Search

Aims: Patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (HF) could be enrolled in EMPULSE (NCT04157751) upon haemodynamic stabilization and between 24 h and 5 days after hospital admission. The timing of treatment initiation may influence the efficacy and safety of drugs such as empagliflozin. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient characteristics, clinical events, and treatment effects according to time from admission to randomization. Methods and results: The EMPULSE population was dichotomized by median time from hospital admission to randomization (1–2 days vs. 3–5 days). The primary outcome was a hierarchical composite endpoint of time to all‐cause death, number of HF events, time to first HF event, and a ≥5‐point difference in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score change from baseline after 90 days, analysed using the win ratio (WR) method. Patients randomized later (3–5 days, average time 3.9 days; n = 312) had a higher risk of experiencing clinical events than patients randomized earlier (1–2 days, average time 1.7 days; n = 215). The treatment effect favoured empagliflozin versus placebo in patients randomized later (3–5 days: WR 1.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26–2.25) but was attenuated in patients randomized earlier (1–2 days: WR 1.04, 95% CI 0.74–1.44) (interaction p = 0.029). A similar pattern was observed for the composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death and all‐cause hospitalizations (interaction p < 0.1 for both). The reduction of N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide levels was more pronounced with empagliflozin among patients randomized later than in patients randomized earlier (interaction p = 0.004). Conclusions: Among patients hospitalized for acute HF enrolled in EMPULSE, those randomized later after hospital admission (3–5 days) experienced greater clinical benefit with empagliflozin than those randomized earlier (1–2 days). These findings should be confirmed in future studies before clinical application. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: People with type 2 diabetes (T2D) face high risks of heart failure (HF) hospitalizations that are often recurrent, especially as kidney function declines. We examined the effects of canagliflozin on total HF events by baseline kidney function in patients with T2D at high cardiovascular risk and/or with chronic kidney disease. Methods and results: Leveraging pooled participant‐level data from the CANVAS programme (n = 10 142) and CREDENCE trial (n = 4401), first and total HF hospitalizations were examined. Cox proportional hazards models were built for the time to first HF hospitalization, and proportional means models based on cumulative mean functions were used for recurrent HF hospitalizations. Treatment effects were evaluated overall as well as within baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) strata (<45, 45–60, and >60 ml/min/1.73 m2). HF hospitalizations were independently and blindly adjudicated. Among 14 540 participants with available baseline eGFR values, 672 HF hospitalizations occurred over a median follow‐up of 2.5 years. Among participants who experienced a HF hospitalization, 357 had a single event (201 in placebo‐treated patients and 156 in canagliflozin‐treated patients), 77 had 2 events, and 39 had >2 events. Canagliflozin reduced risk of first HF hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48–0.70) consistently across baseline eGFR strata (pinteraction = 0.84). Canagliflozin reduced total HF hospitalizations overall (mean event ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.54–0.73) and across eGFR subgroups (pinteraction = 0.51). Canagliflozin also reduced cardiovascular death and total HF hospitalizations (mean event ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.65–0.80) and across eGFR subgroups (pinteraction = 0.82). The absolute risk reductions were numerically larger, and numbers needed to treat were smaller when evaluating total events versus first events alone. These observed HF benefits were highly consistent across the range of eGFR, with larger absolute benefits in participants who had worse kidney function at baseline. Conclusions: In individuals with T2D at high cardiovascular risk and/or with chronic kidney disease, canagliflozin reduced the total burden of HF hospitalizations, with consistent benefits observed across the kidney function spectrum. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: CANVAS (NCT01032629), CANVAS‐R (NCT01989754), CREDENCE (NCT02065791). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Compared to heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction, HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), and HF with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) are increasing in prevalence, yet little is known about the geographic variation in patient characteristics, treatments and outcomes among these two HF phenotypes. The aim of this study was to investigate geographic differences in HFpEF and HFmrEF. Methods and results: We conducted an individual patient analysis of five clinical trials enrolling patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF from North America (NA), Latin America (LA), Western Europe (WE), Central/Eastern Europe and Russia (CEER), and Asia‐Pacific (AP). We compared regions using descriptive statistics and multivariable regression models. Among the 19 959 patients included, 4066 (23.1%) had HFmrEF and 15 353 (76.9%) HFpEF. Regardless of HF phenotype, patients from WE were oldest, and those in CEER youngest. LA had the largest portion of females and NA most black patients. Obesity and diabetes were most prevalent in NA and hypertension and coronary heart disease most common in CEER. Self‐reported health status varied strikingly and was the worst in NA and best in AP. Among patients with HFmrEF, rates of the primary composite endpoint (cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization) were: NA 12.56 per 100 patient‐years (/100py), AP 11.67/100py, CEER 10.12/100py, LA 8.90/100py, and WE 8.43/100py, driven by differences in the rate of HF hospitalization. The corresponding values in HFpEF were 11.47/100py, 7.80/100py, 5.47/100py, 5.92/100py, and 7.80/100py, respectively. Conclusions: There is substantial geographic variation in patient characteristics, treatment and outcomes among patients with HFpEF and HFmrEF. These findings have implications for interpretation and generalizability of trial results, design and conduct of future trials, and optimization of care for these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Although much is known about the usefulness of heart failure (HF)‐specific instruments for assessing patient well‐being, less is known about the value of generic instruments for the measurement of health‐related quality of life (HRQL) in HF. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between the EuroQol 5‐dimension 5‐level (EQ‐5D‐5L) visual analogue scale (VAS) and index scores, clinical characteristics, and outcomes in patients with HF and the effect of dapagliflozin on these scores. Methods and results: We performed a patient‐level pooled analysis of the DAPA‐HF and DELIVER trials, which investigated the effectiveness and safety of dapagliflozin in patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and mildly reduced/preserved ejection fraction (HFmrEF/HFpEF), respectively. Patients reporting higher (better) EQ‐5D‐5L VAS and index scores had a lower prevalence of comorbidities, including atrial fibrillation and hypertension, than patients with a worse score. They were also more likely to have better investigator‐reported (New York Heart Association class) and patient‐self‐reported (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire) health status and lower median N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide levels. Compared to patients with the lowest scores (Q1), those with higher EQ‐5D‐5L VAS scores had better outcomes: the hazard ratio for the composite of cardiovascular death or worsening HF was 0.81 (95% confidence interval 0.72–0.91) in Q2, 0.74 (0.65–0.84) in Q3, and 0.62 (0.54–0.72) in Q4. The risk of each component of the composite outcome, and all‐cause death, was also lower in patients with better scores. Similar findings were observed for the index score. Treatment with dapagliflozin improved both EQ‐5D‐5L VAS and index scores across the range of ejection fraction. Conclusions: Both higher (better) EQ‐5D‐5L VAS and index scores were associated with better outcomes. Dapagliflozin treatment improved EQ‐5D‐5L VAS and index scores, irrespective of ejection fraction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The EMPULSE (EMPagliflozin in patients hospitalised with acUte heart faiLure who have been StabilizEd) trial showed that, compared to placebo, the sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin (10 mg/day) improved clinical outcomes of patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (HF). We investigated whether efficacy and safety of empagliflozin were consistent across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Methods and results: A total of 530 patients hospitalized for acute de novo or decompensated HF were included irrespective of LVEF. For the present analysis, patients were classified as HF with reduced (HFrEF, LVEF ≤40%), mildly reduced (HFmrEF, LVEF 41–49%) or preserved (HFpEF, LVEF ≥50%) ejection fraction at baseline. The primary endpoint was a hierarchical outcome of death, worsening HF events (HFE) and quality of life over 90 days, assessed by the win ratio. Secondary endpoints included individual components of the primary endpoint and safety. Out of 523 patients with baseline data, 354 (67.7%) had HFrEF, 54 (10.3%) had HFmrEF and 115 (22.0%) had HFpEF. The clinical benefit (hierarchical composite of all‐cause death, HFE and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score) of empagliflozin at 90 days compared to placebo was consistent across LVEF categories (≤40%: win ratio 1.35 [95% confidence interval 1.04, 1.75]; 41–49%: win ratio 1.25 [0.66, 2.37)] and ≥50%: win ratio 1.40 [0.87, 2.23], pinteraction = 0.96) with a favourable safety profile. Results were consistent across individual components of the hierarchical primary endpoint. Conclusion: The clinical benefit of empagliflozin proved consistent across LVEF categories in the EMPULSE trial. These results support early in‐hospital initiation of empagliflozin regardless of LVEF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Patients with heart failure (HF) often suffer from a range of comorbidities, which may affect their health status. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of different comorbidities on health status in patients with HF and reduced (HFrEF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods and results: Using individual patient data from HFrEF (ATMOSPHERE, PARADIGM‐HF, DAPA‐HF) and HFpEF (TOPCAT, PARAGON‐HF) trials, we examined the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) domain scores and overall summary score (KCCQ‐OSS) across a range of cardiorespiratory (angina, atrial fibrillation [AF], stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD]) and other comorbidities (obesity, diabetes, chronic kidney disease [CKD], anaemia). Of patients with HFrEF (n = 20 159), 36.2% had AF, 33.9% CKD, 33.9% diabetes, 31.4% obesity, 25.5% angina, 12.2% COPD, 8.4% stroke, and 4.4% anaemia; the corresponding proportions in HFpEF (n = 6563) were: 54.0% AF, 48.7% CKD, 43.4% diabetes, 53.3% obesity, 28.6% angina, 14.7% COPD, 10.2% stroke, and 6.5% anaemia. HFpEF patients had lower KCCQ domain scores and KCCQ‐OSS (67.8 vs. 71.3) than HFrEF patients. Physical limitations, social limitations and quality of life domains were reduced more than symptom frequency and symptom burden domains. In both HFrEF and HFpEF, COPD, angina, anaemia, and obesity were associated with the lowest scores. An increasing number of comorbidities was associated with decreasing scores (e.g. KCCQ‐OSS 0 vs. ≥4 comorbidities: HFrEF 76.8 vs. 66.4; HFpEF 73.7 vs. 65.2). Conclusions: Cardiac and non‐cardiac comorbidities are common in both HFrEF and HFpEF patients and most are associated with reductions in health status although the impact varied among comorbidities, by the number of comorbidities, and by HF phenotype. Treating/correcting comorbidity is a therapeutic approach that may improve the health status of patients with HF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Among patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), those with atrial fibrillation (AF) may respond differently to certain treatments than patients without AF. We investigated the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in patients with HFrEF with and without AF in the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse‐outcomes in Heart Failure trial (DAPA‐HF). We also examined the effect of dapagliflozin on new‐onset AF. Methods and results: The primary outcome was the composite of an episode of worsening HF (HF hospitalization or urgent HF visit requiring intravenous therapy) or cardiovascular death. Of the 4744 patients randomized, 1910 (40.3%) had 'any AF' (history of AF or AF on enrolment electrocardiogram). Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of worsening HF or cardiovascular death to a similar extent in patients with and without any AF [hazard ratio (HR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62–0.92 and 0.74, 95% CI 0.62–0.88, respectively; p for interaction = 0.88]. Consistent benefits were observed for the components of the primary outcome, all‐cause mortality, and improvement of Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score. Among patients without AF at baseline, dapagliflozin did not significantly reduce the risk of new‐onset AF compared with placebo (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.60–1.22). However, patients with new‐onset AF had a 5 to 6‐fold higher risk of adverse outcomes when compared to those without incident AF. Conclusions: Dapagliflozin, compared with placebo, reduced the risk of worsening HF events, cardiovascular death, and all‐cause death, and improved symptoms, in patients with and without AF. Dapagliflozin did not reduce the risk of new‐onset AF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: In patients with current or a history of hyperkalaemia, treatment with renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) is often compromised. Patiromer, a novel potassium (K+) binder, may improve serum K+ levels and adherence to RAASi. Methods: The DIAMOND trial will enroll ∼820 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF; ejection fraction ≤40%). Patients meeting the screening criteria will enter a single‐blinded run‐in phase where they will be started or continued on a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) titrated to 50 mg/day and other RAASi therapy to ≥50% target dose, and patiromer. Patiromer will be titrated up to a maximum three packs/day (8.4 g/pack) to achieve optimal doses of RAASi without hyperkalaemia. The run‐in phase will last up to 12 weeks, following which patients will undergo double‐blind randomization in a 1:1 ratio to receive either continued patiromer or placebo (patiromer withdrawal). The primary endpoint is the mean difference in serum K+ from randomization between patiromer and placebo arms. Secondary endpoints will include hyperkalaemia events with K+ value >5.5 mEq/L, durable enablement of MRA at target dose, investigator‐reported adverse events of hyperkalaemia, hyperkalaemia‐related clinical endpoints and an overall RAASi use score (using a 0–8‐point scale) comprising all‐cause death, occurrence of cardiovascular hospitalization or usage of comprehensive heart failure medication. Conclusion: The DIAMOND trial is designed to determine if patiromer can favourably impact K+ control in patients with HFrEF with hyperkalaemia or a history of hyperkalaemia leading to RAASi therapy compromise, and in turn improve RAASi use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Loop diuretics (LD) relieve symptoms and signs of congestion due to heart failure (HF), but many patients prescribed LD do not have such a diagnosis. We studied the relationship between HF diagnosis, use of LD, and outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) enrolled in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial.Methods and Results: The relationship between HF diagnosis, use of LD, and outcomes was evaluated in four patient subgroups with T2DM: (i) investigator-reported HF on LD, (ii) investigator-reported HF not on LD, (iii) no HF on LD, and (iv) no HF and not on LD, and we assessed their risk of cardiovascular events. Of 7020 participants, 706 (10%) had a diagnosis of HF at baseline, of whom 334 were prescribed LD. However, 755 (11%) patients who did not have a diagnosis of HF were prescribed LD. Compared to those with neither HF nor prescribed LD (reference group; placebo), those with both HF and receiving LD had the highest rates for all-cause [hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval) 3.19 (2.03-5.01)] and cardiovascular mortality [3.83 [(2.28-6.44)], and HF hospitalizations [9.51 (5.61-16.14)]. Patients without HF but prescribed LD had higher rates for all three outcomes [1.62 (1.10-2.39); 1.97 (1.26-3.08); 3.20 (1.90-5.39)], which were similar to patients with HF who were not receiving LD [1.42 (0.78-2.57); 1.56 (0.78-3.11); 3.00 (1.40-6.40)]. Empagliflozin had similar benefits regardless of subgroup (P for interaction >0.1 for all outcomes).Conclusion: Patients with T2DM prescribed LD are at greater risk of cardiovascular events even if they are not reported to have HF; this might reflect under-diagnosis. Empagliflozin was similarly effective in all subgroups investigated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been shown to reduce the risk of incident heart failure hospitalization in individuals with type 2 diabetes who have, or are at high risk of, cardiovascular disease. Most patients in these trials did not have heart failure at baseline and the effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on outcomes in individuals with established heart failure (with or without diabetes) is unknown.Design and Methods: The Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure trial (DAPA-HF) is an international, multicentre, parallel group, randomized, double-blind, study in patients with chronic heart failure, evaluating the effect of dapagliflozin 10 mg, compared with placebo, given once daily, in addition to standard care, on the primary composite outcome of a worsening heart failure event (hospitalization or equivalent event, i.e. an urgent heart failure visit) or cardiovascular death. Patients with and without diabetes are eligible and must have a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40%, a moderately elevated N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide level, and an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥ 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 . The trial is event-driven, with a target of 844 primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes include the composite of total heart failure hospitalizations (including repeat episodes), and cardiovascular death and patient-reported outcomes. A total of 4744 patients have been randomized.Conclusions: DAPA-HF will determine the efficacy and safety of the SGLT2 inhibitor dapagliflozin, added to conventional therapy, in a broad spectrum of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Anaemia is common in heart failure and associated with worse outcomes. We examined the effect of dapagliflozin on correction of anaemia in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction in DAPA‐HF. We also analysed the effect of dapagliflozin on outcomes, according to anaemia status at baseline. Methods and results: Anaemia was defined at baseline as a haematocrit <39% in men and <36% in women. Resolution of anaemia was defined as two consecutive haematocrit measurements above these thresholds at any time during follow‐up. The primary outcome was a composite of worsening HF (hospitalization or urgent visit requiring intravenous therapy) or cardiovascular death. Of the 4744 patients randomized in DAPA‐HF, 4691 had a haematocrit available at baseline, of which 1032 were anaemic (22.0%). The rate of the primary outcome was higher in patients with anaemia (16.1 per 100 person‐years) compared with those without (12.9 per 100 person‐years). Anaemia was corrected in 62.2% of patients in the dapagliflozin group, compared with 41.1% of patients in the placebo group. The effect of dapagliflozin on the primary outcome was consistent in anaemic compared with non‐anaemic patients [hazard ratio (HR) 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52–0.88 vs. HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.65–0.89; interaction P = 0.44]. Similar findings were observed for cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization, and all‐cause mortality. Patients with resolution of anaemia had better outcomes than those in which anaemia persisted. Conclusion: Patients with anaemia had worse outcomes in DAPA‐HF. Dapagliflozin corrected anaemia more often than placebo and improved outcomes, irrespective of anaemia status at baseline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The aim of this study was to examine whether left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) modified efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin 10 mg compared with placebo in the 4744 patients with LVEF ≤40% randomized in the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure trial (DAPA-HF).Methods and Results: We examined whether LVEF, analysed categorically or continuously, modified the effect of dapagliflozin. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of a worsening heart failure (HF) event (unplanned HF hospitalization/an urgent HF visit requiring intravenous therapy) or cardiovascular death. Mean LVEF was 31.1% and LVEF categories analysed were: <26% (n = 1143), 26-30% (n = 1018), 31-35% (n = 1187), and >35% (n = 1396). Each 5% decrease in LVEF was associated with a higher risk of the primary outcome [hazard ratio (HR) 1.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-1.24]. The benefit of dapagliflozin was consistent across the spectrum of LVEF: the dapagliflozin vs. placebo HR was 0.75 (95% CI 0.59-0.95) for LVEF <26%, 0.75 (0.57-0.98) for LVEF 26-30%, 0.67 (0.51-0.89) for LVEF 31-35%, and 0.83 (0.63-1.09) for LVEF >35% (P for interaction = 0.762). Similarly, the effect of dapagliflozin on the components of the primary endpoint was not modified by baseline LVEF (P for interaction for cardiovascular death = 0.974, and for worsening HF = 0.161). Safety of dapagliflozin was also consistent across the range of LVEF and neither efficacy nor safety were modified by diabetes status.Conclusion: Left ventricular ejection fraction was a significant predictor of hospitalization and mortality in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction but did not modify the beneficial effect of dapagliflozin, overall or separately, in patients with and without diabetes.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03036124. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aims of this study were to: (i) report the baseline characteristics of patients enrolled in the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF) trial, (ii) compare DAPA-HF patients to participants in contemporary heart failure (HF) registries and in other recent HF trials, and (iii) compare individuals with diabetes, pre-diabetes and a normal glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in DAPA-HF.Methods and Results: Adults with HF in New York Heart Association functional class ≥ II, a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40%, an elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide concentration and receiving standard treatment were eligible for DAPA-HF, which is comparing dapagliflozin 10 mg once daily to matching placebo. In patients without a history of diabetes, previously undiagnosed diabetes was defined as a confirmed HbA1c ≥ 6.5%. Among patients without known or undiagnosed diabetes, pre-diabetes was defined as a HbA1c ≥ 5.7% The remainder of patients, with a HbA1c < 5.7%, were defined as normoglycaemic. Of the 4744 patients (mean age 66 years; 23% women) randomized, 42% had known diabetes and 3% undiagnosed diabetes. Of the remainder, 67% had pre-diabetes and 33% normal HbA1c. Overall, DAPA-HF patients were generally similar to those in recent registries and in relevant trials and had high levels of background therapy: 94% angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, 96% beta-blocker, and 71% mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist; 26% had a defibrillator. Patients with diabetes had worse HF status, more co-morbidity, and greater renal impairment but received similar HF therapy. Patients with diabetes received non-insulin hypoglycaemic therapy alone in 49%, insulin alone in 11%, both in 14%, and none in 26%.Conclusions: Patients randomized in DAPA-HF were similar to those in other contemporary HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) registries and trials. These patients were receiving recommended HFrEF therapy and those with diabetes were also treated with conventional glucose-lowering therapy. Consequently, DAPA-HF will test the incremental efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in HFrEF patients with and without diabetes.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03036124. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Methods and results Conclusions Patients with heart failure (HF) with improved ejection fraction (HFimpEF) may face residual risks of clinical events that are comparable to those experienced by patients with HF whose left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) has consistently been above 40%. However, little is known about the clinical course of patients with HFimpEF during hospitalization for HF.DELIVER randomized patients with HF and LVEF >40% to dapagliflozin or placebo, including HFimpEF (LVEF previously ≤40%). We evaluated all HF hospitalizations adjudicated by the clinical endpoints committee with available data for determination of in‐hospital course. Complicated hospitalization was defined as any hospitalization requiring intensive care unit stay, intravenous vasopressors/inotropes/vasodilators, invasive or non‐invasive ventilation, mechanical fluid removal, ultrafiltration, or mechanical circulatory support. LVEF changes were extracted using a validated GPT‐3.5, a large language model, via a secure private endpoint. Of the 6263 patients enrolled in DELIVER, 1151 (18%) had HFimpEF. During a median follow‐up of 2.3 years, there were 224 total HF hospitalizations in 144 patients with HFimpEF and 985 in 603 patients with LVEF consistently >40%. Patients with HFimpEF experienced higher rates of complicated HF hospitalization as compared with patients with LVEF consistently >40% (39% vs. 27%; p < 0.001). Among those who experienced a first HF hospitalization, there was no significant difference in length of stay or in‐hospital mortality between patients with HFimpEF versus LVEF consistently >40%. In a subset of participants who had at least one LVEF measurement available during HF hospitalization, 66% of those with HFimpEF and 29% of patients with LVEF consistently >40% experienced a reduction in their LVEF to ≤40% from the time of enrolment (p < 0.001). In the entire DELIVER cohort, dapagliflozin reduced total uncomplicated and complicated HF hospitalizations, irrespective of HFimpEF status (pinteraction ≥0.30).Among patients hospitalized for HF in DELIVER, those with HFimpEF experienced a more adverse in‐hospital clinical course, necessitating higher resource utilization beyond standard diuretic therapy compared with patients with HF and LVEF consistently >40%, but had similar in‐hospital mortality. Treatment benefits of dapagliflozin were not modified by hospitalization type. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]