed in 71.1% of patients. On the basis of current recommendations, 46.2% could receive the 4 foundational drugs at discharge. Renal dysfunction was associated with <2 foundational drugs prescribed. After adjusting for age and renal function, use of ≥2 drugs was associated with lower risk of rehospitalization during the 30 days after discharge. Conclusions A quadruple therapy could be directly implementable at discharge, potentially providing prognostic advantages. Renal dysfunction was the main prevalent condition limiting this approach.

Nebivolol versus placebo in patients undergoing anthracyclines (CONTROL Trial): rationale and study design

AIMS

Anthracyclines are the chemotherapeutic agents most frequently associated with cardiotoxicity, while remaining widely used. Different neurohormonal blockers have been tested as a primary prevention strategy to prevent or attenuate the onset of cardiotoxicity, with mixed results. However, prior studies were often limited by a nonblinded design and an assessment of cardiac function based only on echocardiographic imaging. Moreover, on the basis of an improved mechanistic understanding of anthracycline cardiotoxicity mechanisms, new therapeutic strategies have been proposed. Among cardioprotective drugs, nebivolol might be able to prevent the cardiotoxic effects of anthracyclines, through its protective properties towards the myocardium, endothelium, and cardiac mitochondria. This study aims to evaluate the cardioprotective effects of the beta blocker nebivolol in a prospective, placebo-controlled, superiority randomized trial in patients with breast cancer or diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who have a normal cardiac function and will receive anthracyclines as part of their first-line chemotherapy programme.

METHODS

The CONTROL trial is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, superiority trial. Patients with breast cancer or a DLBCL, with a normal cardiac function as assessed by echocardiography, scheduled for treatment with anthracyclines as part of their first-line chemotherapy programme will be randomized 1 : 1 to nebivolol 5 mg once daily (o.d.) or placebo. Patients will be examined with cardiological assessment, echocardiography and cardiac biomarkers at baseline, 1 month, 6 months and 12 months. A cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) assessment will be performed at baseline and at 12 months. The primary end point is defined as left ventricular ejection fraction reduction assessed by CMR at 12 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The CONTROL trial is designed to provide evidence to assess the cardioprotective role of nebivolol in patients undergoing chemotherapy with anthracyclines.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered in the EudraCT registry (number: 2017-004618-24) and in the ClinicalTrials.gov registry (identifier: NCT05728632).

Sequencing and titrating approach of therapy in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction following the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines: an international cardiology survey

AIMS

In symptomatic patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), recent international guidelines recommend initiating four major therapeutic classes rather than sequential initiation. It remains unclear how this change in guidelines is perceived by practicing cardiologists versus heart failure (HF) specialists.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An independent academic web-based survey was designed by a group of HF specialists and posted by email and through various social networks to a broad community of cardiologists worldwide 1 year after the publication of the latest European HF guidelines. Overall, 615 cardiologists (38 [32-47] years old, 63% male) completed the survey, of which 58% were working in a university hospital and 26% were HF specialists. The threshold to define HFrEF was ≤40% for 61% of the physicians. Preferred drug prescription for the sequential approach was angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors first (74%), beta-blockers second (55%), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists third (52%), and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (53%) fourth. Eighty-four percent of participants felt that starting all four classes was feasible within the initial hospitalization, and 58% felt that titration is less important than introducing a new class. Age, status in training, and specialization in HF field were the principal characteristics that significantly impacted the answers.

CONCLUSION

In a broad international cardiology community, the 'historical approach' to HFrEF therapies remains the preferred sequencing approach. However, accelerated introduction and uptitration are also major treatment goals. Strategy trials in treatment guidance are needed to further change practices.

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.

Heart failure: an update from the last years and a look at the near future

In the last years, major progress occurred in heart failure (HF) management. Quadruple therapy is now mandatory for all the patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Whilst verciguat is becoming available across several countries, omecamtiv mecarbil is waiting to be released for clinical use. Concurrent use of potassium-lowering agents may counteract hyperkalaemia and facilitate renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor implementations. The results of the EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic heaRt Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Preserved) trial were confirmed by the Dapagliflozin in Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction (DELIVER) trial, and we now have, for the first time, evidence for treatment of also patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction. In a pre-specified meta-analysis of major randomized controlled trials, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors reduced all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, and HF hospitalization in the patients with HF regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction. Other steps forward have occurred in the treatment of decompensated HF. Acetazolamide in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure with Volume Overload (ADVOR) trial showed that the addition of intravenous acetazolamide to loop diuretics leads to greater decongestion vs. placebo. The addition of hydrochlorothiazide to loop diuretics was evaluated in the CLOROTIC trial. Torasemide did not change outcomes, compared with furosemide, in TRANSFORM-HF. Ferric derisomaltose had an effect on the primary outcome of CV mortality or HF rehospitalizations in IRONMAN (rate ratio 0.82; 95% confidence interval 0.66-1.02; P = 0.070). Further options for the treatment of HF, including device therapies, cardiac contractility modulation, and percutaneous treatment of valvulopathies, are summarized in this article.

Cost analysis of chronic heart failure management in Malaysia: A multi-centred retrospective study

Background

Estimation of the economic burden of heart failure (HF) through a complete evaluation is essential for improved treatment planning in the future. This estimation also helps in reimbursement decisions for newer HF treatments. This study aims to estimate the cost of HF treatment in Malaysia from the Ministry of Health’s perspective.

Materials and methods

A prevalence-based, bottom-up cost analysis study was conducted in three tertiary hospitals in Malaysia. Chronic HF patients who received treatment between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2018 were included in the study. The direct cost of HF was estimated from the patients’ healthcare resource utilisation throughout a one-year follow-up period extracted from patients’ medical records. The total costs consisted of outpatient, hospitalisation, medications, laboratory tests and procedure costs, categorised according to ejection fraction (EF) and the New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional classification.

Results

A total of 329 patients were included in the study. The mean ± standard deviation of total cost per HF patient per-year (PPPY) was USD 1,971 ± USD 1,255, of which inpatient cost accounted for 74.7% of the total cost. Medication costs (42.0%) and procedure cost (40.8%) contributed to the largest proportion of outpatient and inpatient costs. HF patients with preserved EF had the highest mean total cost of PPPY, at USD 2,410 ± USD 1,226. The mean cost PPPY of NYHA class II was USD 2,044 ± USD 1,528, the highest among all the functional classes. Patients with underlying coronary artery disease had the highest mean total cost, at USD 2,438 ± USD 1,456, compared to other comorbidities. HF patients receiving angiotensin-receptor neprilysin-inhibitor (ARNi) had significantly higher total cost of HF PPPY in comparison to patients without ARNi consumption (USD 2,439 vs. USD 1,933, p < 0.001). Hospitalisation, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary angiogram, and comorbidities were the cost predictors of HF.

Conclusion

Inpatient cost was the main driver of healthcare cost for HF. Efficient strategies for preventing HF-related hospitalisation and improving HF management may potentially reduce the healthcare cost for HF treatment in Malaysia.

Maintenance of recovered dilated cardiomyopathy patients with half-dose neurohumoral blockades (MED-CHARM): A protocol for an open-label, pilot, randomized trial

Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) has brought great damage to the patients' health and social economy. The number of patients with recovered dilated cardiomyopathy (recDCM) has increased over the years as treatment progresses. However, there is a lack of relevant evidence to support the clinical management of patients with recDCM, thereby, the recommendations in guidelines remains sparse. Accordingly, the exploration of recDCM is important to improve patient prognosis and reduce societal burden. This is an open-label, randomized controlled, prospective study that will compare the safety and efficacy of original dose and halved dose of neurohumoral blockades for patients with recDCM.

Patiromer for the management of hyperkalemia in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: the DIAMOND trial

AIMS

To investigate the impact of patiromer on serum potassium level and its ability to enable specified target doses of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi) use in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1642 patients with HFrEF and current or a history of RAASi-related hyperkalemia were screened and 1195 were enrolled in the run-in phase with patiromer and optimization of RAASi therapy (≥50% recommended dose of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, and 50 mg of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist [MRA] spironolactone or eplerenone). Specified target doses of RAASi therapy were achieved in 878 (84.6%) patients; 439 were randomized to patiromer and 439 to placebo. All patients, physicians, and outcome assessors were blinded to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was between-group difference in adjusted mean change in serum potassium. Five hierarchical secondary endpoints were assessed. At the end of treatment, the median (interquartile range) duration of follow-up was 27 (13, 43) weeks, the adjusted mean change in potassium was +0.03 mmol/L in the patiromer group and +0.13 mmol/L in the placebo group (difference in adjusted mean change between patiromer and placebo: -0.10 [95% confidence interval, CI -0.13, -0.07] mmol/L, P<0.001). Risk of hyperkalemia >5.5 mmol/L (hazard ratio [HR] 0.63; 95% CI 0.45, 0.87; P=0.006), reduction of MRA dose (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.45, 0.87; P=0.006), and total adjusted hyperkalemia events/100 person-years (77.7 vs. 118.2; HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.53, 0.81; P<0.001) were lower with patiromer. Hyperkalemia-related morbidity-adjusted events (win ratio 1.53, P<0.001) and total RAASi use score (win ratio 1.25, P=0.048) favored the patiromer arm. Adverse events were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

Concurrent use of patiromer and high-dose MRAs reduces the risk of recurrent hyperkalemia (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03888066).

Roadmap for the management of heart failure patients during the vulnerable phase after heart failure hospitalizations: how to implement excellence in clinical practice

Patients discharged after an episode of acute heart failure have an increased risk of hospitalizations and deaths within the subsequent 3 months. This phase is commonly called the 'vulnerable period' and it represents a window of opportunity of intervention in order to improve longer term outcomes. Prompt identification of signs of residual haemodynamic congestion is a priority in planning for the out-of-hospital management strategies. Patients will also need to be screened for frailty and have a prioritization of the management of their comorbidities. Life-saving medications should be started together or in a short time and up-titrated (when needed) according to blood pressure, heart rate and concomitant comorbidities. Ideally, patients should be assessed by their general practitioner within 1 week of discharge and have a hospital/clinic follow-up within 4 weeks of discharge. Patients should progressively resume physical activities and adhere to an educational programme with appropriate lifestyle adjustments best implemented during a cardiac rehabilitation programme.

SGLT2 Inhibitors in Older Adults with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Heart failure is an important medical condition that is prevalent in older adults. Multiple therapies have been identified that improve clinical outcome in heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction. Conversely, this has not been the case in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Until now, empagliflozin is the first therapy that has convincingly been shown to improve clinical outcome in HFpEF. Importantly, some key points should be considered to better understand the impact of empagliflozin on the patient trajectory, particularly in older adults with HFpEF. In this current opinion article, we have therefore provided more information on how to translate the findings of the EMPEROR-Preserved trial to the setting of older adults, with a focus on the impact of empagliflozin on hospitalizations, both heart failure-related and all-cause. To better understand the importance of EMPEROR-Preserved findings, we compared these findings with previous relevant HFpEF and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) trials and provided information on ongoing trials in the HFpEF setting.

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.

Navigating between Scylla and Charybdis: challenges and strategies for implementing guideline-directed medical treatment in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) has the potential to reduce the risks of mortality and hospitalisation in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, real-world data indicate that many patients with HFrEF do not receive optimised GDMT, which involves several different medications, many of which require up-titration to target doses. There are many challenges to implementing GDMT, the most important being patient-related factors (comorbidities, advanced age, frailty, cognitive impairment, poor adherence, low socioeconomic status), treatment-related factors (intolerance, side-effects) and healthcare-related factors that influence availability and accessibility of HF care. Accordingly, international disparities in resources for HF management and limited public reimbursement of GDMT, coupled with clinical inertia for treatment intensification combine to hinder efforts to provide GDMT. In this review paper, authors aim to provide solutions based on available evidence, practical experience, and expert consensus on how to utilise evolving strategies, novel medications, and patient profiling to allow the more comprehensive uptake of GDMT. Authors discuss professional education, motivation, and training, as well as patient empowerment for self-care as important tools to overcome clinical inertia and boost GDMT implementation. We provide evidence on how multidisciplinary care and institutional accreditation can be successfully used to increase prescription rates and adherence to GDMT. We consider the role of modern technologies in advancing professional and patient education and facilitating patient-provider communication. Finally, authors emphasise the role of novel drugs (especially sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors), and a tailored approach to drug management as evolving strategies for the more successful implementation of GDMT. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

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.

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.

Variation in use and dosing escalation of renin angiotensin system, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor and beta-blocker therapies in heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: Association of comorbidities

BACKGROUND

In patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB), or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA), and beta-blockers (βB) are underutilized. It is unknown if patients with and without comorbidities have similar ACEi/ARB/ARNI, MRA, and βB prescription patterns.

METHODS

Baseline data from the CHAMP-HF (Change the Management of Patients with Heart Failure) registry were categorized by history of atrial fibrillation, asthma/chronic lung disease, obstructive sleep apnea, and depression. Using multivariate hierarchical logistic models, associations of ACEi/ARB/ARNI, MRA and βB medication use and dose by comorbidities were assessed after adjusting for patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 4,815 HFrEF patients from 152 CHAMP-HF sites, ACEi/ARB/ARNI use was lower in patients with more comorbidities, and generally, MRA use was low and βB use was high. In adjusted analyses, patients with HFrEF and comorbid obstructive sleep apnea, vs. without, were more likely to be prescribed ARNI (OR [95% CI]: 1.25 [1.00, 1.55]); P = .047 and MRA (1.31 [1.11, 1.55]); P = .002 and less likely to be prescribed ACEi (0.74 [0.63, 0.88]); P < .001. Patients with atrial fibrillation, vs. without, were less likely to receive ACEi/ARB (0.82 [0.71, 0.95]); P = .006 and any study medication (0.81 [0.67, 0.97]); P = .020. Comorbid lung disease and history of depression were not associated with HFrEF prescriptions.

CONCLUSIONS

Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone blockade therapy prescription and dose varied by comorbidity status, but βB therapy did not. In quality efforts, leaders need to consider use and dosing of prescriptions in light of prevalent comorbidities.

Risk Stratification Towards Precision Medicine in Heart Failure - Current Progress and Future Perspectives

Clinical risk stratification is a key strategy used to identify low- and high-risk subjects to optimize the management, ranging from pharmacological treatment to palliative care, of patients with heart failure (HF). Using statistical modeling techniques, many HF risk prediction models that combine predictors to assess the risk of specific endpoints, including death or worsening HF, have been developed. However, most risk prediction models have not been well-integrated into the clinical setting because of their inadequacy and diverse predictive performance. To improve the performance of such models, several factors, including optimal sampling and biomarkers, need to be considered when deriving the models; however, given the large heterogeneity of HF, the currently advocated one-size-fits-all approach is not appropriate for every patient. Recent advances in techniques to analyze biological "omics" information could allow for the development of a personalized medicine platform, and there is growing awareness that an integrated approach based on the concept of system biology may be an excessively naïve view of the multiple contributors and complexity of an individual's HF phenotype. This review article describes the progress in risk stratification strategies and perspectives of emerging precision medicine in the field of HF management.

A Novel Approach to Medical Management of Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

The advent of newly available medical therapies for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has resulted in many potential therapeutic combinations, increasing treatment complexity. Publication of expert consensus guidelines and initiatives aimed to improve implementation of treatment has emphasized sequential stepwise initiation and titration of medical therapy, which is labour intensive. Data taken from heart failure registries show suboptimal use of medications, prolonged titration times, and consequently little change in dose intensity, all of which indicate therapeutic inertia. Recently published evidence indicates that 4 medication classes-renin-angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitors, β-blockers, mineralocorticoid antagonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitors-which we refer to as Foundational Therapy, confer rapid and robust reduction in both morbidity and mortality in most patients with HFrEF and that they work in additive fashion. Additional morbidity and mortality may be observed following addition of several personalized therapies in specific subgroups of patients. In this review, we discuss mechanisms of action of these therapies and propose a framework for their implementation, based on several principles. These include the critical importance of rapid initiation of all 4 Foundational Therapies followed by their titration to target doses, emphasis on multiple simultaneous drug changes with each patient encounter, attention to patient-specific factors in choice of medication class, leveraging inpatient care, use of the entire health care team, and alternative (ie, virtual visits) modes of care. We have incorporated these principles into a Cluster Scheme designed to facilitate timely and optimal medical treatment for patients with HFrEF.