Limited value of NT-proBNP as a prognostic marker of all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure with preserved and mid-range ejection fraction in primary care: A report from the swedish heart failure register

Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of Aminoterminal Prohormone of Brain Natriuretic Peptide in Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced Ejection Fraction Stratified by the Degree of Renal Dysfunction

Limited data concerning the diagnostic and prognostic value of blood-derived biomarkers in heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) is available. This study investigates the diagnostic and prognostic value of aminoterminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) in patients with HFmrEF, stratified by the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Consecutive patients with HFmrEF were retrospectively included at one institution from 2016 to 2022. First, the diagnostic value of NT-proBNP for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) was tested. Thereafter, the prognostic value of NT-proBNP levels was tested for 30-months all-cause mortality in patients with ADHF. From a total of 755 patients hospitalized with HFmrEF, the rate of ADHF was 42%. Patients with ADHF revealed higher NT-proBNP levels compared to patients without (median 5394 pg/mL vs. 1655 pg/mL; p = 0.001). NT-proBNP was able to discriminate ADHF with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.777 (p = 0.001), with the highest AUC in patients with eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min (AUC = 0.800; p = 0.001), and no diagnostic value was seen in eGFR < 30 mL/min (AUC = 0.576; p = 0.210). Patients with NT-proBNP levels > 3946 pg/mL were associated with higher rates of all-cause mortality at 30 months (57.7% vs. 34.4%; HR = 2.036; 95% CI 1.423-2.912; p = 0.001), even after multivariable adjustment (HR = 1.712; 95% CI 1.166-2.512; p = 0.006). In conclusion, increasing NT-proBNP levels predicted the risk of ADHF and all-cause mortality in patients with HFmrEF and preserved renal function; however, NT-proBNP levels were not predictive in patients with HFmrEF and eGFR < 30 mL/min.

An update on utilising brain natriuretic peptide for risk stratification, monitoring and guiding therapy in heart failure

INTRODUCTION

Heart failure (HF) is a dominant health problem with an overall poor prognosis. Natriuretic peptides (NPs) are upregulated in HF as a compensatory mechanism. They have extensively been used for diagnosis and risk stratification.

AREAS COVERED

This review addresses the history and physiology of NPs in order to understand their current role in clinical practice. It further provides a detailed and updated narrative review on the utility of those biomarkers for risk stratification, monitoring, and guiding therapy in HF.

EXPERT OPINION

NPs show excellent predictive ability in heart failure patients, both in acute and chronic settings. Understanding their pathophysiology and their modifications in specific situations is key for an adequate interpretation in specific clinical scenarios in which their prognostic value may be weaker or less well evaluated. To better promote risk stratification in HF, NPs should be integrated with other predictive tools to develop multiparametric risk models. Both inequalities of access to NPs and evidence caveats and limitations will need to be addressed by future research in the coming years.

Improvements in Efficacy Measures With Tafamidis in the Tafamidis in Transthyretin Cardiomyopathy Clinical Trial

Background

Transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) is a fatal disease. Tafamidis was approved to treat patients with ATTR-CM based on findings from the ATTR-ACT (Tafamidis in Transthyretin Cardiomyopathy Clinical Trial).

Objectives

This post hoc analysis examined the proportion of patients who experienced improved efficacy measures through 30 months of treatment with tafamidis or placebo in ATTR-ACT.

Methods

Patients with ATTR-CM were randomized to tafamidis (80 mg or 20 mg) or placebo. Change from baseline in 6-minute walk test distance, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary score, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide concentration, patient global assessment of overall health, and New York Heart Association functional class were assessed at regular time points. The proportion of patients with improvement was summarized for each time point with odds ratio. Missing data were imputed as deterioration.

Results

Higher proportions of tafamidis-treated patients (n = 264) than placebo-treated patients (n = 177) showed improvement in all assessments. The odds ratio for improvement favored tafamidis for all measures and at all time points. It was significant (P < 0.001) at month 30 for 6-minute walk test distance (4.9; 95% CI: 2.28-10.69), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary score (3.3; 95% CI: 1.85-5.78), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide concentration (5.3; 95% CI: 2.66-10.73), and patient global assessment of overall health (2.9; 95% CI: 1.69-4.95).

Conclusions

This analysis found that higher proportions of patients treated with tafamidis experienced improvement from baseline in measures of heart failure, functional capacity, and health-related quality of life than those treated with placebo during ATTR-ACT. These data provide further evidence of the clinical benefits of tafamidis in patients with ATTR-CM. (Safety and Efficacy of Tafamidis in Patients With Transthyretin Cardiomyopathy [ATTR-ACT]; NCT01994889).

The Prognostic Value of Lung Ultrasound in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction in the Ambulatory Setting

Background: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a growing healthcare burden, and its prevalence is steadily increasing. Lung ultrasound (LUS) is a promising screening and prognostic tool in the heart failure population. However, more information on its value in predicting outcome is needed.

Aims: The aim of our study was to assess the prognostic performance of LUS B-lines compared to traditional and novel clinical and echocardiographic parameters and natriuretic peptide levels in patients with newly diagnosed HFpEF in an ambulatory setting.

Methods: In our prospective cohort study, all ambulatory patients with clinical suspicion of HFpEF underwent comprehensive echocardiography, lung ultrasound and NT-proBNP measurement during their first appointment at our cardiology outpatient clinic. Our endpoint was a composite of worsening heart failure symptoms requiring hospitalization or loop diuretic dose escalation and death.

Results: We prospectively enrolled 75 consecutive patients with HFpEF who matched our inclusion and exclusion criteria. We detected 11 events on a 26 ± 10-months follow-up. We found that the predictive value of B-lines is similar to the predictive value of NT-proBNP (AUC 0.863 vs. 0.859), with the best cut-off at >15 B-lines. Having more B-lines than 15 significantly increased the likelihood of adverse events with a hazard ratio of 20.956 (p = 0.004). The number of B-lines remained an independent predictor of events at multivariate modeling. Having more than 15 B-lines lines was associated with a significantly worse event-free survival (Log-rank: 16.804, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The number of B-lines seems to be an independent prognostic factor for adverse outcomes in HFpEF. Since it is an easy-to-learn, feasible and radiation-free method, it may add substantial value to the commonly used diagnostic and risk stratification models.

N-terminal prohormone B-type natriuretic peptide variability acts as a predictor of poor prognosis in patients with cardiorenal syndrome type 2

This study aims to explore the effect of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) variability (mean absolute difference of the log2 NT-proBNP level measured in hospital) on the prognosis of patients with cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) type 2. Patients with CRS type 2 were retrospectively included. The varied NT-proBNP indications were analyzed. They were NT-proBNP I(pre-treatment), NT-proBNP II(post-treatment), NT-proBNP II/I, ΔNT-proBNP, log2 (NT-proBNP) variability and mean log2 (NT-proBNP). A logistic regression model and survival curves (Kaplan–Meier analysis) were built to identify independent predictors associated with poor prognosis. The primary outcomes were major adverse renal and cardiac events. The secondary outcome was all-cause mortality. From 2012 to 2016, 136 patients were included in this study with 69 (50.7%) had high log2 (NT-proBNP) variability level. The optimal cutoff level for each NT-proBNP indication that predicts poor prognosis was calculated, and the area under curves ranged from 0.668 to 0.891 with different indications. Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed that there was significantly correlated with prevalence of primary outcomes and NT-proBNP variability. The hazard ratios (HRs) ranged from 1.67 to 6.61 with different indications. The multivariate regression analyses also identified the risk of the primary outcomes were associated with elevated NT-proBNP values, except NT-proBNP I. The odds ratio (ORs) ranged from 1.83 to 6.61 with different indications. When analyzing the relationship between NT-proBNP variability and all-cause mortality, the results were the same. NT-proBNP variability might serve as an independent predictor for poor prognosis and all-cause mortality in patients with CRS type 2.

Prognosticators of All-Cause Mortality in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) represents ∼50% of all cases of congestive heart failure (CHF) with prevalence expected to increase with aging of the population. We performed an observational study of all patients admitted to 3 hospitals in the ExcelaHealth care system, Greensburg, PA, with a primary diagnosis of HFpEF heart failure exacerbation between January 2014 and January 2017. Demographic data, laboratory results, and echocardiograms performed closest to index hospitalization were collected. A total of 487 patients were admitted with a primary diagnosis of CHF exacerbation and HFpEF, with a mean age of 80.5 years (±10.9), 62% women and predominantly Caucasian (98.8%). Over a median follow-up of 21.7 months, 246 patients died with an all-cause mortality rate of 51.3%. Receiver operator curves were generated for multiple continuous variables to identify optimal cut-off values Kaplan-Meir survival curves were then generated. Clinical factors were tested by univariate Cox regression modeling, with significant factors entered into a step-wise multivariate model. Our modeling identified age>80 years, serum albumin level<3.2 g/dl, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) >5,000 pg/mL and medial E/e'≥20 as significant, independent predictors of all-cause mortality (p-value <0.0001). Surprisingly, lack of a diagnosis of hypertension was associated with significantly increased mortality risk. In a community-based sample of HFpEF patients, we identified multiple factors that were strong, independent predictors of all-cause mortality that can be easily applied in a clinical setting.

Heart Failure With Midrange Ejection Fraction-What Is It, If Anything?

The patient cohort with left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs) of 41%-49%, which has been defined as heart failure with midrange ejection fraction (HFmrEF), represent a significant proportion of the heart failure (HF) population. Despite the clear cutoffs established by different society guidelines, confusion remains regarding the exact significance of midrange LVEF within the HF syndrome. Patients with LVEF 41%-49% represent a heterogeneous group of patients sharing pathophysiologic mechanisms, biomarker profiles, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics with patients with preserved and reduced LVEF. In this clinical review, we discuss the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms that culminate in the clinical syndrome of HF and contribute to the disparities observed between HFpEF, HFrEF, and HFmrEF. We highlight differences and similarities in clinical characteristics and imaging features between HFpEF and HFrEF in an effort to disentangle the heterogeneous group of patients with midrange LVEF, but ultimately we conclude that LVEF should be seen as simply one important element of a continuum throughout the HF syndrome, and that although is useful, it is an oversimplification, because HF syndrome is more of a continuum. The underlying pathophysiology, etiology, and comorbidities of patients presenting with HF is becoming ever more important as the limitations of a classification solely based on LVEF are being better recognised, and as patient-specific personalisation of care is becoming ever more important.

Precipitating factors of heart failure decompensation, short-term morbidity and mortality in patients attended in primary care

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the precipitating factors for heart failure decompensation in primary care and associations with short-term prognosis. Design Prospective cohort study with a 30-d follow-up from an index consultation. Regression models to determine independent factors associated with hospitalisation or death.

SETTING

Primary care in ten European countries. Patients Patients with diagnosis of heart failure attended in primary care for a heart failure decompensation (increase of dyspnoea, unexplained weight gain or peripheral oedema).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Potential precipitating factors for decompensation of heart failure and their association with the event of hospitalisation or mortality 30 d after a decompensation.

RESULTS

Of 692 patients 54% were women, mean age 81 (standard deviation [SD] 8.9) years; mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 55% (SD 12%). Most frequently identified heart failure precipitation factors were respiratory infections in 194 patients (28%), non-compliance of dietary recommendations in 184 (27%) and non-compliance with pharmacological treatment in 157 (23%). The two strongest precipitating factors to predict 30 d hospitalisation or death were respiratory infections (odds ratio [OR] 2.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] (2.4-3.4)) and atrial fibrillation (AF) > 110 beats/min (OR 2.2, CI 1.5-3.2). Multivariate analysis confirmed the association between the following variables and hospitalisation/death: In relation to precipitating factors: respiratory infection (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.14-1.25) and AF with heart rate > 110 beats/min (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.10-1.35); and regarding patient characteristics: New York Heart Association (NYHA) III or IV (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.15-1.29); previous hospitalisation (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.11-1.19); and LVEF < 40% (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.09-1.19).

CONCLUSIONS

In primary care, respiratory infections and rapid AF are the most important precipitating factors for hospitalisation and death within 30 d following an episode of heart failure decompensation. Key points Hospitalisation due to heart failure decompensation represents the highest share of healthcare costs for this disease. So far, no primary care studies have analysed the relationship between precipitating factors and short term prognosis of heart failure decompensation episodes. We found that in 692 patients with heart failure decompensation in primary care, the respiratory infection and rapid atrial fibrillation (AF) increased the risk of short-term hospital admission or death. Patients with a hospital admission the previous year and a decompensation episode caused by respiratory infection were even more likely to be hospitalized or die within 30 d.