Familial dilated cardiomyopathy diagnosis is commonly overlooked at the time of transplant listing

Sex Differences in Heart Failure: What Do We Know?

Heart failure (HF) remains an important global health issue, substantially contributing to morbidity and mortality. According to epidemiological studies, men and women face nearly equivalent lifetime risks for HF. However, their experiences diverge significantly when it comes to HF subtypes: men tend to develop HF with reduced ejection fraction more frequently, whereas women are predominantly affected by HF with preserved ejection fraction. This divergence underlines the presence of numerous sex-based disparities across various facets of HF, encompassing aspects such as risk factors, clinical presentation, underlying pathophysiology, and response to therapy. Despite these apparent discrepancies, our understanding of them is far from complete, with key knowledge gaps still existing. Current guidelines from various professional societies acknowledge the existence of sex-based differences in HF management, yet they are lacking in providing explicit, actionable recommendations tailored to these differences. In this comprehensive review, we delve deeper into these sex-specific differences within the context of HF, critically examining associated definitions, risk factors, and therapeutic strategies. We provide a specific emphasis on aspects exclusive to women, such as the impact of pregnancy-induced hypertension and premature menopause, as these unique factors warrant greater attention in the broader HF discussion. Additionally, we aim to clarify ongoing controversies and knowledge gaps pertaining to the pharmacological treatment of HF and the sex-specific indications for cardiac implantable electronic devices. By shining a light on these issues, we hope to stimulate a more nuanced understanding and promote the development of more sex-responsive approaches in HF management.

Opportunistic Genetic Screening for Familial Hypercholesterolemia in Heart Transplant Patients

Heart transplantation remains the gold standard for the treatment of advanced heart failure (HF). Identification of the etiology of HF is mandatory, as the specific pathology can determine subsequent treatment. Early identification of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), the most common genetic disorder associated with premature cardiovascular disease, has a potential important impact on clinical management and public health. We evaluated the genetic information in the genes associated with FH in a cohort of 140 heart-transplanted patients. All patients underwent NGS genetic testing including LDLR, APOB, and PCSK9. We identified four carriers of rare pathogenic variants in LDLR and APOB. Although all four identified carriers had dyslipidemia, only the one carrying the pathogenic variant LDLR c.676T>C was transplanted due to CAD. Another patient with heart valvular disease was carrier of the controversial LDLR c.2096C>T. Two additional patients with non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy were carriers of variants in APOB (c.4672A>G and c.5600G>A). In our cohort, we identified the genetic cause of FH in patients that otherwise would not have been diagnosed. Opportunistic genetic testing for FH provides important information to perform personalized medicine and risk stratification not only for patients but also for relatives at concealed high cardiovascular risk. Including the LDLR gene in standard NGS cardiovascular diagnostics panels should be considered.

Genetic Testing as a Guide for Treatment in Dilated Cardiomyopathies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is one of the most prevalent primary cardiomyopathies and may be caused by genetic and non-genetic etiologies. DCM may also be the final common pathway of other cardiomyopathies such as hypertrophic, arrhythmogenic, or non-compaction cardiomyopathy. We review the main DCM genetic substrates, specific genotype-phenotype aspects, the role of genetic testing in risk stratification, and advances regarding genotype-based precision medicine.

RECENT FINDINGS

Performing a comprehensive genetic study could have a diagnostic yield up to 40% in DCM, and it is considered a cost-effective approach nowadays. The detection of a specific underlying genetic substrate explaining the disease can have important consequences for clinical management, especially for familial cascade screening, optimizing medical treatment, and improving the arrhythmic risk stratification. The identification of the genetic substrate underlying dilated cardiomyopathy makes possible the genotype-phenotype correlation analysis and a better understanding of the natural history of this disease. Nowadays, there are many promising targeting-gene therapies in different developing phases.

Sex-Related Differences in Genetic Cardiomyopathies

Cardiomyopathies are a heterogeneous collection of diseases that have in common primary functional and structural abnormalities of the heart muscle, often genetically determined. The most effective categorization of cardiomyopathies is based on the presenting phenotype, with hypertrophic, dilated, arrhythmogenic, and restrictive cardiomyopathy as the prototypes. Sex modulates the prevalence, morpho-functional manifestations and clinical course of cardiomyopathies. Aspects as diverse as ion channel expression and left ventricular remodeling differ in male and female patients with myocardial disease, although the reasons for this are poorly understood. Moreover, clinical differences may also result from complex societal/environmental discrepancies between sexes that may disadvantage women. This review provides a state-of-the-art appraisal of the influence of sex on cardiomyopathies, highlighting the many gaps in knowledge and open research questions.

Diagnostic yield of genetic testing in heart transplant recipients with prior cardiomyopathy

Background

The importance of genetic testing for cardiomyopathies has increased in the last decade. However, in heart transplant patients with former cardiomyopathy, genetic testing in retrospect is not routinely performed. We hypothesize that the yield of genetic testing in this population is considerable, and will have a major impact for both patients and relatives.

Methods

Patients that underwent heart transplantation (HTx) between 1995 and 2020 and were still in follow-up, were offered genetic testing if the primary etiology was non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. Next generation sequencing (NGS) of known cardiomyopathy genes was performed and variants were classified as variant of unknown significance (class 3), likely pathogenic (class 4) or pathogenic (class 5) variant.

Results

Of the 99 HTx patients in active follow-up, only 6 patients had a genetic diagnosis at the time of HTx. In this study, 31 selected patients with prior non-ischemic cardiomyopathy underwent genetic testing post HTx. 23/31 patients (74.2%) carried a variant that was classified as class 3 or higher. In 12/31 patients a class 4/5 variant (38.7%) was identified, and in 11/31 patients (35.5%) a class 3 variant. Class 5 Variants in TTN were the most prevalent (7/31), followed by class 5 variants in MYBPC3 (2/31). A positive family history was present in 21/31 (67.7%) and a second precipitating factor (e.g., alcohol abuse, pregnancy) was present in 17/31 patients (54.8%). Diagnostic yield of genetic testing was similar between patients with or without familial history and/or second hit. Through cascade screening 48 family members were screened for presence of a class 4/5 variant, of whom 19 (39.6%) were genotype positive, of whom 10 (52.6%) showed a cardiac phenotype. Appropriate follow-up was offered.

Conclusions

Genetic testing for cardiomyopathy genes established a molecular diagnosis in 38.7% of patients post HTx. These results highlight the importance of genetic testing in this population as it is still often overlooked in patients that already underwent HTx in the past. Genetic testing is highly recommended, independent of family history or second precipitating factors, as it might identify relatives at risk.

Sex Differences, Genetic and Environmental Influences on Dilated Cardiomyopathy

Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is characterized by dilatation of the left ventricle and impaired systolic function and is the second most common cause of heart failure after coronary heart disease. The etiology of DCM is diverse including genetic pathogenic variants, infection, inflammation, autoimmune diseases, exposure to chemicals/toxins as well as endocrine and neuromuscular causes. DCM is inherited in 20–50% of cases where more than 30 genes have been implicated in the development of DCM with pathogenic variants in TTN (Titin) most frequently associated with disease. Even though male sex is a risk factor for heart failure, few studies have examined sex differences in the pathogenesis of DCM. We searched the literature for studies examining idiopathic or familial/genetic DCM that reported data by sex in order to determine the sex ratio of disease. We found 31 studies that reported data by sex for non-genetic DCM with an average overall sex ratio of 2.5:1 male to female and 7 studies for familial/genetic DCM with an overall average sex ratio of 1.7:1 male to female. No manuscripts that we found had more females than males in their studies. We describe basic and clinical research findings that may explain the increase in DCM in males over females based on sex differences in basic physiology and the immune and fibrotic response to damage caused by mutations, infections, chemotherapy agents and autoimmune responses.

Epidemiology of the inherited cardiomyopathies

In the absence of contemporary, population-based epidemiological studies, estimates of the incidence and prevalence of the inherited cardiomyopathies have been derived from screening studies, most often of young adult populations, to assess cardiovascular risk or to detect the presence of disease in athletes or military recruits. The global estimates for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (1/500 individuals), dilated cardiomyopathy (1/250) and arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (1/5,000) are probably conservative given that only individuals who fulfil diagnostic criteria would have been included. This caveat is highly relevant because a substantial minority or even a majority of individuals who carry disease-causing genetic variants and are at risk of disease complications have incomplete and/or late-onset disease expression. The genetic literature on cardiomyopathy, which is often focused on the identification of genetic variants, has been biased in favour of pedigrees with higher penetrance. In clinical practice, an abnormal electrocardiogram with normal or non-diagnostic imaging results is a common finding for the sarcomere variants that cause hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, the titin and sarcomere variants that cause dilated cardiomyopathy and the desmosomal variants that cause either arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy or dilated cardiomyopathy. Therefore, defining the genetic epidemiology is also challenging given the overlapping phenotypes, incomplete and age-related expression, and highly variable penetrance even within individual families carrying the same genetic variant.

Prognosis and Clinical Characteristics of Dilated Cardiomyopathy With Family History via Pedigree Analysis

BACKGROUND

The clinical characteristics and prognostic outcomes of dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) with a familial history (FHx) via pedigree analysis are unclear.Methods and Results:We conducted a prospective observational study of 514 consecutive Japanese patients with DCM. FHx was defined as the presence of DCM in ≥1 family member within 2-degrees relative based on pedigree analysis. The primary endpoint was a composite of major cardiac events (sudden cardiac death and pump failure death). The prevalence of FHx was 7.4% (n=38). During a median follow-up of 3.6 years, 77 (15%) patients experienced a major cardiac event. Multivariable Cox regression analysis identified FHx as independently associated with major cardiac events (hazard ratio [HR] 4.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.04-9.19; P<0.001) compared with conventional risk factors such as age, QRS duration, and left ventricular volume. In the propensity score-matched cohort (n=38 each), the FHx group had a significantly higher incidence of major cardiac events (HR, 4.48; 95% CI, 1.25-16.13; P=0.022). In addition, the FHx group had a higher prevalence of a diffuse late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) pattern than the no-FHx group (32% vs. 17%, P=0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

DCM patients with FHx had a worse prognosis, which was associated with a higher prevalence of a diffuse LGE pattern, than patients without FHx.

Importance of Genetic Testing in Dilated Cardiomyopathy: Applications and Challenges in Clinical Practice

Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is a clinical syndrome characterized by left ventricular dilatation and contractile dysfunction. It is the most common cause of heart failure in young adults. The advent of next-generation sequencing has contributed to the discovery of a large amount of genomic data related to DCM. Mutations involving genes that encode cytoskeletal proteins, the sarcomere, and ion channels account for approximately 40% of cases previously classified as idiopathic DCM. In this scenario, geneticists and cardiovascular genetics specialists have begun to work together, building knowledge and establishing more accurate diagnoses. However, proper interpretation of genetic results is essential and multidisciplinary teams dedicated to the management and analysis of the obtained information should be considered. In this review, we approach genetic factors associated with DCM and their prognostic relevance and discuss how the use of genetic testing, when well recommended, can help cardiologists in the decision-making process.

Hidden in Heart Failure

Current diagnostic strategies fail to illuminate the presence of rare disease in the heart failure population. One-third of heart failure patients are categorised as suffering an idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy, while others are labelled only as heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Those affected frequently suffer from delays in diagnosis, which can have a significant impact on quality of life and prognosis. Traditional rhetoric argues that delineation of this patient population is superfluous to treatment, as elucidation of aetiology will not lead to a deviation from standard management protocols. This article emphasises the importance of identifying genetic, inflammatory and infiltrative causes of heart failure to enable patients to access tailored management strategies.

Sudden cardiac death in nonischemic cardiomyopathy

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is a major cause of mortality in patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM). Identifying patients who are at highest risk for SCD is an ongoing challenge. At present, guidelines recommend the use of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in patients with NICM with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and heart failure (HF) symptoms. Some recent data, however, suggest that ICDs may not increase longevity in this population. Conversely, community-based studies have demonstrated that many at-risk individuals who may benefit from ICD therapy remain unprotected. Current recommendations for ICD implantation are continually debated, justifying comprehensive individualized risk assessment. Various promising techniques for further risk stratification are under evaluation, including cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, electrocardiographic assessment of electrical instability, and genetic testing. However, none of these strategies has been fully adapted into guidelines. Hence, clinical risk stratification practice today depends on LVEF and HF symptoms, which have poor sensitivity and specificity for predicting SCD risk.

Contemporary characteristics and outcomes of adults with familial dilated cardiomyopathy listed for heart transplantation

BACKGROUND

Familial dilated cardiomyopathy (FDCM) account for 20%-30% of non-ischemic cardiomyopathies (NICM). Previous published data showed that some patients with FDCM tend to have rapidly progressive disease; however, five-year mortality was not significantly different in the familial and non-familial forms of NICM with optimal medical therapy.

AIM

To better define the characteristics and clinical outcomes of FDCM patients listed for heart transplantation (HT).

METHODS

We queried the United Network for Organ Sharing Registry to identify FDCM patients listed for HT between January 2008 and September 2015 and compared them to NICM and ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) patients. We included all patients ≥ 18 years old and we separated patients to three groups: FDCM, NICM and ICM. Chi-square test was used to compare between categorical variables, the t-test was used to compare between continues variables, and Cox-proportional hazards model was used to perform time-dependent survival analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 24809 adults listed for HT, we identified 677 patients (2.7%) with the diagnosis of FDCM. Compared to patients with NICM and ICM, FDCM patients were younger (FDCM 43.9 ± 13.5 vs NICM 50.9 ± 12.3, P < 0.001, vs ICM 58.5 ± 8.1, P < 0.001), more frequently listed as status 2 (FDCM 35.2% vs NICM 26.5%, P < 0.001), with significantly lower left ventricular assist device (LVAD) utilization (FDCM 18.4% vs NICM 25.1%, P < 0.001; vs ICM 25.6%, P < 0.001), but higher use of total artificial heart (FDCM 1.3% vs NICM 0.6%, P = 0.039; vs ICM 0.4%, P = 0.002). Additionally, patients with FDCM were less frequently delisted for clinical deterioration or death and more likely to be transplanted compared to those with NICM [hazard ratio (HR): 0.617, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.47-0.81; HR: 1.25, 95%CI: 1.14-1.37, respectively], and ICM (HR: 0.5, 95%CI: 0.38-0.66; HR: 1.18, 95%CI: 1.08-1.3, respectively). There was more frequent rejection among patients with FDCM (FDCM 11.4% vs NICM 9.8%, P = 0.28; vs ICM 8.4%, P = 0.034). One, three, and five post-transplant survival of patients with FDCM (91%, 88% and 80%) was similar to those with NICM (91%, 84%, 79%, P = 0.225), but superior to those with ICM (89%, 82%, 75%, P = 0.008), respectively.

CONCLUSION

End-stage FDCM patients are more likely to be transplanted, more likely to have early rejection, and have similar or higher survival than patients with other cardiomyopathies.

Should Primary Prevention ICDs Still Be Placed in Patients with Non-ischemic Cardiomyopathy? A Review of the Evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Recent evidence has suggested that implantable defibrillator (ICD) in non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) may not offer mortality benefit in the presence of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT).

RECENT FINDINGS

Despite significant benefits of GDMT and CRT, current evidence is derived from ICD trials that rely predominantly on reduced left ventricular ejection fraction alone (LVEF). The majority of patients with sudden cardiac death (SCD) have LVEF > 30% indicating that LVEF by itself is an inadequate predictor of SCD. The Danish study to assess the efficacy of ICD in patients with non-ischemic systolic heart failure on mortality (DANISH) highlights the importance of better risk stratifying NICM patients for ICD implantation. Assessment of life expectancy, comorbidities, presence of advanced heart failure, etiology of NICM, and the presence of myocardial fibrosis can help risk stratify ICD beyond LVEF. Genetics and biomarkers can be of further assistance in risk stratification.

A Genome-Wide Association Study of Idiopathic Dilated Cardiomyopathy in African Americans

Idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (IDC) is the most common form of non-ischemic chronic heart failure. Despite the higher prevalence of IDC in African Americans, the genetics of IDC have been relatively understudied in this ethnic group. We performed a genome-wide association study to identify susceptibility genes for IDC in African Americans recruited from five sites in the U.S. (662 unrelated cases and 1167 controls). The heritability of IDC was calculated to be 33% (95% confidence interval: 19-47%; p = 6.4 × 10-7). We detected association of a variant in a novel intronic locus in the CACNB4 gene meeting genome-wide levels of significance (p = 4.1 × 10-8). The CACNB4 gene encodes a calcium channel subunit expressed in the heart that is important for cardiac muscle contraction. This variant has not previously been associated with IDC in any racial group. Pathway analysis, based on the 1000 genes most strongly associated with IDC, showed an enrichment for genes related to calcium signaling, growth factor signaling, neuronal/neuromuscular signaling, and various types of cellular level signaling, including gap junction and cAMP signaling. Our results suggest a novel locus for IDC in African Americans and provide additional insights into the genetic architecture and etiology.

Sudden death risk stratification in non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy using old and new tools: a clinical challenge

INTRODUCTION

Risk stratification for sudden cardiac death in non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NIDCM) remains a clinical challenge. Areas covered: Currently, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), severity of heart failure symptoms according to NYHA classification, and morphology and duration of the QRS complex guide device management in these patients with implantation of a cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) and/or cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices. Recently, the results of a randomized trial stirred some controversy regarding the utility of ICD in NIDCM patients, however, a subsequent meta-analysis confirmed prior findings of the survival-prolonging benefit of device therapy. Newer risk markers, like late gadolinium enhancement in cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) detecting myocardial fibrosis, are encouraging in improving risk stratification in these patients. Furthermore, resurgence of an old tool, the electrophysiology study (EPS), and technical advances in genetics in identifying high-risk familial NIDCM, appear promising in this direction. Expert commentary: Based on old and new tools, a more individualized approach may be applied in NIDCM patients, whereby CMR, EPS and genetics may provide further guidance, particularly in patients with LVEF>35%. These issues are herein reviewed and a practical algorithm is proposed for risk stratification and device implantation in NIDCM patients with LVEF below and above 35%.