Risk following hospitalization in stable chronic systolic heart failure

Physiological effects of ivabradine in heart failure and beyond

Ivabradine is a pharmacologic agent that inhibits the funny current responsible for determining heart rate in the sinoatrial node. Ivabradine's clinical potential has been investigated in the context of heart failure since it is associated with reduced myocardial oxygen demand, enhanced diastolic filling, stroke volume, and coronary perfusion time; however, it is yet to demonstrate definitive mortality benefit. Alternative effects of ivabradine include modulation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, sympathetic activation, and endothelial function. Here, we review key clinical trials informing the clinical use of ivabradine and explore opportunities for leveraging its potential pleiotropic effects in other diseases, including treatment of hyperadrenergic states and mitigating complications of COVID-19 infection.

Bridging the STRONG Gap: Call to Optimize Heart Failure Treatment After Hospitalization in Women and Men in Taiwan

The benefits of rapidly up-titrating evidence-based treatments following heart failure (HF) hospitalizations were demonstrated in the The Safety, Tolerability and Efficacy of Rapid Optimization, Helped by NT-proBNP Testing, of Heart Failure Therapies (STRONG-HF) trial and emphasized in contemporary HF guidelines. We aimed to assess up-titration patterns of guideline-directed medical treatments in the Taiwanese HF population. Combining data from the Taiwan Society of Cardiology - Heart Failure with reduced Ejection Fraction (TSOC-HFrEF) registry and the Treatment with Angiotensin Receptor neprilysin inhibitor for Taiwan Acute Heart Failure (TAROT-AHF) study cohort, we formed the "Taiwan real-world cohort". We compared these data with subgroups of patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% in the STRONG-HF trial. Patients in the Taiwan cohort exhibited similar blood pressure, heart rate and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide levels at discharge compared with those in the STRONG-HF trial. A higher proportion of patients in the STRONG-HF high-intensity care group received up-titrations compared with those in the usual care group and the Taiwan cohort. Composite all-cause mortality or HF hospitalization at 180 days for patients in the high-intensity care group, usual care group, and Taiwan cohort were 17.4%, 23.7%, and 31.9%, respectively, with differences largely contributed by HF hospitalization (10.1%, 17.9%, and 27.6%, respectively), whereas all-cause mortality rates were similar (11.0%, 9.6%, and 9.3%, respectively). Gender did not affect this trend. In conclusion, our data highlights a treatment gap between the STRONG-HF trial and real-world practices in Taiwan, urging prompt optimization of HF therapy.

Is it time to consider a "time-out" before primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator placement in currently or recently hospitalized older patients with heart failure?

BACKGROUND

Trajectories of mortality after primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement for older patients with heart failure during or soon after acute hospitalization have not been assessed.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare trajectories of mortality after primary prevention ICD placement during or soon after acute cardiac or non-cardiac hospitalization.

METHODS

We identified older patients with heart failure undergoing primary prevention ICD placement using 20% Medicare data (2008-2018). Placement settings were as follows: (1) Current-H-during current hospitalization, (2) Recent-H-within 90 days of hospitalization, or (3) Chronic stable. Hospitalization was categorized as cardiac vs non-cardiac. Interval mortality rates and hazard ratios (HRs) using Cox regression were estimated at 0-30, 31-90, and 91-365 days after ICD placement.

RESULTS

Of the 61,710 patients (mean age 76 years; 35% female; 85% white), 19% (11,947), 25% (15,147), and 56% (34,616) had ICDs in Current-H, Recent-H, and Chronic stable settings. Mortality rates (per 100 person-years) were highest during 0-30 days, with 38 (34-42) and 22 (19-24) for Current-H and Recent-H, which declined to 21 (20-22) and 16 (15-17) during 91-365 days, respectively. Compared to Chronic stable, HRs were highest during 0-30 days post-ICD placement (5.5 [4.5-6.8] for Current-H and 3.4 [2.8-4.2] for Recent-H) and decreased during 91-365 days (2.0 [1.8-2.1] for Current-H and 1.6 [1.5-1.7] for Recent-H). HR pattens were similar for cardiac and non-cardiac hospitalizations.

CONCLUSION

Primary prevention ICD placement during or soon after hospitalization for any reason was associated with worse mortality with diminishing risks after 90 days. Hospitalization likely identifies a sicker population in whom early mortality with or without ICD may be higher. Our results support careful consideration regarding ICD placement during the 90 days after hospitalization.

Efficacy of Dialectical Comprehensive Treatment of Traditional Chinese Medicine in Patients with Chronic Stable Heart Failure: A Randomized Controlled Trial

The treatment of chronic stable heart failure (CSHF) with integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine has been of wide concern. We mainly discuss the clinical efficacy of TCM decoction combined with acupuncture and moxibustion (A&M) in CSHF treatment on the basis of syndrome differentiation and treatment (SDT). The control group was given conventional cardiac rehabilitation (CCR), and the treatment group was given TCM decoction combined with A&M treatment based on SDT on the basis of conventional cardiac rehabilitation. The clinical efficacy and cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) indicators were evaluated. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), NT-proBNP, myocardial ischemia threshold (MIT), and 6-minute walking distance (6MWD) were measured by ultrasound, ELISA, electrocardiogram, and 6MWD test. After treatment, the clinical efficacy, LVEF, and 6MWD of the treatment group were better than in the control group. The NT-proBNP plasma level and MIT in the treatment group were lower than in the control group. The treatment group had enhanced AT, VO2 Peak, VO2 Peak/HR, and Peak power and decreased resting systolic pressure and peak systolic pressure, and the difference was statistically significant. Dialectical comprehensive treatment of TCM could effectively improve cardiac function and clinical treatment effect, which was worthy of clinical application.

'Time is prognosis' in heart failure: time-to-treatment initiation as a modifiable risk factor

In heart failure (HF), acute decompensation can occur quickly and unexpectedly because of worsening of chronic HF or to new-onset HF diagnosed for the first time ('de novo'). Patients presenting with acute HF (AHF) have a poor prognosis comparable with those with acute myocardial infarction, and any delay of treatment initiation is associated with worse outcomes. Recent HF guidelines and recommendations have highlighted the importance of a timely diagnosis and immediate treatment for patients presenting with AHF to decrease disease progression and improve prognosis. However, based on the available data, there is still uncertainty regarding the optimal 'time-to-treatment' effect in AHF. Furthermore, the immediate post-worsening HF period plays an important role in clinical outcomes in HF patients after hospitalization and is known as the 'vulnerable phase' characterized by high risk of readmission and early death. Early and intensive treatment for HF patients in the 'vulnerable phase' might be associated with lower rates of early readmission and mortality. Additionally, in the chronic stable HF outpatient, treatments are often delayed or not initiated when symptoms are stable, ignoring the risk for adverse outcomes such as sudden death. Consequently, there is a dire need to better identify HF patients during hospitalization and after discharge and treating them adequately to improve their prognosis. HF is an urgent clinical scenario along all its stages and disease conditions. Therefore, time plays a significant role throughout the entire patient's journey. Therapy should be optimized as soon as possible, because this is beneficial regardless of severity or duration of HF. Time lavished before treatment initiation is recognized as important modifiable risk factor in HF.

Predictive value of overt and non-overt volume overload in patients with high- or low-gradient aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Background

The plasma volume status (PVS) is considered a marker of non-overt cardiac congestion and is of prognostic value. Patients with low-flow, low-gradient (LFLG) aortic stenosis (AS) suffer from impaired left ventricular function and show signs of heart failure (HF). We hypothesized that PVS might predict post-interventional rehospitalization and cardiovascular mortality in high-risk patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

Methods

In this retrospective, observational analysis, PVS before transfemoral TAVI was calculated by a formula taking into account hematocrit and weight. The predictive performance of PVS was compared with that of prior cardiac decompensation (PCD).

Results

In the entire cohort of n=2,458 patients, PVS >-4% (high plasma volume) identified patients (n=1,013) with a higher post-interventional 1-year mortality rate than patients (n=1,445) with a PVS ≤-4% (low plasma volume). However, PVS lost prognostic independence when adjusted for anemia, whereas PCD did not. A high PVS and PCD were not correlated, and both parameters similarly revealed a low sensitivity and specificity but a high negative predictive value (NPV) for future HF events. PVS was not different between control patients (n=1,512) and those with intermediate (paradoxical LFLG-AS, n=327) or high risk scores (LFLG-AS, n=239). The accuracy of high PVS in predicting adverse events in these subpopulations was the same as in the study population overall. Kaplan-Maier analyses demonstrated similar prognostic impacts for PVS and PCD.

Conclusions

PVS and PCD represent two independent parameters of volume overload with unfavorable prognostic significance. Pre-interventional PVS does not appear to be suitable for predicting clinical outcomes in high-risk patients undergoing TAVI.

Timely and individualized heart failure management: need for implementation into the new guidelines

Due to remarkable improvements in heart failure (HF) management over the last 30 years, a significant reduction in mortality and hospitalization rates in HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has been observed. Currently, the optimization of guideline-directed chronic HF therapy remains the mainstay to further improve outcomes for patients with HFrEF to reduce mortality and HF hospitalization. This includes established device therapies, such as implantable defibrillators and cardiac resynchronization therapies, which improved patients' symptoms and prognosis. Over the last 10 years, new HF drugs have merged targeting various pathways, such as those that simultaneously suppress the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and the breakdown of endogenous natriuretic peptides (e.g., sacubitril/valsartan), and those that inhibit the If channel and, thus, reduce heart rate (e.g., ivabradine). Furthermore, the treatment of patient comorbidities (e.g., iron deficiency) has shown to improve functional capacity and to reduce hospitalization rates, when added to standard therapy. More recently, other potential treatment mechanisms have been explored, such as the sodium/glucose co-transporter inhibitors, the guanylate cyclase stimulators and the cardiac myosin activators. In this review, we summarize the novel developments in HFrEF pharmacological and device therapy and discuss their implementation strategies into practice to further improve outcomes.

Apelin ameliorated acute heart failure via inhibiting endoplasmic reticulum stress in rabbits

This study aimed to investigate whether inhibition of endoplasmic reticulum stress (ERS) mediated the ameliorative effect of apelin on acute heart failure (AHF). Rabbit model of AHF was induced by sodium pentobarbital. Cardiac dysfunction and injury were detected in the rabbit models of AHF, including impaired hemodynamic parameters and increased levels of CK-MB and cTnI. Apelin treatment dramatically improved cardiac impairment caused by AHF. ERS, indexed by increased GRP78, CHOP, and cleaved-caspase12 protein levels, was simultaneously attenuated by apelin. Apelin also could ameliorate increased protein levels of cleaved-caspase3 and Bax, and improved decreased protein levels of Bcl-2. Two common ERS stimulators, tunicamycin (Tm) and dithiothreitol (DTT) blocked the ameliorative effect of apelin on AHF. Phosphorylated Akt levels increased after apelin treatment in the rabbit models of AHF. The Akt signaling inhibitors wortmannin and LY294002 could block the cardioprotective effect of apelin, which could be relieved by ERS inhibitor 4-phenyl butyric acid (4-PBA). The aforementioned beneficial effects of apelin could all be blocked by APJ receptor antagonist F13A. 4-PBA and SC79, an Akt activator, can restore the ameliorative effect of apelin on AHF blocked by F13A. Apelin treatment dramatically ameliorated cardiac impairment caused by AHF, which might be mediated by APJ/Akt/ERS signaling pathway. These results will shed new light on AHF therapy.

Resting Heart Rate as an Important Predictor of Mortality and Morbidity in Ambulatory Patients With Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Resting heart rate is a risk factor of adverse heart failure outcomes; however, studies have shown controversial results. This meta-analysis evaluates the association of resting heart rate with mortality and hospitalization and identifies factors influencing its effect.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We systematically searched electronic databases in February 2019 for studies published in 2005 or before that evaluated the resting heart rate as a primary predictor or covariate of multivariable models of mortality and/or hospitalization in adult ambulatory patients with heart failure. Random effects inverse variance meta-analyses were performed to calculate pooled hazard ratios. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess evidence quality. Sixty-two studies on 163,445 patients proved eligible. Median population heart rate was 74 bpm (interquartile range 72-76 bpm). A 10-bpm increase was significantly associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval 1.08-1.13, high quality). Overall, subgroup analyses related to patient characteristics showed no changes to the effect estimate; however, there was a strongly positive interaction with age showing increasing risk of all-cause mortality per 10 bpm increase in heart rate.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality evidence demonstrates increasing resting heart rate is a significant predictor of all-cause mortality in ambulatory patients with heart failure on optimal medical therapy, with consistent effect across most patient factors and an increased risk trending with older age.

Optimization of Heart Failure Treatment by Heart Rate Reduction

Heart failure (HF) treatment should be optimized in addition to guideline-directed and recommended drugs to achieve an appropriate heart rate (i.e. 50−60 bpm) by ivabradine in patients with a heart rate >70 bpm in sinus rhythm and with an ejection fraction ≤35%. Heart rate reduction was to reduce cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization dependent on baseline resting heart rate. In particular in patients at a heart rate >75 bpm, a reduction in cardiovascular death, all-cause death, HF death, HF hospitalization and all-cause hospitalization has been observed. The optimal heart rate achieved appears to be between 50−60 bpm, if well tolerated as in these patients the lowest event rate is observed on treatment. Heart rate reduction is, therefore, a treatable risk factor in chronic HF. Observational studies support the concept that it is a risk indicator in other cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular conditions. Whether heart rate reduction is also modifying risk in other conditions than chronic HF should be explored in prospective clinical trials.

Acutely decompensated versus acute heart failure: two different entities

Heart failure (HF) has been classified in chronic HF (CHF) and acute HF (AHF). The latter has been subdivided in acutely decompensated chronic HF (ADCHF) defined as the deterioration of preexisting CHF and de novo AHF defined as the rapid development of new symptoms and signs of HF that requires urgent medical attention. However, ADCHF and de novo AHF have fundamental pathophysiological differences. Most importantly, the typical illness trajectory of HF, which is similar to that of other chronic organ diseases including lung, renal, and liver failure, features a gradual decline, with acute episodes usually related to disease evolution followed by partial recovery. Thus, ADCHF should be considered part of the natural history of CHF and renamed CHF exacerbation (CHFE) in accordance with the appropriate terminology used in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. AHF, in turn, should include only acute de novo HF. The clinical implications of this paradigm shift will be in CHFE the change in focus from in-hospital to optimal ambulatory CHF management aiming at primary and secondary CHFE prevention, while in AHF, the institution of measures for in-hospital limitation of cardiac injury and prevention or retardation of symptomatic CHF development.

Effects of Serelaxin in Patients with Acute Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Serelaxin is a recombinant form of human relaxin-2, a vasodilator hormone that contributes to cardiovascular and renal adaptations during pregnancy. Previous studies have suggested that treatment with serelaxin may result in relief of symptoms and in better outcomes in patients with acute heart failure.

METHODS

In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven trial, we enrolled patients who were hospitalized for acute heart failure and had dyspnea, vascular congestion on chest radiography, increased plasma concentrations of natriuretic peptides, mild-to-moderate renal insufficiency, and a systolic blood pressure of at least 125 mm Hg, and we randomly assigned them within 16 hours after presentation to receive either a 48-hour intravenous infusion of serelaxin (30 μg per kilogram of body weight per day) or placebo, in addition to standard care. The two primary end points were death from cardiovascular causes at 180 days and worsening heart failure at 5 days.

RESULTS

A total of 6545 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. At day 180, death from cardiovascular causes had occurred in 285 of the 3274 patients (8.7%) in the serelaxin group and in 290 of the 3271 patients (8.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.15; P = 0.77). At day 5, worsening heart failure had occurred in 227 patients (6.9%) in the serelaxin group and in 252 (7.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.07; P = 0.19). There were no significant differences between the groups in the incidence of death from any cause at 180 days, the incidence of death from cardiovascular causes or rehospitalization for heart failure or renal failure at 180 days, or the length of the index hospital stay. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this trial involving patients who were hospitalized for acute heart failure, an infusion of serelaxin did not result in a lower incidence of death from cardiovascular causes at 180 days or worsening heart failure at 5 days than placebo. (Funded by Novartis Pharma; RELAX-AHF-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01870778.).

Optimization of heart rate lowering therapy in hospitalized patients with heart failure: Insights from the Optimize Heart Failure Care Program

BACKGROUND

Hospitalization is an opportunity to optimize heart failure (HF) therapy. As optimal treatment for hospitalized HF patients in sinus rhythm with heart rate≥70bpm is unclear, we investigated the impact of combined beta-blocker (BB) and ivabradine versus BBs alone on short and longer term mortality and rehospitalization.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 370 hospitalized HF patients with heart rate≥70bpm (150 BB+ivabradine, 220 BB alone) in the Optimize Heart Failure Care Program in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, from October 2015 to April 2016.

RESULTS

At 1month, 3months, 6months and 12months, there were fewer deaths, HF hospitalizations and overall hospitalizations in patients on BB+ivabradine vs BBs alone. At 12months, all-cause mortality or HF hospitalization was significantly lower with BB+ivabradine than BBs (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.45 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32-0.64, P<0.0001). Significantly greater improvement was seen in quality of life (QOL) from admission to 12months with BB+ivabradine vs BBs alone (P=0.0001). With BB+ivabradine, significantly more patients achieved ≥50% target doses of BBs at 12months than on admission (82.0% vs 66.6%, P=0.0001), but the effect was non-significant with BBs alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Heart rate lowering therapy with BB+ivabradine started in hospitalized HF patients (heart rate≥70bpm) is associated with reduced overall mortality and re-hospitalization over the subsequent 12months. A prospective randomized trial is needed to confirm the advantages of this strategy.

Prevalence and prognostic importance of precipitating factors leading to heart failure hospitalization: recurrent hospitalizations and mortality

AIMS

Hospitalizations for heart failure (HF) are common and are associated with significant morbidity, mortality and cost. However, precipitating factors leading to HF hospitalization and their importance with respect to subsequent outcomes are not well understood.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The symptoms and signs present at admission and investigator-identified factors thought to have contributed to the first adjudicated HF hospitalization in the Candesartan in Heart Failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity (CHARM) programme were prospectively collected and stratified by ejection fraction (EF). Potential precipitants were collected using a specifically designed case report form and categorized according to the presence of cardiovascular (CV), non-CV and unknown factors. Associations between these factors and subsequent rehospitalization and mortality rates were examined. Of 1668 patients who experienced HF hospitalization, 1152 had reduced EF (≤40%, HFrEF) and 516 had preserved EF (HFpEF). Overall, 54% had CV, 32% had non-CV and 14% had unknown factors thought to have precipitated HF, with similar proportions in the HFrEF and HFpEF groups. The most common precipitants were arrhythmia (15%), other non-CV factors (11%) and respiratory infection (10%). Subsequent CV readmission rates were highest in those whose initial HF hospitalization was precipitated by CV factors. However, mortality rates were similar among patients with any of the three categories of precipitating factors. Results were similar in HFrEF and HFpEF.

CONCLUSIONS

Among chronic HF patients hospitalized for decompensation, the investigator-reported precipitating factor was not associated with the subsequent mortality rate, but was associated with type of readmission: readmissions for CV reasons were more likely when the index precipitant was CV.

Serelaxin in addition to standard therapy in acute heart failure: rationale and design of the RELAX-AHF-2 study

Patients admitted for acute heart failure (AHF) experience high rates of in-hospital and post-discharge morbidity and mortality despite current therapies. Serelaxin is recombinant human relaxin-2, a hormone with vasodilatory and end-organ protective effects believed to play a central role in the cardiovascular and renal adaptations of human pregnancy. In the phase 3 RELAX-AHF trial, serelaxin met its primary endpoint of improving dyspnoea through day 5 in patients admitted for AHF. Compared to placebo, serelaxin also reduced worsening heart failure (WHF) by 47% through day 5 and both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality by 37% through day 180. RELAX-AHF-2 ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01870778) is designed to confirm serelaxin's effect on these clinical outcomes. RELAX-AHF-2 is a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven, phase 3 trial enrolling ∼6800 patients hospitalized for AHF with dyspnoea, congestion on chest radiograph, increased natriuretic peptide levels, mild-to-moderate renal insufficiency, and systolic blood pressure ≥125 mmHg. Patients are randomized within 16 h of presentation to 48 h intravenous infusions of serelaxin (30 µg/kg/day) or placebo, both in addition to standard of care treatments. The primary objectives are to demonstrate that serelaxin is superior to placebo in reducing: (i) 180 day cardiovascular death, and (ii) occurrence of WHF through day 5. Key secondary endpoints include 180 day all-cause mortality, composite of 180 day combined cardiovascular mortality or heart failure/renal failure rehospitalization, and in-hospital length of stay during index AHF. The results from RELAX-AHF-2 will provide data on the potential beneficial effect of serelaxin on cardiovascular mortality and WHF in selected patients with AHF.

Ivabradine

Ivabradine is a blocker of the funny current channels in the sinoatrial node cells. This results in pure heart rate reduction when elevated without direct effect on contractility or on the vessels. It was tested in a large outcome clinical trial in stable chronic heart failure (CHF) with low ejection fraction, in sinus rhythm, on a contemporary background therapy including betablockers (SHIFT: Systolic Heart Failure Treatment with the If inhibitor Trial).The primary composite endpoint (cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization) was reduced by 18% whereas the first occurrence of heart failure hospitalizations was reduced by 26%. The effect was of greater magnitude in patients with baseline heart rate ≥75 beats per minute. Ivabradine improved also the quality of life and induced a reverse remodelling.The safety was overall good with an increase in (a)symptomatic bradycardia and visual side effects.The efficacy and tolerability were similar to those observed in the overall trial in subgroups with diabetes mellitus, low systolic blood pressure (SBP), renal dysfunction or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).Ivabradine is indicated in CHF with systolic dysfunction, in patients in sinus rhythm with a heart rate ≥75 bpm in combination with standard therapy including betablocker therapy or when betablocker therapy is contraindicated or not tolerated (European Medicine Agency).

Chronic exposure to ivabradine reduces readmissions in the vulnerable phase after hospitalization for worsening systolic heart failure: a post-hoc analysis of SHIFT

AIMS

During the post-discharge phase following a heart failure hospitalization (HFH), patients are at high risk of early readmission despite standard of care therapy. We examined the impact of chronic exposure to ivabradine on early readmissions in patients hospitalized for heart failure during the course of the SHIFT study (Systolic Heart Failure treatment with the If inhibitor ivabradine Trial).

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1186 of the 6505 randomized patients experienced at least one HFH during the study, and had a more severe profile than those without HFH. Of these 1186 patients, 334 patients (28%) were rehospitalized within 3 months for any reason, mostly for cardiovascular causes (86%), including HFH (61%). Ivabradine was associated with fewer all-cause hospitalizations at 1 month [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-1.00, P < 0.05], 2 months (IRR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58-0.98, P = 0.03), and 3 months (IRR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.99, P = 0.04). A trend for a reduction in cardiovascular and HF hospitalizations was also observed in ivabradine-treated patients.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate in this post-hoc analysis that chronic exposure to ivabradine reduces the incidence of all-cause hospitalizations during the vulnerable phase after a HFH. Further studies are needed to investigate if in-hospital or early post-discharge initiation of ivabradine could be useful to improve early outcomes in patients hospitalized for HF.

Relative Importance of History of Heart Failure Hospitalization and N-Terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide Level as Predictors of Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels and recent heart failure (HF) hospitalization as predictors of future events in heart failure - preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF).

BACKGROUND

Recently, doubt has been expressed about the value of a history of HF hospitalization as a predictor of adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with HF and HF-PEF.

METHODS

We estimated rates and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization, according to history of recent HF hospitalization and baseline NT-proBNP level in the I-PRESERVE (Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved systolic function) trial.

RESULTS

Rates of composite endpoints in patients with (n = 804) and without (n = 1,963) a recent HF hospitalization were 12.78 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.47 to 14.24) and 4.49 (95% CI: 4.04 to 4.99) per 100 person-years, respectively (HR: 2.71; 95% CI: 2.33 to 3.16). For patients with NT-proBNP concentrations >360 pg/ml (n = 1,299), the event rate was 11.51 (95% CI: 10.54 to 12.58) compared to 3.04 (95% CI: 2.63 to 3.52) per 100 person-years in those with a lower level of NT-proBNP (n = 1468) (HR: 3.19; 95% CI: 2.68 to 3.80). In patients with no recent HF hospitalization and NT-proBNP ≤360 pg/ml (n = 1,187), the event rate was 2.43 (95% CI: 2.03 to 2.90) compared with 17.79 (95% CI: 15.77 to 20.07) per 100 person-years when both risk predictors were present (n = 523; HR: 6.18; 95% CI: 4.96 to 7.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Recent hospitalization for HF or an elevated level of NT-proBNP identified patients at higher risk for cardiovascular events, and this risk was increased further when both factors were present.

Update on ivabradine for heart failure

Despite dramatic advances in therapy for heart failure (HF) during the past 3 decades, hospitalization and mortality rates remain relatively high. In recent decades, it has become apparent that HF is divisible into two equally lethal but pathophysiologically different sub-classes, the first comprising patients with LV systolic dysfunction [heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)] and the other, approximately equal in size, involving patients with "preserved" systolic function [heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)]. Evidence-based event reducing therapy currently is available only for HFrEF. With the completion of seminal trials of beta blockers, now part of standard therapy for HFrEF, it was apparent that heart rate slowing is an underlying basis of clinical effectiveness of HFrEF therapy. With the discovery of the "f current" that modulates the slope of spontaneous diastolic depolarization of the sino-atrial node, a non-beta blockade approach to heart rate slowing became available. Ivabradine, the first FDA-approved f-current blocker for HFrEF, markedly reduces hospitalizations for worsening heart failure, while also progressively reducing mortality as pre-therapy heart rate increases, and also promotes beneficial left ventricular remodeling, improves health-related quality of life and is effective despite a wide range of comorbidities. The drug is well tolerated and adverse effects are relatively few. Ivabradine represents an important addition to the armamentarium for mitigation of HFrEF.

Temporal Changes in Postdischarge Mortality Risk After Hospitalization for Heart Failure (from the EVEREST Trial)

In observational studies of patients hospitalized for heart failure (HHF), risk of death is highest immediately after discharge and decreases over time. It is unclear whether this population risk trajectory reflects (1) lowering of individual patient mortality risk with increasing time from index hospitalization or (2) temporal changes in population case-mix with earlier postdischarge death for "sicker" patients. Survival rate and longitudinal models were used to estimate temporal changes in postdischarge all-cause mortality risk in 3,993 HHF patients discharged alive in the Efficacy of Vasopressin Antagonism in Heart Failure Outcome Study with Tolvaptan (EVEREST) trial. After median follow-up of 9.9 months, 971 patients died (24.2%). Predicted mortality rate decreased from 15.9 per 100 patient-years immediately after discharge to 13.4 at 30 days and 12.8 at 90 days; mortality rate increased steadily thereafter. Risk variation between quintiles of risk was considerably larger than the temporal variation within risk strata. In a longitudinal model serially reassessing predicted patient mortality risk after each follow-up visit using data collected at these visits, predicted mortality risk increased during the 90 days preceding subsequent heart failure readmission and then followed a postdischarge trajectory similar to the index admission. In conclusion, although there is transiently elevated individual patient risk in the 90 days before and after discharge, the patient's individual risk profile, rather than temporal change in risk relative to hospitalization, remains the main determinant of mortality. For purposes of reducing all-cause mortality in HF patients, preventative and therapeutic measures may be best implemented as long-term interventions for high mortality risk patients based on serial risk assessments, irrespective of recent hospitalization.

Mode of Death After Acute Heart Failure Hospitalization - A Clue to Possible Mechanisms

Heart failure continues to be a leading cause of hospitalization worldwide, and acute heart failure (AHF) carries significant risk for short-term morbidity and mortality. Despite many trials of potential new therapies for AHF, there have been very few advances over the recent decades. In this review, we will examine mortality during and after AHF hospitalization, with an emphasis on available data on mode of death (MOD). We will also review data on the timing of different MOD after AHF and the effect of specific therapies, as well as what is known about the contribution of specific pathophysiological mechanisms. Finally, we discuss the potential utility of further study of MOD data for AHF and its application to drug development, risk stratification, and therapeutic tailoring to improve short- and long-term outcomes in AHF.

Prognostic value of different biomarkers for cardiovascular death in unselected older patients in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Risk stratification of elderly patients presenting with heart failure (HF) to an emergency department (ED) is an unmet challenge. We prospectively investigated the prognostic performance of different biomarkers in unselected older patients in the ED.

METHODS

We consecutively enrolled 302 non-surgical patients ⩾70 years presenting to the ED with a wide range of cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular comorbid conditions. N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proADM), mid-regional pro-atrial natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP), C-terminal pro-endothelin-1 (CT-proET-1), ultrasensitive C-terminal pro-arginine-vasopressin (Copeptin-us) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) were measured at admission. Two cardiologists independently adjudicated the final diagnosis of HF after reviewing all available baseline data using circulating NT-proBNP levels. A final diagnosis of HF was found in 120 (40%) of the 302 patients. All patients were followed up for cardiovascular death within the following 12 months. In order to test the prognostic performance of the investigated biomarkers we used boosting models with age and sex as mandatory covariates. Boosting is a statistical learning technique with built-in variable selection developed to obtain sparse and interpretable prediction models.

RESULTS

Follow-up was 100% complete. During a median follow-up time of 225 days (interquartile range (IQR) 156-319 days), 30 (9.9%) of 302 patients (aged 81±6 years) had cardiovascular deaths. Of these 30 patients, 21 had HF and nine had no HF diagnosed prior to admission. The boosting model selected MR-proADM and hs-cTNT as predictors of cardiovascular deaths. The median values of MR-proADM and hs-cTnT at presentation were significantly higher in patients with cardiovascular deaths compared to surviving patients during follow-up (2.56 nmol/L (IQR 1.62-4.48) vs. 1.11 nmol/L (IQR 0.83-1.80), P<0.001 and 81 ng/L (IQR 38-340) vs. 17 ng/L (IQR 0.9-38), P=0.004). One unit increase in the log-transformed MR-proADM levels was associated with a 1.99-fold risk of death (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.61-2.45, P<0.001). The second marker, hs-cTnT, showed an increased predicted risk but was not significantly correlated to event-free survival (hazard ratio 3.22, 95% CI 0.97-10.68, P=0.056).

CONCLUSION

Within different biomarkers, MR-proADM was the only predictor of cardiovascular deaths in unselected older patients presenting to the ED.

Short and long term survival following hospitalization with a primary versus non-primary diagnosis of acute heart failure

OBJECTIVE

To compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of patients hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of acute heart failure (AHF) versus AHF associated with an alternative principal diagnosis.

METHODS

The Israel nationwide Heart Failure (HF) survey examined prospectively 4102 consecutive HF patients admitted to all 25 public hospitals in the country. This study focused on 2302 patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of AHF. In 1594 patients, AHF was the principal diagnosis of hospitalization. In 708 patients, AHF was a secondary diagnosis with an alternative principal diagnosis of hospitalization.

RESULTS

Patients with secondary diagnosis of AHF were younger with an overall less comorbidities except for concomitant ischemic heart disease. Despite that, hospital duration was longer (median days (Q1-Q3), 4 (3-7), and 6(4-9), respectively, P<0.001) and in-hospital mortality was higher (7.2% vs. 4.9%, p-value=0.03) among patients with a secondary diagnosis of AHF. Consistently, the age and sex adjusted OR of secondary diagnosis of AHF for in-hospital mortality was 1.76 (C.I. 1.2-2.54; p-val=0.003). However, long-term follow-up showed a risk-reversal wherein the adjusted risk for 10-year mortality was significantly lower among those hospitalized with a secondary vs. primary diagnosis of AHF (HR=0.88, C.I. 0.79-0.99; p-val=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

While hospitalization with secondary diagnosis of AHF is associated with a higher risk for in-hospital mortality in comparison to hospitalization with principal diagnosis of AHF, it is independently associated with a lower risk for 10-year mortality. These findings may have implications for short and long term risk stratification after AHF hospitalization.

The Hospitalization Burden and Post-Hospitalization Mortality Risk in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: Results From the I-PRESERVE Trial (Irbesartan in Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction)

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate prognosis in patients with heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction and the causes of hospitalization and post-hospitalization mortality.

BACKGROUND

Although hospitalizations in patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction are common, there are limited data from clinical trials on the causes of admission and the influence of hospitalizations on subsequent mortality risk.

METHODS

Patients (n = 4,128) with New York Heart Association functional class II to IV HF and left ventricular ejection fractions >45% were enrolled in I-PRESERVE (Irbesartan in Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction). A blinded events committee adjudicated cardiovascular hospitalizations and all deaths using predefined and standardized definitions. The risk for death after HF, any-cause, or non-HF hospitalization was assessed using time-dependent Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

A total of 2,278 patients had 5,863 hospitalizations during the 49 months of follow-up, of which 3,585 (61%) were recurrent hospitalizations. For any-cause hospitalizations, 26.5% of patients died during follow-up, with an incident mortality rate of 11.1 deaths per 100 patient-years (PYs) and an adjusted hazard ratio of 5.32 (95% confidence interval: 4.21 to 6.23). Overall, 53.6% of hospitalizations were classified as cardiovascular and 43.7% as noncardiovascular, with 2.7% not classifiable. HF was the largest single cause of initial (17.6%) and overall (21.1%) hospitalizations, although, after HF hospitalization, a substantially higher proportion of readmissions were due to primary HF causes (40%). HF hospitalization occurred in 685 patients, with 41% deaths during follow-up, an incident mortality rate of 19.3 deaths per 100 PYs. The adjusted hazard ratio was 2.93 (95% confidence interval: 2.40 to 3.57) relative to patients who were not hospitalized for HF and was greater in those with longer durations of hospitalization. There were 1,593 patients with only non-HF hospitalizations, 21% of whom died during follow-up, with an incident mortality rate of 8.7 deaths per 100 PYs and an adjusted hazard ratio of 4.25 (95% confidence interval: 3.27 to 5.32). The risk for death was highest in the first 30 days and declined over time for all hospitalization categories. Patients not hospitalized for HF or for any cause had observed incident mortality rates of 3.8 and 1.3 deaths per 100 PYs, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In I-PRESERVE, HFpEF patients hospitalized for any reason, and especially for HF, were at high risk for subsequent death, particularly early. The findings support the need for careful attention in the post-discharge time period including attention to comorbid conditions. Among those hospitalized for HF, the high mortality rate and increased proportion of readmissions due to HF (highest during the first 30 days), suggest that this group would be an appropriate target for investigation of new interventions.

Resting heart rate: risk indicator and emerging risk factor in cardiovascular disease

Resting heart rate is central to cardiac output and is influenced by changes occurring in numerous diseases. It predicts longevity and cardiovascular diseases, and current evidence suggests that it is also an important marker of outcome in cardiovascular disease, including heart failure. Beta-blockers improve outcomes in heart failure; however, they have effects outside reducing heart rate. Ivabradine has demonstrated efficacy in reducing rehospitalizations and mortality in heart failure and in improving exercise tolerance and reducing angina attacks in patients with coronary artery disease, whereas selective heart rate reduction may also prove to be beneficial in therapeutic areas outside those in which ivabradine has already demonstrated clinical efficacy. This review provides an update on the associations between heart rate and cardiovascular outcomes in various conditions, the experimental effects of heart rate reduction with ivabradine, and the potential new indications in cardiovascular disease.

Top ten risk factors for morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic systolic heart failure and elevated heart rate: The SHIFT Risk Model

AIMS

We identified easily obtained baseline characteristics associated with outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure (HF) and elevated heart rate (HR) receiving contemporary guideline-recommended therapy in the SHIFT trial, and used them to develop a prognostic model.

METHODS

We selected the 10 best predictors for each of four outcomes (cardiovascular death or HF hospitalisation; all-cause mortality; cardiovascular mortality; and HF hospitalisation). All variables with p<0.05 for association were entered into a forward stepwise Cox regression model. Our initial analysis excluded baseline therapies, though randomisation to ivabradine or placebo was forced into the model for the composite endpoint and HF hospitalisation.

RESULTS

Increased resting HR, low ejection fraction, raised creatinine, New York Heart Association class III/IV, longer duration of HF, history of left bundle branch block, low systolic blood pressure and, for three models, age were strong predictors of all outcomes. Additional predictors were low body mass index, male gender, ischaemic HF, low total cholesterol, no history of hyperlipidaemia or dyslipidaemia and presence of atrial fibrillation/flutter. The c-statistics for the four outcomes ranged from 67.6% to 69.5%. There was no evidence for lack of fit of the models with the exception of all-cause mortality (p=0.017). Similar results were found including baseline therapies.

CONCLUSION

The SHIFT Risk Model includes simple, readily obtainable clinical characteristics to produce important prognostic information in patients with chronic HF, systolic dysfunction, and elevated HR. This may help better calibrate management to individual patient risk.

Regional variation in patients and outcomes in the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) trial

BACKGROUND

Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) patients with heart failure and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction assigned to spironolactone did not achieve a significant reduction in the primary composite outcome (time to cardiovascular death, aborted cardiac arrest, or hospitalization for management of heart failure) compared with patients receiving placebo. In a post hoc analysis, an ≈4-fold difference was identified in this composite event rate between the 1678 patients randomized from Russia and Georgia compared with the 1767 enrolled from the United States, Canada, Brazil, and Argentina (the Americas).

METHODS AND RESULTS

To better understand this regional difference in clinical outcomes, demographic characteristics of these populations and their responses to spironolactone were explored. Patients from Russia/Georgia were younger, had less atrial fibrillation and diabetes mellitus, but were more likely to have had prior myocardial infarction or a hospitalization for heart failure. Russia/Georgia patients also had lower left ventricular ejection fraction and creatinine but higher diastolic blood pressure (all P<0.001). Hyperkalemia and doubling of creatinine were more likely and hypokalemia was less likely in patients receiving spironolactone in the Americas with no significant treatment effects in Russia/Georgia. All clinical event rates were markedly lower in Russia/Georgia, and there was no detectable impact of spironolactone on any outcomes. In contrast, in the Americas, the rates of the primary outcome, cardiovascular death, and hospitalization for heart failure were significantly reduced by spironolactone.

CONCLUSIONS

This post hoc analysis demonstrated greater potassium and creatinine changes and possible clinical benefits with spironolactone in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction from the Americas.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00094302.

Increased mortality after an acute heart failure episode: new pathophysiological insights from the RELAX-AHF study and beyond

Acute heart failure (AHF) is one of the most common causes of hospital admission. Despite the very high short-term morbidity and mortality and high costs associated with the condition, little progress has been made toward an understanding of the complex mechanisms of AHF, and particularly the spike in mortality after AHF admission. This manuscript addresses certain hypotheses for the pathophysiology of increased mortality after an AHF episode, specifically exploring the role of neurohormonal and inflammatory activation, congestion, and end-organ damage occurring during the first hours and days of an AHF episode. The results of the recently published RELAX-AHF (Relaxin in Acute Heart Failure) study may hold the key to understanding these intricate mechanisms. In the study, congestion and end-organ damage, which were strongly associated with increased 180-day mortality, were relieved by early administration of serelaxin, which was also associated with reduction in 180-day mortality. Hence, it is possible that early treatment of AHF, including decongestion and prevention of damage to end organs, including kidneys, heart, and liver, is critical to preventing mortality in AHF. This may require a change in our strategic approach to the management of patients admitted with AHF, setting them apart from patients with chronic heart failure (HF), and developing specific treatment strategies for AHF patients beyond simply implementing therapies proven to be effective in chronic HF.

Influence of hospitalization for cardiovascular versus noncardiovascular reasons on subsequent mortality in patients with chronic heart failure across the spectrum of ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Noncardiovascular (non-CV) comorbidities may contribute to hospitalizations in patients with heart failure (HF). We examined the incidence of mortality following hospitalization for cardiovascular (CV) versus non-CV reasons in the Candesartan in Heart Failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity (CHARM) Program.

METHODS AND RESULTS

First hospitalizations for CV or non-CV reasons during the CHARM trial (N=7599) were related to subsequent risk of all-cause death using time-updated proportional hazards models. Over median 37.7 month follow-up, 2816 subjects (37.1%) were not hospitalized, 2893 (38.1%) were first hospitalized for CV reasons, and 1890 (24.9%) for non-CV reasons. The death rate (per 100 patient-years) among those not hospitalized was 2.8 compared with 17.8 after CV and 16.5 after non-CV hospitalization (both P<0.001 versus not hospitalized). Mortality at 30 days was higher after CV than non-CV hospitalization; however, among 30-day survivors of CV and non-CV hospitalization, rates of subsequent mortality were similar (14.5 versus 14.6 per 100 patient-years; P=0.62). Rates of CV hospitalization were higher for those with ejection fraction (EF) ≤40% than those with EF >40% (P<0.001), but rates of non-CV hospitalization did not vary by EF. Low EF patients had higher risk for mortality than preserved EF patients after any hospitalization, but within each EF subgroup, mortality in 30-day survivors of CV versus non-CV hospitalization was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-CV hospitalization is frequent in patients with symptomatic heart failure and associated with risk of subsequent mortality similar to CV hospitalization across the spectrum of EF. These findings may have implications for developing strategies to prevent readmissions.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00634309 (CHARM-Added), NCT00634712 (CHARM-Preserved), NCT00634400 (CHARM-Alternative).

Spironolactone for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

Mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonists improve the prognosis for patients with heart failure and a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction. We evaluated the effects of spironolactone in patients with heart failure and a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind trial, we assigned 3445 patients with symptomatic heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 45% or more to receive either spironolactone (15 to 45 mg daily) or placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, aborted cardiac arrest, or hospitalization for the management of heart failure.

RESULTS

With a mean follow-up of 3.3 years, the primary outcome occurred in 320 of 1722 patients in the spironolactone group (18.6%) and 351 of 1723 patients in the placebo group (20.4%) (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.04; P=0.14). Of the components of the primary outcome, only hospitalization for heart failure had a significantly lower incidence in the spironolactone group than in the placebo group (206 patients [12.0%] vs. 245 patients [14.2%]; hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.99, P=0.04). Neither total deaths nor hospitalizations for any reason were significantly reduced by spironolactone. Treatment with spironolactone was associated with increased serum creatinine levels and a doubling of the rate of hyperkalemia (18.7%, vs. 9.1% in the placebo group) but reduced hypokalemia. With frequent monitoring, there were no significant differences in the incidence of serious adverse events, a serum creatinine level of 3.0 mg per deciliter (265 μmol per liter) or higher, or dialysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction, treatment with spironolactone did not significantly reduce the incidence of the primary composite outcome of death from cardiovascular causes, aborted cardiac arrest, or hospitalization for the management of heart failure. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; TOPCAT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00094302.).

The ADHF/NT-proBNP risk score to predict 1-year mortality in hospitalized patients with advanced decompensated heart failure

BACKGROUND

The acute decompensated heart failure/N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (ADHF/NT-proBNP) score is a validated risk scoring system that predicts mortality in hospitalized heart failure patients with a wide range of left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs). We sought to assess discrimination and calibration of the score when applied to patients with advanced decompensated heart failure (AHF).

METHODS

We studied 445 patients hospitalized for AHF, defined by the presence of severe symptoms of worsening HF at admission, severely depressed LVEF, and the need for intravenous diuretic and/or inotropic drugs. The primary outcome was cumulative (in-hospital and post-discharge) mortality and post-discharge 1-year mortality. Separate analyses were performed for patients aged ≤ 70 years. A Seattle Heart Failure Score (SHFS) was calculated for each patient discharged alive.

RESULTS

During follow-up, 144 patients (32.4%) died, and 69 (15.5%) underwent heart transplantation (HT) or ventricular assist device (VAD) implantation. After accounting for the competing events (VAD/HT), the ADHF/NT-proBNP score's C-statistic for cumulative mortality was 0.738 in the overall cohort and 0.771 in patients aged ≤ 70 years. The C-statistic for post-discharge mortality was 0.741 and 0.751, respectively. Adding prior (≤6 months) hospitalizations for HF to the score increased the C-statistic for post-discharge mortality to 0.759 in the overall cohort and to 0.774 in patients aged ≤ 70 years. Predicted and observed mortality rates by quartiles of score were highly correlated. The SHFS demonstrated adequate discrimination but underestimated the risk. The ADHF/NT-proBNP risk calculator is available at http://www.fsm.it/fsm/file/NTproBNPscore.zip.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that the ADHF/NT-proBNP score may efficiently predict mortality in patients hospitalized with AHF.

Effects of serelaxin in subgroups of patients with acute heart failure: results from RELAX-AHF

AIM

Patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF) differ with respect of many clinical characteristics which may influence their prognosis and response to treatment. We have assessed possible differences in the effects of serelaxin on dyspnoea relief, 60 Day outcomes and 180 Day mortality across patient subgroups in the RELAX-AHF trial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Subgroups were based on pre-specified covariates (age, sex, race, geographic region, estimated glomerular filtration rate, time from presentation to randomization, baseline systolic blood pressure, history of diabetes, atrial fibrillation, ischaemic heart disease, cardiac devices, i.v. nitrates at randomization). Other covariates which may modify the efficacy of AHF treatment were also analysed. Subgroup analyses did not show any difference in the effects of serelaxin vs. placebo on dyspnoea relief or on the incidence of cardiovascular death or rehospitalizations for heart failure or renal failure at 60 days. Nominally significant interactions between some patient subgroups and the effects of serelaxin on 180 days cardiovascular and all-cause mortality were noted but should be interpreted cautiously due to the number of comparisons and the low incidence of deaths in the subgroups at lower risk.

CONCLUSION

The effects of serelaxin vs. placebo appeared to be similar across subgroups of patients in RELAX-AHF.