Integrating Quality of Life and Survival Outcomes in Cardiovascular Clinical Trials

Quality of Life After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

BACKGROUND

Differences in quality of life (QoL) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not well characterized. We aimed to compare the short- and long-term effects of CABG versus PCI on QoL.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing CABG versus PCI using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ)-Angina Frequency, SAQ-QoL, SAQ-Physical Limitations, EuroQoL-5D, and Short-Form Questionnaire. We calculated mean changes within each group from baseline to 1, 6, 12, and 36 to 60 months (latest follow-up) and the weighted mean differences between groups using inverse-variance methods. A total of 10 760 patients were enrolled in 5 trials. From baseline to 12 months and 36 to 60 months, the mean change in SAQ-Angina Frequency was >22 points (95% CI, 21.0-25.6) after both PCI and CABG. The mean difference in SAQ-Angina Frequency was similar between procedures at 1 month and at 36 to 60 months but favored CABG at 12 months (1.97 [95% CI, 0.68-3.26]). SAQ-QoL favored PCI at 1 month (-2.92 [95% CI, -4.66 to -1.18]) and CABG at 6 (2.50 [95% CI, 1.02-3.97]), 12 (3.30 [95% CI, 1.78-4.82]), and 36 to 60 months (3.17 [95% CI, 0.54 5.80). SAQ-Physical Limitations (-12.61 [95% CI, -16.16 to -9.06]) and EuroQoL-5D (-0.07 [95% CI, -0.08 to -0.07) favored PCI at 1 month. Short-Form Questionnaire-Physical Component favored CABG at 12 months (1.18 [95% CI, 0.46-1.90]).

CONCLUSIONS

Both PCI and CABG improved long-term disease-specific and generic QoL.

Patient-reported outcome measures and patient engagement in heart failure clinical trials: multi-stakeholder perspectives

There are many consequences of heart failure (HF), including symptoms, impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and physical and social limitations (functional status). These have a substantial impact on patients' lives, yet are not routinely captured in clinical trials. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can quantify patients' experiences of their disease and its treatment. Steps can be taken to improve the use of PROs in HF trials, in regulatory and payer decisions, and in patient care. Importantly, PRO measures (PROMs) must be developed with involvement of patients, family members, and caregivers from diverse demographic groups and communities. PRO data collection should become more routine not only in clinical trials but also in clinical practice. This may be facilitated by the use of digital tools and interdisciplinary patient advocacy efforts. There is a need for standardization, not only of the PROM instruments, but also in procedures for analysis, interpretation and reporting PRO data. More work needs to be done to determine the degree of change that is important to patients and that is associated with increased risks of clinical events. This 'minimal clinically important difference' requires further research to determine thresholds for different PROMs, to assess consistency across trial populations, and to define standards for improvement that warrant regulatory and reimbursement approvals. PROs are a vital part of patient care and drug development, and more work should be done to ensure that these measures are both reflective of the patient experience and that they are more widely employed.

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Resistance Training Added to Caloric Restriction Plus Aerobic Exercise Training in Obese Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

We have shown that combined caloric restriction (CR) and aerobic exercise training (AT) improve peak exercise O2 consumption (VO2peak), and quality-of-life in older patients with obese heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. However, ≈35% of weight lost during CR+AT was skeletal muscle mass. We examined whether addition of resistance training (RT) to CR+AT would reduce skeletal muscle loss and further improve outcomes.

METHODS

This study is a randomized, controlled, single-blind, 20-week trial of RT+CR+AT versus CR+AT in 88 patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and body mass index (BMI) ≥28 kg/m2. Outcomes at 20 weeks included the primary outcome (VO2peak); MRI and dual X-ray absorptiometry; leg muscle strength and quality (leg strength ÷ leg skeletal muscle area); and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven participants completed the trial. RT+CR+AT and CR+AT produced nonsignificant differences in weight loss: mean (95% CI): -8 (-9, -7) versus -9 (-11, -8; P=0.21). RT+CR+AT and CR+AT had non-significantly differences in the reduction of body fat [-6.5 (-7.2, -5.8) versus -7.4 (-8.1, -6.7) kg] and skeletal muscle [-2.1 (-2.7, -1.5) versus -2.1 (-2.7, -1.4) kg] (P=0.20 and 0.23, respectively). RT+CR+AT produced significantly greater increases in leg muscle strength [4.9 (0.7, 9.0) versus -1.1 (-5.5, 3.2) Nm, P=0.05] and leg muscle quality [0.07 (0.03, 0.11) versus 0.02 (-0.02, 0.06) Nm/cm2, P=0.04]. Both RT+CR+AT and CR+AT produced significant improvements in VO2peak [108 (958, 157) versus 80 (30, 130) mL/min; P=0.001 and 0.002, respectively], and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score [17 (12, 22) versus 23 (17, 28); P=0.001 for both], with no significant between-group differences. Both RT+CR+AT and CR+AT significantly reduced LV mass and arterial stiffness. There were no study-related serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

In older obese heart failure with preserved ejection fraction patients, CR+AT produces large improvements in VO2peak and quality-of-life. Adding RT to CR+AT increased leg strength and muscle quality without attenuating skeletal muscle loss or further increasing VO2peak or quality-of-life.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://ClincalTrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02636439.

Novel Trial Design: CHIEF-HF

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

The expense of clinical trials mandates new strategies to efficiently generate evidence and test novel therapies. In this context, we designed a decentralized, patient-centered randomized clinical trial leveraging mobile technologies, rather than in-person site visits, to test the efficacy of 12 weeks of canagliflozin for the treatment of heart failure, regardless of ejection fraction or diabetes status, on the reduction of heart failure symptoms.

The win ratio approach for composite endpoints: practical guidance based on previous experience

The win ratio was introduced in 2012 as a new method for examining composite endpoints and has since been widely adopted in cardiovascular (CV) trials. Improving upon conventional methods for analysing composite endpoints, the win ratio accounts for relative priorities of the components and allows the components to be different types of outcomes. For example, the win ratio can combine the time to death with the number of occurrences of a non-fatal outcome such as CV-related hospitalizations (CVHs) in a single hierarchical composite endpoint. The win ratio can provide greater statistical power to detect and quantify a treatment difference by using all available information contained in the component outcomes. The win ratio can also incorporate quantitative outcomes such as exercise tests or quality-of-life scores. There is a need for more practical guidance on how best to design trials using the win ratio approach. This manuscript provides an overview of the principles behind the win ratio and provides insights into how to implement the win ratio in CV trial design and reporting, including how to determine trial size.

Exercise Training Effects on the Relationship of Physical Function and Health-Related Quality of Life Among Older Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction

PURPOSE

Although exercise training (ET) has been shown to improve both physical function and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in older patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the relationship between changes in these important patient-centered outcome measures has not been adequately investigated.

METHODS

Patients (n = 116) with HFpEF (from 2 previous randomized controlled trials) were assigned to either 16 wk of endurance ET or attention control (CON). The ET in both trials consisted of ≤ 60 min of moderate-intensity endurance ET 3 time/wk. Peak exercise oxygen uptake (V˙o2peak) and other exercise capacity measures were obtained from a cardiopulmonary exercise test on an electronically braked cycle ergometer and 6-min walk test (6MWT). HRQOL was assessed using the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF) Questionnaire and the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36).

RESULTS

Compared with CON, the ET group demonstrated significant improvement in measures of physical function (V˙o2peak and 6MWT) at 16 wk of follow-up. There were no significant differences observed between the groups for MLHF scores, but the ET group showed significant improvements on the SF-36. There were no significant correlations between change in any of the physical function and HRQOL measures in the ET group.

CONCLUSIONS

While endurance ET improved both physical function and some domains of HRQOL, the lack of significant correlations between changes in these measures suggests the effects of ET on physical function and HRQOL are largely independent of one another. Since these measures assess important and unique patient-centered outcomes in HFpEF patients, both physical function and HRQOL should be assessed in exercise-based programs and clinical trials.

Health Status after Invasive or Conservative Care in Coronary and Advanced Kidney Disease

BACKGROUND

In the ISCHEMIA-CKD trial, the primary analysis showed no significant difference in the risk of death or myocardial infarction with initial angiography and revascularization plus guideline-based medical therapy (invasive strategy) as compared with guideline-based medical therapy alone (conservative strategy) in participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease (an estimated glomerular filtration rate of <30 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 or receipt of dialysis). A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status.

METHODS

We assessed health status with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) before randomization and at 1.5, 3, and 6 months and every 6 months thereafter. The primary outcome of this analysis was the SAQ Summary score (ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating less frequent angina and better function and quality of life). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate the treatment effect with the invasive strategy.

RESULTS

Health status was assessed in 705 of 777 participants. Nearly half the participants (49%) had had no angina during the month before randomization. At 3 months, the estimated mean difference between the invasive-strategy group and the conservative-strategy group in the SAQ Summary score was 2.1 points (95% credible interval, -0.4 to 4.6), a result that favored the invasive strategy. The mean difference in score at 3 months was largest among participants with daily or weekly angina at baseline (10.1 points; 95% credible interval, 0.0 to 19.9), smaller among those with monthly angina at baseline (2.2 points; 95% credible interval, -2.0 to 6.2), and nearly absent among those without angina at baseline (0.6 points; 95% credible interval, -1.9 to 3.3). By 6 months, the between-group difference in the overall trial population was attenuated (0.5 points; 95% credible interval, -2.2 to 3.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease did not have substantial or sustained benefits with regard to angina-related health status with an initially invasive strategy as compared with a conservative strategy. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; ISCHEMIA-CKD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01985360.).

Health-Status Outcomes with Invasive or Conservative Care in Coronary Disease

BACKGROUND

In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients.

METHODS

We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency.

RESULTS

At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina).

CONCLUSIONS

In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522.).