Cardiovascular biomarkers in patients with acute decompensated heart failure randomized to sacubitril-valsartan or enalapril in the PIONEER-HF trial

Advances in heart failure monitoring: Biosensors targeting molecular markers in peripheral bio-fluids

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), especially chronic heart failure, threaten many patients' lives worldwide. Because of its slow course and complex causes, its clinical screening, diagnosis, and prognosis are essential challenges. Clinical biomarkers and biosensor technologies can rapidly screen and diagnose. Multiple types of biomarkers are employed for screening purposes, precise diagnosis, and treatment follow-up. This article provides an up-to-date overview of the biomarkers associated with the six main heart failure etiology pathways. Plasma natriuretic peptides (BNP and NT-proBNP) and cardiac troponins (cTnT, cTnl) are still analyzed as gold-standard markers for heart failure. Other complementary biomarkers include growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15), circulating Galactose Lectin 3 (Gal-3), soluble interleukin (sST2), C-reactive protein (CRP), and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α). For these biomarkers, the electrochemical biosensors have exhibited sufficient sensitivity, detection limit, and specificity. This review systematically summarizes the latest molecular biomarkers and sensors for heart failure, which will provide comprehensive and cutting-edge authoritative scientific information for biomedical and electronic-sensing researchers in the field of heart failure, as well as patients. In addition, our proposed future outlook may provide new research ideas for researchers.

Sacubitril/valsartan and cardiovascular biomarkers among patients with recent COVID-19 infection: The PARACOR-19 randomized clinical trial

AIMS

The PARACOR-19 randomized controlled trial (RCT) was designed to examine the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on markers of cardiac injury, inflammation, structure, and function among patients who have recovered from acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection.

METHODS AND RESULTS

PARACOR-19 was a single-centre, double-blind RCT of patients with cardiovascular risk factors and a history of COVID-19 infection 4-16 weeks prior to enrolment. Patients were randomized to sacubitril/valsartan (titrated to the maximum dose of 97/103 mg twice daily) versus matching placebo. Co-primary endpoints were change from baseline to 12 weeks in high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) and soluble ST2 (sST2). Exploratory endpoints included change from baseline to 12 weeks in additional circulating biomarkers. Overall, 42 patients were randomized between August 2021 and March 2023 (n = 20 sacubitril/valsartan, n = 22 placebo). Median (25th-75th) time from COVID-19 diagnosis to enrolment was 67 (48-80) days. Median age was 67 (62-71) years, 48% were female, and 91% were White. Compared with placebo, sacubitril/valsartan did not have a significant effect on the co-primary endpoints of change from baseline in hs-TnT and sST2 (all p ≥ 0.29). In exploratory analyses, sacubitril/valsartan led to a 46% greater reduction in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and 51% greater reduction in C-terminal telopeptide of collagen type I (CITP). Permanent drug discontinuation occurred in four patients in the sacubitril/valsartan group and three patients in the placebo group. There were no deaths and one patient was hospitalized in each group.

CONCLUSION

In this pilot RCT of patients who recovered from acute COVID-19, sacubitril/valsartan did not lower hs-cTnT or sST2 compared with placebo. Exploratory analyses suggested potential benefits of sacubitril/valsartan on cardiac wall stress and collagen turnover as measured by NT-proBNP and CITP. Sacubitril/valsartan was well tolerated.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04883528.

Inflammation in heart failure: pathophysiology and therapeutic strategies

A role for inflammation in the development and progression of heart failure (HF) has been proposed for decades. Multiple studies have demonstrated the potential involvement of several groups of cytokines and chemokines in acute and chronic HF, though targeting these pathways in early therapeutic trials have produced mixed results. These studies served to highlight the complexity and nuances of how pro-inflammatory pathways contribute to the pathogenesis of HF. More recent investigations have highlighted how inflammation may play distinct roles based on HF syndrome phenotypes, findings that may guide the development of novel therapies. In this review, we propose a contemporary update on the role of inflammation mediated by the innate and adaptive immune systems with HF, highlighting differences that exist across the ejection fraction spectrum. This will specifically be looked at through the lens of established and novel biomarkers of inflammation. Subsequently, we review how improvements in inflammatory pathways may mediate clinical benefits of existing guideline-directed medical therapies for HF, as well as future therapies in the pipeline targeting HF and inflammation.

Chronic heart failure with reduced EF: A decade of major pharmacological innovations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Because of its severity, prevalence, and medical economic importance, heart failure is a chronic disease that is the subject of intense medical research. The aim of this article was to review the therapeutic innovations of the last decade that have been incorporated into the latest international recommendations for the treatment of heart failure.

METHOD

Review of literature and current guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The results of the clinical trials reviewed here represent major advances that will have a significant impact on quality of life, survival, rehospitalisation and, for certain treatments, a beneficial joint effect on commonly associated comorbidities such as diabetes and chronic renal failure.

Cardiac Fibrosis in heart failure: Focus on non-invasive diagnosis and emerging therapeutic strategies

Heart failure is a leading cause of mortality and hospitalization worldwide. Cardiac fibrosis, resulting from the excessive deposition of collagen fibers, is a common feature across the spectrum of conditions converging in heart failure. Eventually, either reparative or reactive in nature, in the long-term cardiac fibrosis contributes to heart failure development and progression and is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Despite this, specific cardiac antifibrotic therapies are lacking, making cardiac fibrosis an urgent unmet medical need. In this context, a better patient phenotyping is needed to characterize the heterogenous features of cardiac fibrosis to advance toward its personalized management. In this review, we will describe the different phenotypes associated with cardiac fibrosis in heart failure and we will focus on the potential usefulness of imaging techniques and circulating biomarkers for the non-invasive characterization and phenotyping of this condition and for tracking its clinical impact. We will also recapitulate the cardiac antifibrotic effects of existing heart failure and non-heart failure drugs and we will discuss potential strategies under preclinical development targeting the activation of cardiac fibroblasts at different levels, as well as targeting additional extracardiac processes.

Prognostic Value of sST2 in Heart Failure

In recent years, there has been growing interest in the risk stratification for heart failure, and the use of multiple biomarkers to identify different pathophysiological processes associated with this condition. One such biomarker is soluble suppression of tumorigenicity-2 (sST2), which has shown some potential for integration into clinical practice. sST2 is produced by both cardiac fibroblasts and cardiomyocytes in response to myocardial stress. Other sources of sST2 are endothelial cells of the aorta and coronary arteries and immune cells such as T cells. Indeed, ST2 is also associated with inflammatory and immune processes. We aimed at reviewing the prognostic value of sST2 in both chronic and acute heart failure. In this setting, we also provide a flowchart about its potential use in clinical practice.

The history and mystery of sacubitril/valsartan: From clinical trial to the real world

Heart failure is a serious threat to human health, with morbidity and mortality rates increasing despite the existence of multiple treatment options. Therefore, it is necessary to identify new therapeutic targets for this disease. Sacubitril/valsartan is a supramolecular sodium salt complex of the enkephalinase inhibitor prodrug sacubitril and the angiotensin receptor blocker valsartan. Its combined action increases endogenous natriuretic peptides while inhibiting the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and exerting cardioprotective effects. Clinical evidence suggests that sacubitril/valsartan is superior to conventional renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitor therapy for patients with reduced ejection fraction heart failure who can tolerate angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers. The therapy reduces the risk of heart failure hospitalization, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality and has a better safety and tolerability record. This review describes the potential pathophysiological mechanisms of cardiomyocyte injury amelioration by sacubitril/valsartan. We explore the protective effects of sacubitril/valsartan and outline the therapeutic value in patients with heart failure by summarizing the results of recent large clinical trials. Furthermore, a preliminary outlook shows that sacubitril/valsartan may be effective at treating other diseases, and provides some exploratory observations that lay the foundation for future studies on this drug.

Assessing clinical and biomarker characteristics to optimize the benefits of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure

Of the various medical therapies for heart failure (HF), sacubitril/valsartan is a first-in-class angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor that combines sacubitril, a pro-drug that is further metabolized to the neprilysin inhibitor sacubitrilat, and the angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker valsartan. Inhibition of neprilysin and blockade of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor with sacubitril/valsartan increases vasoactive peptide levels, increasing vasodilation, natriuresis, and diuresis. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is widely used to classify HF, to assist with clinical decision-making, for patient selection in HF clinical trials, and to optimize the benefits of sacubitril/valsartan in HF. However, as HF is a complex syndrome that occurs on a continuum of overlapping and changing phenotypes, patient classification based solely on LVEF becomes problematic. LVEF measurement can be imprecise, have low reproducibility, and often changes over time. LVEF may not accurately reflect inherent disease heterogeneity and complexity, and the addition of alternate criteria to LVEF may improve phenotyping of HF and help guide treatment choices. Sacubitril/valsartan may work, in part, by mechanisms that are not directly related to the LVEF. For example, this drug may exert antifibrotic and neurohumoral modulatory effects through inhibition or activation of several signaling pathways. In this review, we discuss markers of cardiac remodeling, fibrosis, systemic inflammation; activation of neurohormonal pathways, including the natriuretic system and the sympathetic nervous system; the presence of comorbidities; patient characteristics; hemodynamics; and HF signs and symptoms that may all be used to (1) better understand the mechanisms of action of sacubitril/valsartan and (2) help to identify subsets of patients who might benefit from treatment, regardless of LVEF.

Natriuretic Peptide-guided Therapy for Heart Failure

Heart failure (HF) is a complex syndrome with high mortality and hospitalization rates. Conventional care in patients with HF is usually based on clinical history and physical examination. Natriuretic peptides (NPs), B-type NP (BNP) and N-terminal proBNP, are the gold-standard biomarkers in HF. They are recommended for diagnosing HF, when the physician is uncertain of the diagnosis, and for estimating the prognosis. NPs also guide therapy in HF, as serial NP measurements inform medication adjustments to achieve targets independently of symptoms. In this regard, the data are conflicting. In patients with HF and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) there is a suggestion that NP-guided therapy is helpful. The studies STARS-BNP and PROTECT demonstrated a reduction in cardiac events with NP-guided therapy. Additionally, mortality in patients aged <75 years reduced in the BATTLESCARRED and TIME-CHF studies, and in a meta-analysis. On the contrary, no differences were observed in the studies PRIMA and GUIDE-IT. In HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and in the acute setting, no differences were detected with NP-guided therapy compared with conventional care. In patients at risk of developing HF, NP can be useful to guide therapy and prevent HF. In summary, NP-guided therapy seems to be useful in patients with HFrEF, especially in those aged <75 years, but has no use in HFpEF or in acute HF.

Congestion in heart failure: a circulating biomarker-based perspective. A review from the Biomarkers Working Group of the Heart Failure Association, European Society of Cardiology

Congestion is a cardinal sign of heart failure (HF). In the past, it was seen as a homogeneous epiphenomenon that identified patients with advanced HF. However, current evidence shows that congestion in HF varies in quantity and distribution. This updated view advocates for a congestive-driven classification of HF according to onset (acute vs. chronic), regional distribution (systemic vs. pulmonary), compartment of distribution (intravascular vs. extravascular), and clinical vs. subclinical. Thus, this review will focus on the utility of circulating biomarkers for assessing and managing the different fluid overload phenotypes. This discussion focused on the clinical utility of the natriuretic peptides, carbohydrate antigen 125 (also called mucin 16), bio-adrenomedullin and mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin, ST2 (also known as interleukin-1 receptor-like 1), cluster of differentiation 146, troponin, C-terminal pro-endothelin-1, and parameters of haemoconcentration. The utility of circulation biomarkers on top of clinical evaluation, haemodynamics, and imaging needs to be better determined by dedicated studies. Some multiparametric frameworks in which these tools contribute to management are proposed.

Liver tests and outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: findings from DAPA-HF

AIMS

Reflecting both increased venous pressure and reduced cardiac output, abnormal liver tests are common in patients with severe heart failure and are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. We aimed to investigate the prognostic significance of abnormal liver tests in ambulatory patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), explore any treatment interaction between bilirubin and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and examine change in liver tests with SGLT2 inhibitor treatment.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We explored these objectives in the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF) trial, with focus on bilirubin. We calculated the incidence of cardiovascular death or worsening heart failure by bilirubin tertile. Secondary cardiovascular outcomes were examined, along with the change in liver tests at the end-of-study visit. Baseline bilirubin was available in 4720 patients (99.5%). Participants in the highest bilirubin tertile (T3) have more severe HFrEF (lower left ventricular ejection fraction, higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP] and worse New York Heart Association class), had a greater burden of atrial fibrillation but less diabetes. Higher bilirubin (T3 vs. T1) was associated with worse outcomes even after adjustment for other predictive variables, including NT-proBNP and troponin T (adjusted hazard ratio for the primary outcome 1.73 [95% confidence interval 1.37-2.17], p < 0.001; and 1.52 [1.12-2.07], p = 0.01 for cardiovascular death). Baseline bilirubin did not modify the benefits of dapagliflozin. During follow-up, dapagliflozin had no effect on liver tests.

CONCLUSION

Bilirubin concentration was an independent predictor of worse outcomes but did not modify the benefits of dapagliflozin in HFrEF. Dapagliflozin was not associated with change in liver tests.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03036124.

Association of High-Sensitivity Troponin T and I Blood Concentrations With All-Cause Mortality and Cardiovascular Outcome in Stable Patients-Results From the INTERCATH Cohort

Background The association between high-sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT) and high-sensitivity troponin I (hsTnI) and outcome when adjusted for confounders including the angiographical severity of coronary artery disease (CAD) remains largely unknown. We therefore aimed to explore whether hsTnT and hsTnI blood levels increase with CAD severity and add independent predictive information for future major adverse cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in stable patients. Methods and Results Patients from the INTERCATH cohort with available coronary angiography and hsTnT and hsTnI concentrations were included. Troponin concentrations were quantified via hsTnT (Roche Elecsys) and hsTnI (Abbott ARCHITECT STAT). To investigate the association of hsTnT and hsTnI with outcome, a multivariable analysis adjusting for classical cardiovascular risk factors, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, estimated glomerular filtration rate, hs-CRP (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein), NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide), and Gensini score was carried out. Of 1829 patients, 27.9% were women, and the mean age was 68.6±10.9 years. Troponin blood concentrations were higher in patients with diagnosed CAD compared with those without. Using a linear regression model current smoking, arterial hypertension, estimated glomerular filtration rate, hs-CRP, NT-proBNP, and CAD severity as graded by the Gensini and SYNTAX scores were associated with high-sensitivity troponin levels. Patients were followed for 4.4 years (25th and 75th percentiles: 4.3, 4.4). After multivariable adjustment, all-cause mortality was predicted by hsTnT (hazard ratio [HR], 1.7 [95% CI, 1.5-2.2], P<0.001) as well as hsTnI (HR, 1.5 [95% CI, 1.2-1.8], P<0.001). However, only hsTnI (HR, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.0-1.4], P=0.032) remained as an independent predictor of major adverse cardiovascular events after adjusting for most possible confounders, including CAD severity (hsTnT: HR, 1.0 [95% CI, 0.9-1.2], P=0.95). Conclusions After adjusting for classical cardiovascular risk factors, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, estimated glomerular filtration rate, hs-CRP, NT-proBNP, and CAD severity, hsTnT and hsTnI were independently associated with all-cause mortality, but only hsTnI was associated with major adverse cardiovascular events in stable patients undergoing coronary angiography. Registration URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/; Unique identifier: NCT04936438.

Molecular mechanisms of sacubitril/valsartan in cardiac remodeling

Cardiovascular diseases have become a major clinical burden globally. Heart failure is one of the diseases that commonly emanates from progressive uncontrolled hypertension. This gives rise to the need for a new treatment for the disease. Sacubitril/valsartan is a new drug combination that has been approved for patients with heart failure. This review aims to detail the mechanism of action for sacubitril/valsartan in cardiac remodeling, a cellular and molecular process that occurs during the development of heart failure. Accumulating evidence has unveiled the cardioprotective effects of sacubitril/valsartan on cellular and molecular modulation in cardiac remodeling, with recent large-scale randomized clinical trials confirming its supremacy over other traditional heart failure treatments. However, its molecular mechanism of action in cardiac remodeling remains obscure. Therefore, comprehending the molecular mechanism of action of sacubitril/valsartan could help future research to study the drug’s potential therapy to reduce the severity of heart failure.

Medical management of acute heart failure

Despite recent advances in the treatment of chronic heart failure, therapeutic options for acute heart failure (AHF) remain limited. AHF admissions are associated with significant multi-organ dysfunction, especially worsening renal failure, which results in significant morbidity and mortality. There are several aspects of AHF management: diagnosis, decongestion, vasoactive therapy, goal-directed medical therapy initiation and safe transition of care. Effective diagnosis and prognostication could be very helpful in an acute setting and rely upon biomarker evaluation with noninvasive assessment of fluid status. Decongestive strategies could be tailored to include pharmaceutical options along with consideration of utilizing ultrafiltration for refractory hypervolemia. Vasoactive agents to augment cardiac function have been evaluated in patients with AHF but have shown to only have limited efficacy. Post stabilization, initiation of quadruple goal-directed medical therapy—angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, mineral receptor antagonists, sodium glucose type 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, and beta blockers—to prevent myocardial remodeling is being advocated as a standard of care. Safe transition of care is needed prior to discharge to prevent heart failure rehospitalization and mortality. Post-discharge close ambulatory monitoring (including remote hemodynamic monitoring), virtual visits, and rehabilitation are some of the strategies to consider. We hereby review the contemporary approach in AHF diagnosis and management.

Duration of Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction Associated With Electrocardiographic Outcomes Before and After Sacubitril/Valsartan

AIM

Changes in QRS duration in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) after sacubitril/valsartan therapy is not fully understood. This study aimed to assess the association of duration of HFrEF diagnosis with electrocardiographic and echocardiographic outcomes between before and after sacubitril/valsartan.

METHODS

We included HFrEF patients who received naïve sacubitril/valsartan therapy for ≥3 months, between January 2016 and March 2018. All patients were divided into 2 groups based on their duration of HFrEF. Generalized linear models were analyzed the cardiac outcomes after sacubitril/valsartan therapy by HFrEF duration.

RESULTS

Among these, 42 patients were HFrEF duration of <1 year and 47 patients were ≥1 year. The mean difference of QRS duration was lesser in the <1-year group than in the ≥1-year group (-2.3 msec vs 6.3 msec; P = .029). However, the mean difference of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was higher in the ≥1-year group (13.8% vs 5.8%; P = .008). After adjusting for patient demographics and clinical characteristics, the ≥1-year group had a significantly prolonged QRS duration (coefficient = 11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.3-21.7) and an unfavorable LVEF recovery (coefficient = -10.3; 95% CI -14.5 to -6.1) compared with the <1-year group.

CONCLUSION

Prolonged QRS durations and unfavorable LVEF recoveries after sacubitril/valsartan therapy were observed in patients with HFrEF duration of ≥1 year. Earlier diagnosis of HFrEF and appropriate medication treatment may be beneficial in the improvement of QRS duration and LVEF recovery.

Rationale and design of a multi-center, prospective randomized controlled trial on the effects of sacubitril-valsartan versus enalapril on left ventricular remodeling in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: The PERI-STEMI study

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril-valsartan has been recommended as one of the first-line therapies in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. However, whether ARNI could benefit patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) by improving left ventricular (LV) remodeling remains unknown. The primary objective of the PERI-STEMI trial is to assess whether sacubitril-valsartan is more effective in preventing adverse LV remodeling for patients with STEMI than enalapril.

HYPOTHESIS

We hypothesize that sacubitril/valsartan is superior to enalapril in preventing adverse LV remodeling evaluated by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging at the 6-month follow-up.

METHODS

PERI-STEMI is an investigator-initiated, prospective, multi-center, randomized, open-label, superiority trial with blinded evaluation of outcomes. A total of 376 first-time STEMI patients with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) within 12 h after symptom onset will be randomized to sacubitril-valsartan or enalapril treatment. All the patients will receive a baseline cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) examination at 4-7 days post-PPCI. The primary endpoint is the change of indexed LV mass at the 6-month follow-up CMR.

RESULTS

Enrollment of the first patient is planned in November 2021. Recruitment is anticipated to last for 12-18 months and patients will be followed for 5 years after randomization. The study is expected to complete in June 2027.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the PERI-STEMI trial are expected to provide CMR evidence on whether ARNI could benefit patients with STEMI, so as to facilitate the strategy of CMR-based risk stratification and therapy selection for these patients. PERI-STEMI is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04912167).

Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Ischemic versus Non-Ischemic Cardiomyopathy after Angiotensin-Neprilysin Inhibition Therapy

Background: The angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) decreases cardiovascular mortality in patients with chronic heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Data regarding the impact of ARNI on the outcome in HFrEF patients according to heart failure etiology are limited. Methods and results: One hundred twenty-one consecutive patients with HFrEF from the years 2016 to 2017 were included at the Medical Centre Mannheim Heidelberg University and treated with ARNI according to the current guidelines. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was numerically improved during the treatment with ARNI in both patient groups, that with ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 61) (ICMP), and that with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (n = 60) (NICMP); p = 0.25. Consistent with this data, the NT-proBNP decreased in both groups, more commonly in the NICMP patient group. In addition, the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and creatinine changed before and after the treatment with ARNI in both groups. In a one-year follow-up, the rate of ventricular tachyarrhythmias (ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation) tended to be higher in the ICMP group compared with the NICMP group (ICMP 38.71% vs. NICMP 17.24%; p = 0.07). The rate of one-year all-cause mortality was similar in both groups (ICMP 6.5% vs. NICMP 6.6%; log-rank = 0.9947). Conclusions: This study shows that, although the treatment with ARNI improves the LVEF in ICMP and NICMP patients, the risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias remains higher in ICMP patients in comparison with NICMP patients. Renal function is improved in the NICMP group after the treatment. Long-term mortality is similar over a one-year follow-up.

Effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan Combined with Dapagliflozin on Long-Term Cardiac Mortality in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

The angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor dapagliflozin have been shown to reduce rehospitalization and cardiac mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We aimed to compare the long-term cardiac and all-cause mortality of ARNI and dapagliflozin combination therapy against ARNI monotherapy in patients with HFrEF. This retrospective study involved 244 patients with HF with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-IV symptoms and ejection fraction ≤40%. The patients were divided into 2 groups: ARNI monotherapy and ARNI+dapagliflozin. Median follow-up was 2.5 (.16-3.72) years. One hundred and seventy-five (71.7%) patients were male, and the mean age was 65.9 (SD, 10.2) years. Long-term cardiac mortality rates were significantly lower in the ARNI+dapagliflozin group (7.4%) than in the ARNI monotherapy group (19.5%) (P = .01). Dapagliflozin [Hazard Ratio (HR) [95% Confidence Interval (CI)] = .29 [.10-.77]; P = .014] and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) [HR (95% CI) = .89 (.85-.93); P < .001] were found to be independent predictors of cardiac mortality. Our study showed a significant reduction in cardiac mortality with ARNI and dapagliflozin combination therapy compared with ARNI monotherapy.

ANMCO POSITION PAPER: Use of sacubitril/valsartan in hospitalized patients with acute heart failure

Sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) has been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization and improve symptoms in chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction compared with enalapril. After 7 years since the publication of the results of PARADIGM-HF, further insight has been gained with potential new indications. Two prospective randomized multicentre studies (PIONEER-HF and TRANSITION) in patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF) have shown an improved clinical outcome and biomarker profile as compared with enalapril, and good tolerability, safety, and feasibility of initiating in-hospital administration of S/V. Furthermore, some studies have highlighted the favourable effects of S/V in attenuating adverse myocardial remodelling, supporting an early benefit after treatment. Observational data from non-randomized studies in AHF report that in-hospital and pre-discharge prescription of evidence-based drugs associated with better survival still remain suboptimal. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic has also negatively impacted on outpatient activities. Therefore, hospitalization, a real crossroad in the history of heart failure, must become a management and therapeutic opportunity for our patients. The objective of this ANMCO position paper is to encourage and facilitate early S/V administration in stabilized patients during hospitalization after an AHF episode, with the aim of improving care efficiency and clinical outcome.

Cyclic GMP modulating drugs in cardiovascular diseases: Mechanism-based network pharmacology

Mechanism-based therapy centred on the molecular understanding of disease-causing pathways in a given patient is still the exception rather than the rule in medicine, even in cardiology. However, recent successful drug developments centred around the second messenger cyclic guanosine-3′-5′-monophosphate (cGMP), which is regulating a number of cardiovascular disease modulating pathways, are about to provide novel targets for such a personalized cardiovascular therapy. Whether cGMP breakdown is inhibited or cGMP synthesis is stimulated via guanylyl cyclases or their upstream regulators in different cardiovascular disease phenotypes, the outcomes seem to be so far uniformly protective. Thus, a network of cGMP-modulating drugs has evolved that act in a mechanism-based, possibly causal manner in a number of cardiac conditions. What remains a challenge is the detection of cGMPopathy endotypes amongst cardiovascular disease phenotypes. Here, we review the growing clinical relevance of cGMP and provide a glimpse into the future on how drugs interfering with this pathway may change how we treat and diagnose cardiovascular diseases altogether.

Effects of sacubitril/valsartan on clinical symptoms, echocardiographic parameters, and outcomes in HFrEF and HFmrEF patients with coronary heart disease and chronic kidney disease

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) on the clinical symptoms, echocardiographic parameters, and outcomes (cardiovascular death and hospitalization) in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) patients with coronary heart disease and chronic kidney disease.

METHOD

A retrospective observational study was conducted from January 2018 to May 2019, with a follow-up period of 95.4 ± 57.8 days (8 months). Data from 127 patients were included.

RESULTS

A statistically significant increase of 68.8% was observed in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in HFrEF patients compared to that in HFmrEF patients, with an increase of 27.2% at 8 months of follow-up. Sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced left ventricular end-systolic volumes (LVESV) in HFrEF patients unlike in HFmrEF patients. The decrease in LVESV was 28.8% in HFrEF patients and 17.1% in HFmrEF patients. A significant reduction in the prevalence of severe secondary mitral regurgitation (EROA > 0.4 cm²) was observed in HFrEF compared to that in HFmrEF patients with the use of sacubitril/valsartan. A reduction of 15.6% was observed in HFrEF patients, whereas a reduction of 7.1% was observed in HFmrEF patients. Improvement in functional classification (NYHA) was observed during follow-up. The prevalence of (NYHA III) reduced from 50% to 15.7% in HFrEF patients, whereas a reduction from 21.1% to 8.8% was observed in HFmrEF patients. There was a significant reduction in NT-proBNP in HFrEF patients compared to that in HFmrEF patients. A reduction of 52% was observed in HFrEF patients, whereas a reduction of 28.7% was observed in HFmrEF pateints. Sacubitril/valsartan reduced primary endpoint events in both groups. The prevalence of HF-related hospitalization was higher in HFrEF than in HFmrEF patients: 12.1% vs 7.5%, respectively. The prevalence of CV death in HFrEF vs HFmrEF patients was 3.7% vs 0.5%, respectively. Cardiovascular (CV) death was higher in patients with atrial fibrillation in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Sacubitril/valsartan significantly improved morphofunctional remodeling parameters and clinical symptoms in HFrEF patients than in HFmrEF patients.

Evaluation of pathophysiological relationships between renin-angiotensin and ACE-ACE2 systems in cardiovascular disorders: from theory to routine clinical practice in patients with heart failure

Despite the progressive improvements in diagnosis and therapy during the first 20 years of this century, the morbidity and mortality of patients with heart failure (HF) remain high, resulting in an enormous health and economic burden. Only a further improvement in understanding the pathophysiological mechanisms related to the development of cardiac injury and dysfunction can allow more innovative and personalized approaches to HF management. The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) has a critical role in cardiovascular physiology by regulating blood pressure and electrolyte balance. The RAS is mainly regulated by both angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) and type 2 angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE2). However, the balance between the various peptides and peptidases constituting the RAS/ACE pathway remains in great part unraveled in patients with HF. This review summarizes the role of the RAS/ACE axis in cardiac physiology and HF pathophysiology as well as some analytical issues relevant to the clinical and laboratory assessment of inter-relationships between these two systems. There is evidence that RAS peptides represent a dynamic network of peptides, which are altered in different HF states and influenced by medical therapy. However, the mechanisms of signal transduction have not been fully elucidated under physiological and pathophysiological conditions. Further investigations are necessary to explore novel molecular mechanisms related to the RAS, which will provide alternative therapeutic agents. Moreover, monitoring the circulating levels of active RAS peptides in HF patients may enable a personalized approach by facilitating assessment of the pathophysiological status of several cardiovascular diseases and thus better selection of therapies for HF patients.

Myocardial fibrosis combined with NT-proBNP improves the accuracy of survival prediction in ADHF patients

Background

Soluble suppression of tumorigenesis-2 (sST2), Procollagen Type III N-Terminal Peptid (PIIINP) and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) have been verified their role in predicting survival in acutely decompensated heart failure (ADHF). However, whether their combination could improve more specific and sensitive prognostic information than NT-proBNP alone remains unclear.

Methods

This was a prospective study, in which 217 ADHF patients at admission were enrolled from November 2018 and August 2019 (mean age 66.18 years ± 13.60, 63.98% male). The blood samples were collected to measure the concentrations of NT-proBNP, sST2 and PIIINP in the first 24 h of hospitalizations. All-cause mortality was registered for all patients after they were discharge over a median period of 339 days.

Results

In univariate Cox analysis, the three biomarkers were predictive of short-term mortality of ADHF patients. After adjusted for some clinical variables including age, admission systolic blood pressure, peripheral edema on admission, history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, admission sodium < 135 mmol/L, admission hemoglobin, NT-proBNP, sST2 and PIIINP was significantly associated with the poor outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14–1.53, P < 0.01; HR 1.21, 95% CI 1.03–1.43, P = 0.020; HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.08–1.81, P = 0.011). After added with Log2 PIIINP, but not Log2 sST2, the area under the curves (AUC) in the model of clinical variables and Log2 NT-proBNP could increase from 0.79 to 0.85 (95% CI 0.0071–0.10, P = 0.024). Furthermore, compared with the model of clinical variables, Log2 NT-proBNP, the improvement in the prognostic model of clinical variables, Log2 NT-proBNP and Log2 PIIINP had statistical significance [net reclassification improvement (NRI) 0.31, P = 0.018; integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) 0.068, P < 0.01].

Conclusions

NT-proBNP, sST2 and PIIINP are independent prognostic factors for all-cause mortality in ADHF patients. Furthermore, the combination of NT-proBNP and PIIINP may provide incremental prognostic value over NT-proBNP in the survival of ADHF patients.

Association Between Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibition, Cardiovascular Biomarkers, and Cardiac Remodeling in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) treatment is associated with reverse cardiac remodeling and reductions in biomarkers reflecting ventricular wall stress and myocardial injury, such as NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide), hs-cTnT (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T), and soluble suppressor of tumorigenicity 2 (sST2). How longitudinal changes in these biomarkers analyzed collectively are associated with cardiac remodeling in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction treated with S/V is uncertain.

METHODS

In a prospective study of S/V in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, this prespecified exploratory analysis included patients with serially collected biomarkers and echocardiographic measures of cardiac remodeling through 12 months of treatment. A multivariate latent growth curve model assessed associations between simultaneous changes in biomarkers and left ventricular ejection fraction and left atrial volume index.

RESULTS

Seven hundred fifteen out of 794 total study participants were included (mean age 65 years, 73% male). Mean baseline left ventricular ejection fraction and left atrial volume index were 29% and 40 mL/m², respectively. Adjusted geometric mean baseline concentrations for biomarkers included NT-proBNP of 649 pg/mL, hs-cTnT of 15.9 ng/L, and sST2 of 24.7 ng/mL. Following initiation of S/V, circulating concentrations of NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, and sST2 significantly decreased within 30 days and remained significantly different than baseline at all subsequent timepoints. From baseline to month 12, decreases in adjusted biomarker concentrations averaged -27.9% (95% CI, -35.1% to -20.7%; P<0.001) for NT-proBNP; -6.7% (95% CI, -8.8% to -4.7%; P<0.001) for hs-cTnT; and -1.6% (95% CI, -2.9% to -0.4%; P<0.001) for sST2. NT-proBNP concentrations were predictive of later changes in hs-cTnT. The magnitude of reductions in NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT concentrations associated with improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction and left atrial volume index. There was no association between changes in sST2 and changes in other measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Following initiation of S/V, NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, and sST2 concentrations decreased significantly. Longitudinal changes in NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT together associated with left atrial and left ventricular reverse remodeling. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02887183.

The year in cardiology: heart failure

Collapse

Dynamics of growth differentiation factor 15 in acute heart failure

Aims

Risk stratification in acute heart failure (HF) patients can help to decide therapies and time for discharge. The potential of growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF‐15) in HF has been previously shown. We aimed to study the importance of GDF‐15‐level variations in acute HF patients.

Methods and results

We retrospectively evaluated a cohort of patients hospitalized due to acute HF. GDF‐15 was measured both at admission and on the discharge day. Patients were followed‐up during a 3 year period. The endpoint under analysis was all‐cause mortality. GDF‐15 variation is equal to [(admission GDF‐15 − discharge GDF‐15)∕admission GDF‐15] × 100. Variation was categorized in levels of increase or decrease of GDF‐15. Patients were cross‐classified according to admission and discharge GDF‐15 cut‐off points. A Cox regression analysis was used to assess the prognostic impact of GDF‐15 variation and the impact of both admission and discharge GDF‐15 according to the cross‐classification. We studied a group of 249 patients with high co‐morbidity burden. Eighty‐one patients died at 1 year and 147 within 3 years. There was a modest decrease in GDF‐15 during hospitalization from a median value of 4087 to 3671 ng/mL (P = 0.02). No association existed between GDF‐15 variation and mortality. In multivariate analysis, patients with admission GDF‐15 ≥ 3500 ng/mL and discharge GDF‐15 ≥ 3000 ng/mL had a significantly higher 1 year death risk when compared with the remaining—hazard ratio = 2.59 (95% confidence interval: 1.41–4.76)—and a 3 year 1.76 (95% confidence interval: 1.08–2.87) higher death risk compared with those with both values below the cut‐off.

Conclusions

Growth differentiation factor 15 decreased during an acute HF hospitalization, but its variation had no prognostic implications. The knowledge of both admission and discharge GDF‐15 added meaningful information to patients' risk stratification.

Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibition in patients with acute decompensated heart failure: an expert consensus position paper

The short-term mortality and rehospitalization rates after admission for acute heart failure (AHF) remain high, despite the high level of adherence to contemporary practice guidelines. Observational data from non-randomized studies in AHF strongly support the in-hospital administration of oral evidence-based modifying chronic heart failure (HF) medications (i.e., b-blockers, ACE inhibitors, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists) to reduce morbidity and mortality. Interestingly, a well-designed prospective randomized multicenter study (PIONEER-HF) showed an improved clinical outcome and stress/injury biomarker profile after in-hospital administration of sacubitril/valsartan (sac/val) as compared to enalapril, in hemodynamically stable patients with AHF. However, sac/val implementation during hospitalization remains suboptimal due to the lack of an integrated individualized plan or well-defined appropriateness criteria for transition to oral therapies, an absence of specific guidelines regarding dose selection and the up-titration process, and uncertainty regarding patient eligibility.

In the present expert consensus position paper, clinical practical recommendations are proposed, together with an action plan algorithm, to encourage and facilitate sac/val administration during hospitalization after an AHF episode with the aim of improving efficiencies of care and resource utilization.

CRD-733, a Novel PDE9 (Phosphodiesterase 9) Inhibitor, Reverses Pressure Overload-Induced Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Augmentation of NP (natriuretic peptide) receptor and cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) signaling has emerged as a therapeutic strategy in heart failure (HF). cGMP-specific PDE9 (phosphodiesterase 9) inhibition increases cGMP signaling and attenuates stress-induced hypertrophic heart disease in preclinical studies. A novel cGMP-specific PDE9 inhibitor, CRD-733, is currently being advanced in human clinical studies. Here, we explore the effects of chronic PDE9 inhibition with CRD-733 in the mouse transverse aortic constriction pressure overload HF model.

METHODS

Adult male C57BL/6J mice were subjected to transverse aortic constriction and developed significant left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy after 7 days (P<0.001). Mice then received daily treatment with CRD-733 (600 mg/kg per day; n=10) or vehicle (n=17), alongside sham-operated controls (n=10).

RESULTS

CRD-733 treatment reversed existing LV hypertrophy compared with vehicle (P<0.001), significantly improved LV ejection fraction (P=0.009), and attenuated left atrial dilation (P<0.001), as assessed by serial echocardiography. CRD-733 prevented elevations in LV end diastolic pressures (P=0.037) compared with vehicle, while lung weights, a surrogate for pulmonary edema, were reduced to sham levels. Chronic CRD-733 treatment increased plasma cGMP levels compared with vehicle (P<0.001), alongside increased phosphorylation of Ser²⁷³ of cardiac myosin binding protein-C, a cGMP-dependent protein kinase I phosphorylation site.

CONCLUSIONS

The PDE9 inhibitor, CRD-733, improves key hallmarks of HF including LV hypertrophy, LV dysfunction, left atrial dilation, and pulmonary edema after pressure overload in the mouse transverse aortic constriction HF model. Additionally, elevated plasma cGMP may be used as a biomarker of target engagement. These findings support future investigation into the therapeutic potential of CRD-733 in human HF.

Using Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Evaluate Patients with Chest Pain in the Emergency Department

Chest pain is one of the most common presenting symptoms in the emergency department (ED). Among patients with abnormal troponins, it is imperative to quickly and accurately distinguish type 1 acute myocardial infarction (AMI) from other etiologies of myocardial injury. Although high-sensitivity troponin assays introduced a high negative predictive value for AMI, they have exposed the need for diagnostic modalities that can determine the etiology of acute myocardial injury. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is an effective tool to risk stratifying chest pain among patients in the ED. CMR is non-invasive and has a lower cost of care and shorter length of stay compared to those of invasive coronary angiography. It also provides detailed information on cardiac morphology, function, tissue edema, and location and pattern of tissue damage that can help to differentiate many etiologies of cardiac injury. CMR is particularly useful to distinguish chest pain due to type 1 AMI versus supply-demand mismatch due to acute cardiac noncoronary artery disease. A detailed review of the literature has shown that CMR with stress testing is safe to use in patients presenting to the ED with chest pain, with or without abnormal troponins. CMR is a useful, safe, economical, and effective alternative to the traditional diagnostic tools that are typically used in this patient population. It is a practical tool to risk-stratify patients with possible cardiac pathology and to clarify diagnosis without invasive testing.

β 3-Adrenergic Receptor Agonist Prevents Diastolic Dysfunction in an Angiotensin II-Induced Cardiomyopathy Mouse Model

β3-Adrenergic receptor expression is enhanced in the failing heart, but its functional effects are unclear. We tested the hypothesis that a β3-agonist improves left ventricular (LV) performance in heart failure. We examined the chronic effects of a β3-agonist in the angiotensin II (Ang II)-induced cardiomyopathy mouse model. C57BL/6J mice were treated with Ang II alone or Ang II + BRL 37344 (β3-agonist, BRL) for 4 weeks. Systolic blood pressure in conscious mice was significantly elevated in Ang II and Ang II + BRL mice compared with control mice. Heart rate was not different among the three groups. Systolic performance parameters that were measured by echocardiography and an LV catheter were similar among the groups. LV end-diastolic pressure and end-diastolic pressure-volume relationships were higher in Ang II mice compared with control mice. However, the increase in these parameters was prevented in Ang II + BRL mice, which suggested improvement in myocardial stiffness by BRL. Pathologic analysis showed that LV hypertrophy was induced in Ang II mice and failed to be prevented by BRL. However, increased collagen I/III synthesis, cardiac fibrosis, and lung congestion observed in Ang II mice were inhibited by BRL treatment. The cardioprotective benefits of BRL were associated with downregulation of transforming growth factor-β1 expression and phosphorylated-Smad2/3. Chronic infusion of a β3-agonist has a beneficial effect on LV diastolic function independent of blood pressure in the Ang II-induced cardiomyopathy mouse model. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Chronic infusion of a β3-adrenergic receptor agonist attenuates cardiac fibrosis and improves diastolic dysfunction independently of blood pressure in an angiotensin II-induced hypertensive mouse model. This drug might be an effective treatment of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

Cardiovascular biomarkers in patients with acute decompensated heart failure randomized to sacubitril-valsartan or enalapril in the PIONEER-HF trial

AIMS

Circulating high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hsTn) and soluble ST2 (sST2) reflect myocardial stress in patients with heart failure (HF). Production of cyclic guanosine 3'5' monophosphate (cGMP) in response to activation of natriuretic peptide receptors reduces cardiac afterload and preload. We assessed the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on these biomarkers in patients with reduced ejection fraction and acute decompensated HF (ADHF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

PIONEER-HF was a randomized, double-blind trial of sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril in hospitalized patients with ADHF following haemodynamic stabilization. We measured circulating hsTnT, sST2, and urinary cGMP at baseline, 1, 2 (sST2, cGMP), 4, and 8 weeks (n = 694 with all baseline biomarkers). Ratios of geometric means (timepoint/baseline) were determined and compared as a ratio for sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril. Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan led to a significantly greater decline in hsTnT and sST2. This effect emerged as early as 1 week for sST2 and was significant for both at 4 weeks with a 16% greater reduction in hsTnT (P < 0.001) and 9% greater reduction in sST2 (P = 0.0033). Serial urinary cGMP increased with sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril (P < 0.001, 1 week). The significant differences between treatment groups for each biomarker were sustained at 8 weeks. In an exploratory multivariable-adjusted analysis of cardiovascular death or HF-rehospitalization, the concentrations of hsTnT, sST2 at week 1 were significantly associated with subsequent outcome.

CONCLUSION

Biomarkers of myocardial stress are elevated in patients with ADHF and associated with outcome. Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan reduces myocardial injury and haemodynamic stress as reflected by biomarkers, with an onset that is apparent within 1-4 weeks.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT02554890 clinical.trials.gov.

The Rationale for Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitors in a Multi-Targeted Therapeutic Approach to COVID-19

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) disease (COVID-19) determines the angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) down-regulation and related decrease in angiotensin II degradation. Both these events trigger “cytokine storm” leading to acute lung and cardiovascular injury. A selective therapy for COVID-19 has not yet been identified. Clinical trials with remdesivir gave discordant results. Thus, healthcare systems have focused on “multi-targeted” therapeutic strategies aiming at relieving systemic inflammation and thrombotic complications. No randomized clinical trial has demonstrated the efficacy of renin angiotensin system antagonists in reducing inflammation related to COVID-19. Dexamethasone and tocilizumab showed encouraging data, but their use needs to be further validated. The still-controversial efficacy of these treatments highlighted the importance of organ injury prevention in COVID-19. Neprilysin (NEP) might be an interesting target for this purpose. NEP expression is increased by cytokines on lung fibroblasts surface. NEP activity is elevated in acute respiratory distress syndrome and it is conceivable that it is also high in COVID-19. NEP is implicated in the degradation of natriuretic peptides, bradykinin, substance P, adrenomedullin, and apelin that account for prevention of organ injury. Thus, NEP/angiotensin receptor type 1 (AT1R) inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan (SAC/VAL) may increase levels of these molecules and block AT1Rs required for ACE2 endocytosis in SARS-CoV-2 infection. Moreover, SAC/VAL has a positive impact on acute heart failure that is very frequently observed in deceased COVID-19 patients. The current review aims to summarize actual therapeutic strategies for COVID-19 and to examine the data supporting the potential benefits of SAC/VAL in COVID-19 treatment.

The Implication of Cardiac Injury Score on In-hospital Mortality of Coronavirus Disease 2019

BACKGROUNDS

The severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread worldwide. Cardiac injury after SARS-CoV-2 infection is a major concern. The present study investigated impact of the biomarkers indicating cardiac injury in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on patients' outcomes.

METHODS

This study enrolled patients who were confirmed to have COVID-19 and admitted at a tertiary university referral hospital between February 19, 2020 and March 15, 2020. Cardiac injury was defined as an abnormality in one of the following result markers: 1) myocardial damage marker (creatine kinase-MB or troponin-I), 2) heart failure marker (N-terminal-pro B-type natriuretic peptide), and 3) electrical abnormality marker (electrocardiography). The relationship between each cardiac injury marker and mortality was evaluated. Survival analysis of mortality according to the scoring by numbers of cardiac injury markers was also performed.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients with COVID-19 were enrolled. Twenty-two patients (57.9%) had at least one of cardiac injury markers. The patients with cardiac injuries were older (69.6 ± 14.9 vs. 58.6 ± 13.9 years old, P = 0.026), and were more male (59.1% vs. 18.8%, P = 0.013). They showed lower initial oxygen saturation (92.8 vs. 97.1%, P = 0.002) and a trend toward higher mortality (27.3 vs. 6.3%, P = 0.099). The increased number of cardiac injury markers was significantly related to a higher incidence of in-hospital mortality which was also evidenced by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

The increased number of cardiac injury markers is related to in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19.

Study of three novel biomarkers, MR-proADM, midkine, and stromelysin2, and peripheral atherosclerosis in a Chinese Han population: A case-control study

Midregional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proADM), midkine, and stromelysin2 (ST2) are novel cardiac biomarkers associated with heart failure and atherosclerotic diseases like stable ischemic disease and acute coronary syndrome. The potential association between these three biomarkers and peripheral artery disease (PAD) remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the correlation between these three biomarkers and their association with PAD in the Chinese Han population. This study included 224 patients suspected of having coronary artery disease (CAD). All subjects underwent coronary angiography and carotid and subclavian ultrasound assessment for detection of coronary and peripheral atherosclerosis and were divided into two groups according to whether they had PAD or not. Pearson’s correlation coefficient r was calculated, and multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to represent the associations of these biomarkers and PAD. The study included 133 patients with PAD and 91 non-PAD controls and these two groups had similar values for age, ST2, hematocrit, hemoglobin, red blood cell counts, creatinine and CAD ratio, smoking, and type 2 diabetes (all p > 0.05). Compared with non-PAD controls, patients with PAD had lower levels of MR-proADM and midkine and higher levels of TC, LDL-C, and fasting blood sugar (FBS) (all p < 0.05). MR-proADM was positively and ST2 negatively correlated with midkine (all p < 0.05). Compared with females, male patients had higher values of MR-proADM ( p < 0.05) and similar levels of ST2 and midkine (all p > 0.05). Multivariable regression analysis identified FBS as a risk predictor (OR: 1.163, 95% CI: 1.108–1.401, p = 0.014) and MR-proADM as a protective factor (OR: 0.720, 95% CI: 0.529–0.920, p = 0.037) of PAD. Three novel biomarkers, MR-proADM, midkine, and ST2, are internally related, and MR-proADM is gender-specific and a protective factor of peripheral atherosclerosis in the Chinese Han population studied. Clinical Trial: ChiCTR-DDD-17013908

The Rationale of Neprilysin Inhibition in Prevention of Myocardial Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury during ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

During the last three decades, timely myocardial reperfusion using either thrombolytic therapy or primary percutaneous intervention (pPCI) has allowed amazing improvements in outcomes with a more than halving in 1-year ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) mortality. However, mortality and left ventricle (LV) remodeling remain substantial in these patients. As such, novel therapeutic interventions are required to reduce myocardial infarction size, preserve LV systolic function, and improve survival in reperfused-STEMI patients. Myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury (MIRI) prevention represents the main goal to reach in order to reduce STEMI mortality. There is currently no effective therapy for MIRI prevention in STEMI patients. A significant reason for the weak and inconsistent results obtained in this field may be the presence of multiple, partially redundant, mechanisms of cell death during ischemia-reperfusion, whose relative importance may depend on the conditions. Therefore, it is always more recognized that it is important to consider a "multi-targeted cardioprotective therapy", defined as an additive or synergistic cardioprotective agents or interventions directed to distinct targets with different timing of application (before, during, or after pPCI). Given that some neprilysin (NEP) substrates (natriuretic peptides, angiotensin II, bradykinin, apelins, substance P, and adrenomedullin) exert a cardioprotective effect against ischemia-reperfusion injury, it is conceivable that antagonism of proteolytic activity by this enzyme may be considered in a multi-targeted strategy for MIRI prevention. In this review, by starting from main pathophysiological mechanisms promoting MIRI, we discuss cardioprotective effects of NEP substrates and the potential benefit of NEP pharmacological inhibition in MIRI prevention.

NT-proBNP Response to Sacubitril/Valsartan in Hospitalized Heart Failure Patients With Reduced Ejection Fraction: TRANSITION Study

OBJECTIVES

This study examined the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels and determined patient characteristics associated with favorable NT-proBNP reduction response.

BACKGROUND

NT-proBNP levels reflect cardiac wall stress and predict event risk in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF).

METHODS

Post-hoc analysis of the TRANSITION (Comparison of Pre- and Post-discharge Initiation of Sacubitril/Valsartan Therapy in HFrEF Patients After an Acute Decompensation Event) study, including stabilized ADHF patients with reduced ejection fraction, randomized to open-label sacubitril/valsartan initiation in-hospital (pre-discharge) versus post-discharge. NT-proBNP was measured at randomization (baseline), discharge, and 4 and 10 weeks post-randomization. A favorable NT-proBNP response was defined as reduction to ≤1,000 pg/ml or >30% from baseline.

RESULTS

In patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan in-hospital, NT-proBNP was reduced by 28% at discharge, with 46% of patients obtaining favorable NT-proBNP reduction response compared with a 4% reduction and 18% favorable response rate in patients initiated post-discharge (p < 0.001). NT-proBNP was reduced similarly in patients initiating sacubitril/valsartan pre- and post-discharge (reduction at 4 weeks: 25%/22%; 10 weeks: 38%/34%) with comparable favorable response rates (46%/42% and 51%/48% at 4 and 10 weeks, respectively). NT-proBNP favorable response at 4 weeks was associated with lower risk of first heart failure (HF) rehospitalization or cardiovascular death through 26 weeks (hazard ratio: 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38 to 0.86; p = 0.007). Predictors of a favorable response at 4 weeks were starting dose ≥49/51 mg twice daily, higher baseline NT-proBNP, lower baseline serum creatinine, de novo HF, no atrial fibrillation, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-naive or angiotensin receptor blocker-naive, and no prior myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital initiation of sacubitril/valsartan produced rapid reductions in NT-proBNP, statistically significant at discharge. A favorable NT-proBNP response over time was associated with a better prognosis and predicted by higher starting dose and predisposing clinical profile. (Comparison of Pre- and Post-discharge Initiation of LCZ696 Therapy in HFrEF Patients After an Acute Decompensation Event [TRANSITION]; NCT02661217).

Effect of Sacubitril/Valsartan on Biomarkers of Extracellular Matrix Regulation in Patients With HFpEF

BACKGROUND

Myocardial fibrosis may contribute to the pathophysiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Given the biochemical targets of sacubitril/valsartan, this study hypothesized that circulating biomarkers reflecting the mechanisms that determine extracellular matrix homeostasis are altered by sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan alone.

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on biomarkers of extracellular matrix homeostasis and the association between biomarkers and the primary endpoint (total heart failure hospitalizations and cardiovascular death).

METHODS

N-terminal propeptide of collagen I and III, tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase 1, carboxyl-terminal telopeptide of collagen type I, and soluble ST2 were measured at baseline (n = 1,135) and 16 (n = 1,113) and 48 weeks (n = 1,016) after randomization. The effects of sacubitril/valsartan on these biomarkers were compared with those of valsartan alone. Baseline biomarker values and changes from baseline to 16 weeks were related to primary endpoint.

RESULTS

At baseline, all 5 biomarkers were higher than published referent control values. Sixteen weeks after randomization, sacubitril/valsartan decreased tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase 1 by 8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6% to 10%; p < 0.001), soluble ST2 by 4% (95% CI: 1% to 7%; p = 0.002), and N-terminal propeptide of collagen III by 3% (95% CI: 0% to 6%; p = 0.04) and increased carboxyl-terminal telopeptide of collagen type I by 4% (95% CI: 1% to 8%; p = 0.02) compared with valsartan alone, consistently in men and women and patients with left ventricular ejection fraction above or below the median of 57%. Higher levels of tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase 1 and soluble ST2 at baseline and increases in these markers at 16 weeks were associated with higher primary endpoint event rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Biomarkers reflecting extracellular matrix homeostasis are elevated in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, favorably altered by sacubitril/valsartan, and have important prognostic value. (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ARB Global Outcomes in HF With Preserved Ejection Fraction [PARAGON-HF]; NCT01920711).

Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sacubitril-Valsartan in Heart Failure: Emerging Clinical Data

One of the defining features of heart failure (HF) is neurohormonal activation. The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system (RAAS) and sympathetic nervous system (SNS) cause vasoconstriction and fluid retention and, in response, the secretion of natriuretic peptides (NPs) from volume and pressure-overloaded myocardium promotes vasodilation and diuresis. Inhibition of the RAAS with either angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) has been the cornerstone of medical treatment for HF with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but, until recently, it was unclear how the beneficial effects of NPs may be augmented in patients with HF. Neprilysin, a metalloproteinase widely distributed throughout the body, plays a role in degrading the gross excess of circulating NPs in patients with HF. Early studies of neprilysin inhibition suggested possible physiological benefits. In 2014, the PARADIGM-HF trial found that sacubitril-valsartan, a combination of the ARB valsartan, and the neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril, was superior to enalapril in patients with HFrEF, reducing the relative risk of cardiovascular (CV) death or first hospitalisation with HF by 20%. Almost half of the patients with HF symptoms have a “preserved” ejection fraction (HFpEF); however, the PARAGON-HF study found that sacubitril-valsartan in patients with LVEF ≥45% had no effect on CV death or first and recurrent hospitalisations with HF compared to valsartan. Guidelines across the world have changed to include sacubitril-valsartan for patients with HFrEF yet, nearly 6 years after PARADIGM-HF, there is still uncertainty as to when and in whom sacubitril-valsartan should be started. Furthermore, there may yet be subsets of patients with HFpEF who might benefit from treatment with sacubitril-valsartan. This review will describe the mechanisms behind the outcome benefit of sacubitril-valsartan in patients with HFrEF and to consider its future role in the management of patients with HF.

Clinical and Prognostic Significance of sST2 in Heart Failure: JACC Review Topic of the Week

Soluble suppression of tumorigenesis-2 (sST2) is released in response to vascular congestion and inflammatory and pro-fibrotic stimuli, and is a strong, independent predictor of mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients with acute or chronic HF. sST2 meets 2 fundamental criteria for clinically useful biomarkers: accurate, repeated measurements are available at a reasonable cost, and the biomarker provides information not already available from a careful clinical assessment. In particular, the prognostic value of sST2 is additive to natriuretic peptides and (in the case of chronic HF) to high-sensitivity troponin T. Nevertheless, the need for a multibiomarker approach to risk stratification and the role of sST2 as a guide to therapy decision-making remain to be established. Four years after a consensus document on sST2, and following major advances in the comprehension of the clinical value of this biomarker, the authors felt it worthwhile to reappraise current knowledge on sST2 in HF.

Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor for the treatment of heart failure: a review of recent evidence

Heart failure (HF) is a growing health concern in aging societies worldwide. Sacubitril/valsartan is changing the real-world treatment in the whole spectrum of HF. The beginning was the PARADIGM-HF trial published in 2014, which demonstrated the beneficial effects of inhibiting natriuretic peptide breakdown in combination with hindering the renin-angiotensin system in HF patients with a reduced ejection fraction. Subsequent large-scale randomized trials have evaluated angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor in HF patients with acute decompensation or with preserved ejection fraction. The post hoc analyses are being conducted as well. This review summarizes the recent evidence of sacubitril/ valsartan regarding patient-centered outcomes, based on randomized controlled trials and their associated studies.

Representativeness of the PIONEER-HF Clinical Trial Population in Patients Hospitalized With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction

Background:

In PIONEER-HF (Comparison of Sacubitril/Valsartan Versus Enalapril on Effect on NT-pro BNP in Patients Stabilized From an Acute Heart Failure Episode), the in-hospital initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) was well-tolerated and led to improved outcomes. We aim to determine the representativeness of the PIONEER-HF trial among patients hospitalized for ADHF using real-world data.

Methods:

The study population was derived from all patients discharged alive for ADHF in the Get With The Guidelines—HF registry from 2006 to 2018 with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF; all HFrEF with ADHF). We then determined the proportion of patients meeting PIONEER-HF eligibility criteria (PIONEER-HF eligible) and those meeting a set of limited eligibility criteria (actionable cohort). Rates of HF readmissions and all-cause mortality were then compared between the all HFrEF with ADHF, PIONEER-HF eligible, and actionable cohorts using linked Medicare claims data.

Results:

A total of 99 767 patients with HFrEF in Get With The Guidelines—HF were hospitalized for ADHF. PIONEER-HF inclusion criteria were met by 71 633 (71.8%) patients, and both inclusion and exclusion criteria were met by 20 704 (20.8%) patients. Further, 68 739 (68.9%) patients met the criteria for the actionable cohort. Among the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid—linked patients, the HF rehospitalization rate at 1 year was 35.1% (95% CI, 34.5–35.8) for all HFrEF with ADHF patients, 32.6% (95% CI, 31.3–33.9) for the PIONEER-HF eligible cohort, and 33.1% (95% CI, 32.3–33.9) for the actionable cohort. The 1-year all-cause mortality was 36.7% (95% CI, 36.1–7.4) for all HFrEF with ADHF patients, 31.6% (95% CI, 30.3–32.9) for the PIONEER-HF eligible cohort, and 32.2% (95% CI, 31.4–33.0) for the actionable cohort.

Conclusions:

Patient characteristics and clinical outcomes for patients eligible for PIONEER-HF only modestly differ when compared with those encountered in routine practice, suggesting that the in-hospital initiation of sacubitril/valsartan should be routinely considered for patients with HFrEF hospitalized for ADHF.

Sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction with end-stage of renal disease

Aims

Sacubitril/valsartan (SV) reduced heart failure hospitalization and cardiovascular mortality compared with enalapril in the Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ACE‐I to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure trial. However, this trial excluded patients with end stage of renal disease (ESRD); thus, the efficacy and safety of SV in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) with ESRD remains uncertain.

Methods and results

We retrospectively analysed the clinical and laboratory data of 501 HFrEF patients who administered with SV from March 2017 to April 2019 in a single tertiary university hospital. A total of 23 HFrEF patients with ESRD on dialysis [58.3% non‐ischaemic heart failure; left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF): 29.7 ± 4.4%] were included in this study. At baseline and follow‐up visit, we evaluated cardiovascular biomarkers such as high‐sensitive troponin T (hsTnT), soluble ST2 (sST2), echocardiographic parameters, and clinical and adverse events. The mean dose of SV was 90 ± 43 mg/day at baseline and 123 ± 62 mg/day at last follow‐up (follow‐up duration: median 132 days). The level of hsTnT was significantly reduced from 236.2 ± 355.3 to 97.0 ± 14.0 pg/mL (P = 0.002), and the sST2 level was significantly reduced from 40.4 ± 44.0 to 19.6 ± 14.1 ng/mL (P = 0.005). LVEF was significantly improved from 29.7 ± 4.4% to 40.8 ± 10.4% (P = 0.002). During the follow‐up, up‐titration, down‐titration, and maintenance of SV dosing were observed in 7 (30%), 5 (21.7%), and 11 patients (47.8%), respectively. SV down‐titration group had adverse events including symptomatic hypotension (systolic blood pressure <100 mmHg) (n = 4) and dizziness (n = 1), but they did not discontinue SV therapy.

Conclusions

We found that SV could safely reduce the hsTnT and sST2 levels and improve LVEF in HFrEF patients with ESRD. As far as we know, this is the first study to show the efficacy and safety of SV in HFrEF with ESRD on dialysis. Larger prospective, long‐term follow‐up study should be warranted.