Adherence to Aldosterone-Blocking Agents in Patients with Heart Failure

Comparative effectiveness and safety of eplerenone and spironolactone in patients with heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Eplerenone and spironolactone, recognized as mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), have been reported to improve clinical prognosis among individuals diagnosed with heart failure (HF). However, the difference in the clinical effects between eplerenone and spironolactone in individuals with HF remains uncertain. We aimed to assess the impact of eplerenone compared to spironolactone on clinical outcomes within the HF population.

METHODS

An extensive search was executed in several databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library). All relevant studies evaluating eplerenone compared to spironolactone in patients with HF were included. Dichotomous data were pooled as Hazard ratio (HR) or Risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Our main outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included death from cardiovascular causes, treatment withdrawal, and gynecomastia.

RESULTS

Ten studies, comprising 21,930 HF individuals, were included in our investigation. Eplerenone showed a lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR = 0.78, 95%CI [0.64 to 0.94], P = 0.009) and cardiovascular mortality (HR = 0.54, 95%CI [0.39, 0.74], P = 0.0001) compared to spironolactone. Furthermore, eplerenone exhibited a reduced risk of treatment withdrawal (RR = 0.69, 95% CI [0.62, 0.78], P = 0.0001) and gynecomastia (RR = 0.07, 95% CI [0.02 to 0.31], P = 0.0001) than spironolactone.

CONCLUSION

Eplerenone revealed lower all-cause and cardiovascular mortality events in comparison to spironolactone. Moreover, eplerenone was associated with lower gynecomastia and treatment withdrawal events compared to spironolactone. Further well-designed randomized controlled trials are still warranted better to identify the clinical differences between eplerenone and spironolactone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Protocol registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/VNMGK.

Racial Differences in Trends and Prognosis of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy for Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Surveillance Study

BACKGROUND

Racial disparities in guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) have not been fully documented in a community setting.

METHODS

In the ARIC Surveillance Study (2005-2014), we examined racial differences in GDMT at discharge, its temporal trends, and the prognostic impact among individuals with hospitalized HFrEF, using weighted regression models to account for sampling design. Optimal GDMT was defined as beta blockers (BB), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) and ACE inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB). Acceptable GDMT included either one of BB, MRA, ACEI/ARB or hydralazine plus nitrates (H-N).

RESULTS

Of 16,455 (unweighted n = 3,669) HFrEF cases, 47% were Black. Only ~ 10% were discharged with optimal GDMT with higher proportion in Black than White individuals (11.1% vs. 8.6%, p < 0.001). BB use was > 80% in both racial groups while Black individuals were more likely to receive ACEI/ARB (62.0% vs. 54.6%) and MRA (18.0% vs. 13.8%) than Whites, with a similar pattern for H-N (21.8% vs. 10.1%). There was a trend of decreasing use of optimal GDMT in both groups, with significant decline of ACEI/ARB use in Whites (- 2.8% p < 0.01) but increasing H-N use in both groups (+ 6.5% and + 9.2%, p < 0.01). Only ACEI/ARB and BB were associated with lower 1-year mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal GDMT was prescribed in only ~ 10% of HFrEF patients at discharge but was more so in Black than White individuals. ACEI/ARB use declined in Whites while H-N use increased in both races. GDMT utilization, particularly ACEI/ARB, should be improved in Black and Whites individuals with HFrEF.

Clinical effect of nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) antagonists in the treatment of diabetic kidney disease: expectations as a new therapeutic strategy

Diabetes mellitus is the main cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in Japan and worldwide. Although angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs) are basic drugs for the treatment of CKD with diabetes (diabetic kidney disease, DKD) with albuminuria and/or proteinuria, it has also become clear that the use of an ACE inhibitor or ARB alone is not fully sufficient. We have previously reported the clinical effects of mineralocorticoid receptor (MR) antagonists and recommended their use in addition to renin-angiotensin system inhibitors. Recently, new types of nonsteroidal MR antagonists have been developed, and the results of a large-scale study are expected. Nonsteroidal MR antagonists are distributed in the heart, lungs, liver, and kidneys when administered orally and are characterized by their equivalent distribution between the heart (nonepithelial tissue) and kidneys (epithelial tissue). We summarize the latest evidence regarding the use of nonsteroidal MR antagonists in the treatment of DKD. Hyperkalemia and renal dysfunction are frequent during MR antagonist treatment. However, with careful and combined monitoring of these two conditions, the effectiveness of MR antagonists will not be diminished; conversely, it is apparent that patients at such risk will benefit more from the addition of an MR antagonist to the treatment regimen. The most important measure against hyperkalemia is the regular monitoring of serum potassium levels and renal function. The safest and most reliable measure against hyperkalemia is the combined use of a new oral potassium adsorbent that has high potassium selectivity and few side effects. In DKD treatment, it is important to continue using MR antagonists without interruption as much as possible.

Rational drug therapy of chronic heart failure: the role of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists: review

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) are part of basic medical therapy for heart failure. The clinical efficacy of MRAs has been proven by randomized clinical trials. To review comparative efficacy and tolerability data between the two main MRAs, spironolactone and eplerenone, in patients with systolic heart failure.

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist use after hospitalization of patients with heart failure and post-discharge outcomes: a single-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) are an underutilized therapy for heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but the current impact of hospitalization on MRA use is not well characterized. The objective of this study was to describe contemporary MRA prescription for heart failure patients before and after the full scope of hospitalizations and the association between MRA discharge prescription and post-hospitalization outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study at an academic hospital system in 2013-2016. Among 1500 included hospitalizations of 1009 unique patients with HFrEF and without MRA contraindication, the mean age was 71.9 ± 13.6 years and 443 (29.5%) were female. We compared MRA prescription before and after hospitalizations with McNemar's test and between patients with principal and secondary diagnoses of HFrEF with the chi-square test, and association of MRA discharge prescription with 30-day and 180-day mortality and readmissions using generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

MRA prescriptions increased from 303 (20.2%) to 375 (25.0%) at discharge (+4.8%, p < 0.0001). More patients with principal diagnosis of HFrEF compared to those hospitalized for other reasons received MRA (34.9% versus 21.3%, p < 0.0001) and had them initiated (21.8% versus 9.7%, p < 0.0001). MRA prescription at discharge was not associated with mortality or readmission at 30 and 180 days, and there was no interaction with principal/secondary diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Among hospitalized HFrEF patients, 75% did not receive MRA before or after hospitalization, and nearly 90% of eligible patients did not have MRA initiated. As we found no signal for short-term harm after discharge, hospitalization may represent an opportunity to initiate guideline-directed heart failure therapy.

Real-Life Use of Neurohormonal Antagonists and Loop Diuretics in Chronic Heart Failure: Analysis of Serial Biomarker Measurements and Clinical Outcome

We determined the temporal effects of neurohormonal antagonists and loop diuretics on serially assessed (3-monthly) cardiorenal biomarkers, functional status, and clinical outcomes in 250 patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) with reduced ejection fraction. In blood, we measured NT-proBNP, troponin T, C-reactive protein, creatinine, cystatin C; in urine, N-acetyl-beta-d-glucosaminidase and kidney-injury-molecule-1. Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) were inversely associated with cardiac impairment, inflammation, and renal tubular damage, but not with glomerular dysfunction. Diuretics were associated with worse biomarker profiles and with a hazard ratio for adverse clinical outcome of 1.12 (95% confidence interval: 1.03-1.22) per 40 mg higher doses. ACE-inhibitors/ARBs were more frequently downtitrated and diuretics more frequently uptitrated in patients who experienced endpoints than in those who did not. In conclusion, a decrease or withholding of ACE-inhibitors/ARBs solely based on glomerular function is not justified because of the beneficial effects on the heart, inflammation, and renal tubules. Higher and increased diuretic doses mark progression towards endstage CHF.

Central Iliac Arteriovenous Anastomosis for Uncontrolled Hypertension: One-Year Results From the ROX CONTROL HTN Trial

Creation of a central iliac arteriovenous anastomosis using a novel nitinol coupler device results in an immediate, significant reduction of blood pressure (BP). We present efficacy and safety findings at 12 months post-coupler insertion. This open-label, multicenter, prospective, randomized trial enrolled patients with a baseline office systolic BP ≥140 mm Hg and average daytime ambulatory BP ≥135/85 mm Hg. Subjects were randomly allocated to coupler implantation and continuing previous pharmacotherapy or to maintain previous treatment alone. At 12 months, 39 patients who had coupler therapy were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Office-based systolic BP reduced by 25.1±23.3 mm Hg (baseline, 174±18 mm Hg; P<0.0001) post-coupler placement, and office diastolic BP reduced by 20.8±13.3 mm Hg (baseline, 100±13 mm Hg; P<0.0001). Mean 24-hour ambulatory BP reduced by 12.6±17.4/15.3±9.7 mm Hg (P<0.0001 for both). In a prespecified subset of patients who failed to respond adequately to prior renal denervation, coupler therapy led to highly significant reduction in office systolic/diastolic BP (30.7/24.1 mm Hg) and significant reduction in 24-hour ambulatory systolic/diastolic BP (12.4/14.4 mm Hg) at 12 months (n=9). After coupler therapy, 14 patients (33%) developed ipsilateral venous stenosis; all were treated successfully with venous stenting. These findings confirm the importance of arterial mechanics in the pathophysiology of hypertension and support the clinical use of a central iliac arteriovenous anastomosis.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01642498.

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist pattern of use in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: findings from BIOSTAT-CHF

AIMS

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) are recommended (unless contraindicated) to all patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, MRAs are still largely underused in routine clinical practice. This study aims to describe the determinants and pattern of use of MRAs in HFrEF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

BIOSTAT-CHF is a European multicentre, prospective study which enrolled patients suboptimally treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEi/ARBs) and/or beta-blockers, with the aim of optimizing guideline-based use of these agents. From the original 2516 subjects, this retrospective post hoc analysis included the 1325 patients with an indication for MRA therapy (i.e. left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%, estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m² , K⁺ ≤5.0 mmol/L). The mean age was 66.1 ± 12.2 years. At baseline an MRA was prescribed to 741 (56%) patients. Patients who were prescribed MRAs at baseline were younger, more often male, had higher body mass index, lower sodium, higher proportion of hypertension history and ACEi/ARB prescription (all P < 0.05). Of the 1049 patients who completed the baseline plus the 9 month visit, 585 (56%) had an MRA prescribed at baseline and 662 (63%) had an MRA prescribed at 9 months. Among the 585 patients with MRA at baseline, 91 (16%) had discontinued therapy and among the 461 (44%) patients without MRA at baseline 168 (36%) had initiated therapy subsequently. MRA discontinuation was more likely in subjects with higher left ventricular ejection fraction and NYHA class III/IV (P < 0.05 for both). MRA prescription both at baseline and 9 months was not associated with the outcome of death or heart failure hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.66-1.58; P = 0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

In this prospective observational study across Europe, MRAs were largely under-prescribed and frequently discontinued. Owing to these dynamic changes, outcome inferences are inconclusive.

Transitional adherence and persistence in the use of aldosterone antagonist therapy in patients with heart failure

BACKGROUND

Aldosterone antagonist therapy is recommended for selected patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. Adherence to therapy in the transition from hospital to home is not well understood.

METHODS

We identified patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction who were ≥65 years old, eligible for aldosterone antagonist therapy, and discharged home from hospitals in the Get With the Guidelines-Heart Failure registry between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2008. We used Medicare prescription drug event data to measure adherence. Main outcome measures were prescription at discharge, outpatient prescription claim within 90 days, discontinuation, and adherence as measured with the medication possession ratio. We used the cumulative incidence function to estimate rates of initiation and discontinuation.

RESULTS

Among 2,086 eligible patients, 561 (26.9%) were prescribed an aldosterone antagonist at discharge. Within 90 days, 78.6% of eligible patients with a discharge prescription filled a prescription for the therapy, compared with 13.0% of eligible patients without a discharge prescription (P < .001). The median medication possession ratio was 0.63 over 1 year of follow-up. Among 634 patients who filled a prescription within 90 days of discharge, 7.9% discontinued therapy within 1 year.

CONCLUSION

Most eligible patients were not prescribed aldosterone antagonist therapy at discharge from a heart failure hospitalization. Eligible patients without a discharge prescription seldom initiated therapy as outpatients. Most patients who were prescribed an aldosterone antagonist at discharge filled the prescription within 90 days and remained on therapy.

Effects of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists on the risk of sudden cardiac death in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is an important cause of death in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) may attenuate this risk. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the impact of MRAs on SCD in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and other databases through March 30, 2012, without language restrictions. We included trials that enrolled patients with left ventricular ejection fraction of ≤45%, randomized subjects to MRAs versus control and reported outcomes on SCD, total and cardiovascular mortality. Eight published trials that enrolled 11 875 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 6 reported data on SCD and cardiovascular mortality, and 7 reported data on total mortality. No heterogeneity was observed among the trials. Patients treated with MRAs had 23% lower odds of experiencing SCD compared with controls (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.89; P=0.001). Similar reductions were observed in cardiovascular (0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.84; P<0.001) and total mortality (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.86; P<0.001). Although publication bias was observed, the results did not change after a trim and fill test, suggesting that the impact of this bias was likely insignificant.

CONCLUSIONS

MRAs reduce the risk of SCD in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Comparative effectiveness studies of MRAs on SCD in usual care as well as studies evaluating the efficacy of other therapies to prevent SCD in patients receiving optimal MRA therapy are needed to guide clinical decision-making.