Can BNP-guided therapy improve health-related quality of life, and do responders to BNP-guided heart failure treatment have improved health-related quality of life? Results from the UPSTEP study

The Impact of Clinical, Biochemical, and Echocardiographic Parameters on the Quality of Life in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Despite significant advances in HF diagnosis and treatment over the recent decades, patients still characterize poor long-term prognosis with many recurrent hospitalizations and reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We aimed to check the potential relationship between clinical, biochemical, or echocardiographic parameters and HRQoL in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We included 152 adult patients hospitalized due to chronic HFrEF. We used the WHOQoL-BREF questionnaire to assess HRQoL and GNRI to evaluate nutritional status. We also analyzed several biochemical parameters and left ventricle ejection fraction. Forty (26.3%) patients were hospitalized due to HF exacerbation and 112 (73.7%) due to planned HF evaluation. The median age was 57 (48–62) years. Patients with low somatic HRQoL score had lower transferrin saturation (23.7 ± 11.1 vs. 29.7 ± 12.5%; p = 0.01), LDL (2.40 (1.80–2.92) vs. 2.99 (2.38–3.60) mmol/L; p = 0.001), triglycerides (1.18 (0.91–1.57) vs. 1.48 (1.27–2.13) mmol/L; p = 0.006) and LVEF (20 (15–25) vs. 25 (20–30)%; p = 0.003). TIBC (64.9 (58.5–68.2) vs. 57.7 (52.7–68.6); p = 0.02) was significantly higher in this group. We observed no associations between HRQoL and age or gender. The somatic domain of WHOQoL-BREF in patients with HFrEF correlated with the clinical status as well as biochemical and echocardiographic parameters. Assessment of HRQoL in HFrEF seems important in everyday practice and can identify patients requiring a special intervention

Targeting Natriuretic Peptide Levels in Heart Failure with Therapy: Does "X" Really Mark the Spot?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Explore controversial biomarker-guided management of patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction.

RECENT FINDINGS

Natriuretic peptides (e.g., BNP, NT-proBNP) are elevated in HF as a result of end-diastolic stress and are used in the diagnosis and prognosis of heart failure. Natriuretic peptide levels decrease with guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). Multiple small studies examined whether the use of biomarker-guided therapy would be beneficial to guide HF care and potentially improve outcomes. Guiding Evidence-Based Therapy Using Biomarker Intensified Treatment in Heart Failure (GUIDE-IT), the largest randomized control study seeking to answer that question, did not find biomarker guided therapy to be more effective than usual care in improving the primary endpoints of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality in HF patients. Natriuretic peptides are important for diagnosis and prognosis in HF. GUIDE-IT showed that patients with HF and reduced ejection did not benefit from biomarker-guided strategy in terms of clinical outcomes. Future studies could focus on additional routine clinical care settings and take into account other HF phenotypes including preserved ejection fraction.

B-type natriuretic peptide-guided therapy for heart failure (HF): a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data (IPD) and aggregate data

BACKGROUND

We estimated the effectiveness of serial B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) blood testing to guide up-titration of medication compared with symptom-guided up-titration of medication in patients with heart failure (HF).

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We searched: MEDLINE (Ovid) 1950 to 9/06/2016; Embase (Ovid), 1980 to 2016 week 23; the Cochrane Library; ISI Web of Science (Citations Index and Conference Proceedings). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were death related to HF, cardiovascular death, all-cause hospital admission, hospital admission for HF, adverse events, and quality of life. IPD were sought from all RCTs identified. Random-effects meta-analyses (two-stage) were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and confidence intervals (CIs) across RCTs, including HR estimates from published reports of studies that did not provide IPD. We estimated treatment-by-covariate interactions for age, gender, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, HF type; diabetes status and baseline BNP subgroups. Dichotomous outcomes were analysed using random-effects odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI.

RESULTS

We identified 14 eligible RCTs, five providing IPD. BNP-guided therapy reduced the hazard of hospital admission for HF by 19% (13 RCTs, HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98) but not all-cause mortality (13 RCTs; HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.01) or cardiovascular mortality (5 RCTs; OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.16). For all-cause mortality, there was a significant interaction between treatment strategy and age (p = 0.034, 11 RCTs; HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.92, patients < 75 years old and HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.84-1.37, patients ≥ 75 years old); ejection fraction (p = 0.026, 11 RCTs; HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71-0.99, patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF); and HR 1.33, 95% CI 0.83-2.11, patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)). Adverse events were significantly more frequent with BNP-guided therapy vs. symptom-guided therapy (5 RCTs; OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.60).

CONCLUSION

BNP-guided therapy did not reduce mortality but reduced HF hospitalisation. The overall quality of the evidence varied from low to very low. The relevance of these findings to unselected patients, particularly those managed by community generalists, are unclear.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42013005335.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of serum B-type natriuretic peptide testing and monitoring in patients with heart failure in primary and secondary care: an evidence synthesis, cohort study and cost-effectiveness model

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) affects around 500,000 people in the UK. HF medications are frequently underprescribed and B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP)-guided therapy may help to optimise treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of BNP-guided therapy compared with symptom-guided therapy in HF patients.

DESIGN

Systematic review, cohort study and cost-effectiveness model.

SETTING

A literature review and usual care in the NHS.

PARTICIPANTS

(a) HF patients in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of BNP-guided therapy; and (b) patients having usual care for HF in the NHS.

INTERVENTIONS

Systematic review: BNP-guided therapy or symptom-guided therapy in primary or secondary care. Cohort study: BNP monitored (≥ 6 months' follow-up and three or more BNP tests and two or more tests per year), BNP tested (≥ 1 tests but not BNP monitored) or never tested. Cost-effectiveness model: BNP-guided therapy in specialist clinics.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Mortality, hospital admission (all cause and HF related) and adverse events; and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for the cost-effectiveness model.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic review: Individual participant or aggregate data from eligible RCTs. Cohort study: The Clinical Practice Research Datalink, Hospital Episode Statistics and National Heart Failure Audit (NHFA).

REVIEW METHODS

A systematic literature search (five databases, trial registries, grey literature and reference lists of publications) for published and unpublished RCTs.

RESULTS

Five RCTs contributed individual participant data (IPD) and eight RCTs contributed aggregate data (1536 participants were randomised to BNP-guided therapy and 1538 participants were randomised to symptom-guided therapy). For all-cause mortality, the hazard ratio (HR) for BNP-guided therapy was 0.87 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 1.04]. Patients who were aged < 75 years or who had heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) received the most benefit [interactions (p = 0.03): < 75 years vs. ≥ 75 years: HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.92) vs. 1.07 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.37); HFrEF vs. heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF): HR 0.83 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.01) vs. 1.33 (95% CI 0.83 to 2.11)]. In the cohort study, incident HF patients (1 April 2005-31 March 2013) were never tested (n = 13,632), BNP tested (n = 3392) or BNP monitored (n = 71). Median survival was 5 years; all-cause mortality was 141.5 out of 1000 person-years (95% CI 138.5 to 144.6 person-years). All-cause mortality and hospital admission rate were highest in the BNP-monitored group, and median survival among 130,433 NHFA patients (1 January 2007-1 March 2013) was 2.2 years. The admission rate was 1.1 patients per year (interquartile range 0.5-3.5 patients). In the cost-effectiveness model, in patients aged < 75 years with HFrEF or HFpEF, BNP-guided therapy improves median survival (7.98 vs. 6.46 years) with a small QALY gain (5.68 vs. 5.02) but higher lifetime costs (£64,777 vs. £58,139). BNP-guided therapy is cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY.

LIMITATIONS

The limitations of the trial were a lack of IPD for most RCTs and heterogeneous interventions; the inability to identify BNP monitoring confidently, to determine medication doses or to distinguish between HFrEF and HFpEF; the use of a simplified two-state Markov model; a focus on health service costs and a paucity of data on HFpEF patients aged < 75 years and HFrEF patients aged ≥ 75 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of BNP-guided therapy in specialist HF clinics is uncertain. If efficacious, it would be cost-effective for patients aged < 75 years with HFrEF. The evidence reviewed may not apply in the UK because care is delivered differently.

FUTURE WORK

Identify an optimal BNP-monitoring strategy and how to optimise HF management in accordance with guidelines; update the IPD meta-analysis to include the Guiding Evidence Based Therapy Using Biomarker Intensified Treatment (GUIDE-IT) RCT; collect routine long-term outcome data for completed and ongoing RCTs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN37248047 and PROSPERO CRD42013005335.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The British Heart Foundation paid for Chris A Rogers' and Maria Pufulete's time contributing to the study. Syed Mohiuddin's time is supported by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care West at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust. Rachel Maishman contributed to the study when she was in receipt of a NIHR Methodology Research Fellowship.

Evaluation of Resting Cardiac Power Output as a Prognostic Factor in Patients with Advanced Heart Failure

If the heart is represented by a hydraulic pump, cardiac power represents the hydraulic function of the heart. Cardiac pump function is frequently determined through left ventricular ejection fraction using imaging. This study aims to validate resting cardiac power output (CPO) as a predictive biomarker in patients with advanced heart failure (HF). One hundred and seventy-two patients with HF severe enough to warrant cardiac transplantation were retrospectively reviewed at a single tertiary care institution between September 2010 and July 2013. Patients were initially evaluated with simultaneous right-sided and left-sided cardiac catheter-based hemodynamic measurements, followed by longitudinal follow-up (median of 52 months) for adverse events (cardiac mortality, cardiac transplantation, or ventricular assist device placement). Median resting CPO was 0.54 W (long rank chi-square = 33.6; p < 0.0001). Decreased resting CPO (<0.54 W) predicted increased risk for adverse outcomes. Fifty cardiac deaths, 10 cardiac transplants, and 12 ventricular assist device placements were documented. The prognostic relevance of resting CPO remained significant after adjustment for age, gender, left ventricular ejection fraction, mean arterial pressure, pulmonary vascular resistance, right atrial pressure, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (HR, 3.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.66 to 6.77; p = 0.0007). In conclusion, lower resting CPO supplies independent prediction of adverse outcomes. Thus, it could be effectively used for risk stratification in patients with advanced HF.

A novel ventricular restraint device (ASD) repetitively deliver Salvia miltiorrhiza to epicardium have good curative effects in heart failure management

A novel ventricular restraint is the non-transplant surgical option for the management of an end-stage dilated heart failure (HF). To expand the therapeutic techniques we design a novel ventricular restraint device (ASD) which has the ability to deliver a therapeutic drug directly to the heart. We deliver a Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) Salvia miltiorrhiza (Danshen Zhusheye) through active hydraulic ventricular support drug delivery system (ASD) and we hypothesize that it will show better results in HF management than the restraint device and drug alone. SD rats were selected and divided into five groups (n=6), Normal, HF, HF+SM (IV), HF+ASD, HF+ASD+SM groups respectively. Post myocardial infarction (MI), electrocardiography (ECG) showed abnormal heart function in all groups and HF+ASD+SM group showed a significant therapeutic improvement with respect to other treatment HF, HF+ASD, and HF+SM (IV) groups on day 30. The mechanical functions of the heart such as heart rate, LVEDP, and LVSP were brought to normal when treated with ASD+SM and show significant (P value<0.01) compared to other groups. BNP significantly declines in HF+ASD+SM group animals compared with other treatment groups. Masson's Trichrome staining was used to study histopathology of cardiac myocytes and quantification of fibrosis was assessed. The large blue fibrotic area was observed in HF, HF+ASD, and HF+SM (IV) groups while HF+ASD+SM showed negligible fibrotic myocyte at the end of study period (30days). This study proves that novel ASD device augments the therapeutic effect of the drug and delivers Salvia miltiorrhiza to the cardiomyocytes significantly as well as provides additional support to the dilated ventricle by the heart failure.

N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide and associated factors in the general working population: a baseline survey of the Uranosaki cohort study

Few data on clinical characteristics associated with N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) or the clinical value of measuring NT-proBNP in the working population are available. The aim of the present study was to investigate the levels of NT-proBNP and their association with clinical variables in the Japanese general working population by using baseline data from the Uranosaki cohort study. In the study, the plasma concentration of NT-proBNP and some biomarkers were measured in addition to the standard health checkups at the workplace. Questionnaires regarding health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) were also completed. A total of 2140 participants were enrolled in the study. Plasma levels of NT-proBNP were positively associated with age, female sex, systolic blood pressure, pulse pressure, prevalent hypertension, smoking habit, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and prevalent proteinuria, and negatively associated with body mass index, lipid profiles except HDL-C, uric acid, renal function, and hemoglobin. Both the plasma concentration of high-molecular weight adiponectin and that of high-sensitivity troponin T were positively and independently associated with NT-proBNP. In addition, the HR-QOL score regarding sleep disorder was independently associated with NT-proBNP. Thus, we have obtained evidence that the plasma NT-proBNP is affected by several clinical variables in the general working population.

B-type natriuretic peptide-guided treatment for heart failure

BACKGROUND

Heart failure is a condition in which the heart does not pump enough blood to meet all the needs of the body. Symptoms of heart failure include breathlessness, fatigue and fluid retention. Outcomes for patients with heart failure are highly variable; however on average, these patients have a poor prognosis. Prognosis can be improved with early diagnosis and appropriate use of medical treatment, use of devices and transplantation. Patients with heart failure are high users of healthcare resources, not only due to drug and device treatments, but due to high costs of hospitalisation care. B-type natriuretic peptide levels are already used as biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis of heart failure, but could offer to clinicians a possible tool to guide drug treatment. This could optimise drug management in heart failure patients whilst allaying concerns over potential side effects due to drug intolerance.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether treatment guided by serial BNP or NT-proBNP (collectively referred to as NP) monitoring improves outcomes compared with treatment guided by clinical assessment alone.

SEARCH METHODS

Searches were conducted up to 15 March 2016 in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (OVID), Embase (OVID), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database in the Cochrane Library. Searches were also conducted in the Science Citation Index Expanded, the Conference Proceedings Citation Index on Web of Science (Thomson Reuters), World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry and ClinicalTrials.gov. We applied no date or language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of NP-guided treatment of heart failure versus treatment guided by clinical assessment alone with no restriction on follow-up. Adults treated for heart failure, in both in-hospital and out-of-hospital settings, and trials reporting a clinical outcome were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and evaluated risk of bias. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated for dichotomous data, and pooled mean differences (MD) (with 95% confidence intervals (CI)) were calculated for continuous data. We contacted trial authors to obtain missing data. Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, we assessed the quality of the evidence and GRADE profiler (GRADEPRO) was used to import data from Review Manager to create a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 randomised controlled trials with 3660 participants (range of mean age: 57 to 80 years) comparing NP-guided treatment with clinical assessment alone. The evidence for all-cause mortality using NP-guided treatment showed uncertainty (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.01; patients = 3169; studies = 15; low quality of the evidence), and for heart failure mortality (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.30; patients = 853; studies = 6; low quality of evidence).The evidence suggested heart failure admission was reduced by NP-guided treatment (38% versus 26%, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.80; patients = 1928; studies = 10; low quality of evidence), but the evidence showed uncertainty for all-cause admission (57% versus 53%, RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.03; patients = 1142; studies = 6; low quality of evidence).Six studies reported on adverse events, however the results could not be pooled (patients = 1144; low quality of evidence). Only four studies provided cost of treatment results, three of these studies reported a lower cost for NP-guided treatment, whilst one reported a higher cost (results were not pooled; patients = 931, low quality of evidence). The evidence showed uncertainty for quality of life data (MD -0.03, 95% CI -1.18 to 1.13; patients = 1812; studies = 8; very low quality of evidence).We completed a 'Risk of bias' assessment for all studies. The impact of risk of bias from lack of blinding of outcome assessment and high attrition levels was examined by restricting analyses to only low 'Risk of bias' studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In patients with heart failure low-quality evidence showed a reduction in heart failure admission with NP-guided treatment while low-quality evidence showed uncertainty in the effect of NP-guided treatment for all-cause mortality, heart failure mortality, and all-cause admission. Uncertainty in the effect was further shown by very low-quality evidence for patient's quality of life. The evidence for adverse events and cost of treatment was low quality and we were unable to pool results.