Search

ABSTRACT: The advent of immunological therapies has revolutionized the treatment of solid and haematological cancers over the last decade. Licensed therapies which activate the immune system to target cancer cells can be broadly divided into two classes. The first class are antibodies that inhibit immune checkpoint signalling, known as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The second class are cell‐based immune therapies including chimeric antigen receptor T lymphocyte (CAR‐T) cell therapies, natural killer (NK) cell therapies, and tumour infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapies. The clinical efficacy of all these treatments generally outweighs the risks, but there is a high rate of immune‐related adverse events (irAEs), which are often unpredictable in timing with clinical sequalae ranging from mild (e.g. rash) to severe or even fatal (e.g. myocarditis, cytokine release syndrome) and reversible to permanent (e.g. endocrinopathies).The mechanisms underpinning irAE pathology vary across different irAE complications and syndromes, reflecting the broad clinical phenotypes observed and the variability of different individual immune responses, and are poorly understood overall. Immune‐related cardiovascular toxicities have emerged, and our understanding has evolved from focussing initially on rare but fatal ICI‐related myocarditis with cardiogenic shock to more common complications including less severe ICI‐related myocarditis, pericarditis, arrhythmias, including conduction system disease and heart block, non‐inflammatory heart failure, takotsubo syndrome and coronary artery disease. In this scientific statement on the cardiovascular toxicities of immune therapies for cancer, we summarize the pathophysiology, epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of ICI, CAR‐T, NK, and TIL therapies. We also highlight gaps in the literature and where future research should focus.

AIMS: Finerenone reduces the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). We investigated the causes of mortality in the FIDELITY population. METHODS AND RESULTS: The FIDELITY prespecified pooled data analysis from FIDELIO-DKD and FIGARO-DKD excluded patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. Outcomes included intention-to-treat and prespecified on-treatment analyses of the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Of 13 026 patients [mean age, 64.8 years; mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), 57.6 mL/min/1.73 m2], 99.8% were on renin-angiotensin system inhibitors. Finerenone reduced the incidence of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality vs. placebo (8.5% vs. 9.4% and 4.9% vs. 5.6%, respectively) and demonstrated significant on-treatment reductions [hazard ratio (HR), 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.70-0.96; P = 0.014 and HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.67-0.99; P = 0.040, respectively]. Cardiovascular-related mortality was most common, and finerenone lowered the incidence of sudden cardiac death vs. placebo [1.3% (incidence rate 0.44/100 patient-years) vs. 1.8% (0.58/100 patient-years), respectively; HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57-0.996; P = 0.046]. The effects of finerenone on mortality were similar across all Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes risk groups. Event probability with finerenone at 4 years was consistent irrespective of baseline urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio, but seemingly more pronounced in patients with higher baseline eGFR. CONCLUSION: In FIDELITY, finerenone significantly reduced the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality vs. placebo in patients with T2D across a broad spectrum of CKD stages while on treatment, as well as sudden cardiac death in the intention-to-treat population. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: FIDELIO-DKD and FIGARO-DKD are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02540993 and NCT02545049, respectively (funded by Bayer AG).

AimsRecent trials have evaluated sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure (HF). We sought to assess the robustness of findings from these trials using the fragility index (FI).Methods and resultsFragility index is defined as the minimum number of patients that must be moved from the 'non-event' to the 'event' group to turn a statistically significant result to non-significant. In addition to FI, fragility quotient [(FQ); FI divided by the sample size] was calculated to assess the proportion of events that must be moved to change the significance. For statistically non-significant outcomes, reverse fragility index (RFI) and reverse fragility quotient (RFQ) were calculated. Robustness of findings after pooling data from all three trials was also assessed. A robust reduction in first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality was seen with dapagliflozin (FI = 62 and FQ = 0.013), empagliflozin (FI = 50 and FQ = 0.013), and sotagliflozin (FI = 60 and FQ = 0.049). Dapagliflozin nominally improved all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, with modest FI (n = 8 and 5) and FQ (0.002 and 0.001). Empagliflozin and sotagliflozin did not demonstrate statistically significant reductions in all-cause mortality, with modest RFI (empagliflozin: RFI = 26 and RFQ = 0.007; sotagliflozin: RFI = 6 and RFQ = 0.005). A similar trend was seen with cardiovascular mortality (empagliflozin: RFI = 24 and RFQ = 0.006; sotagliflozin: RFI = 7 and RFQ = 0.006). Upon meta-analysis, the result for first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality was robust (FI = 95 and FQ = 0.010). The reductions in all-cause (FI = 12 and FQ = 0.001) and cardiovascular mortality (FI = 9 and FQ = 0.001), while statistically significant, were fragile.ConclusionImprovement in the composite outcome of first HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death was highly concordant and robust across sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor trials. In contrast, secondary endpoints of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were statistically fragile, underscoring the need to power trials for mortality to fully understand the benefit of therapies on fatal events.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have recently been recommended as a foundational therapy for patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) because of their favourable effects on mortality, clinical events and quality of life. While clinical practice guidelines have recommended dapagliflozin or empagliflozin in all patients with HFrEF, or sotagliflozin in those with HFrEF and concomitant diabetes, the timing and practical integration of these drugs in clinical practice is less well defined. We propose that these drugs are candidates for early, upfront administration to patients with newly diagnosed HFrEF and for patients hospitalized with HF. Growing evidence has established early benefits, with clinically meaningful reductions in clinical events that reach statistical significance within days to weeks, following dapagliflozin, empagliflozin or, in diabetic patients, sotagliflozin initiation. Secondly, although major clinical trials have tested these drugs in patients already receiving background HF therapy, secondary analyses showed that their efficacy is independent of that. Third, SGLT2 inhibitors are generally safe and well tolerated, with clinical trial data reporting minimal effects on blood pressure, glycaemia-related adverse events, and no excess in acute kidney injury. Rather, they exert renal protective effects and reduce risk of hyperkalaemia, properties that favour initiation, tolerance and persistence of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. This review supports the early initiation of dapagliflozin and empagliflozin (or sotagliflozin limited to patients with diabetes) to rapidly improve clinical outcome and quality of life of HFrEF patients.

The co-occurrence of cancer and heart failure (HF) represents a significant clinical drawback as each disease interferes with the treatment of the other. In addition to shared risk factors, a growing body of experimental and clinical evidence reveals numerous commonalities in the biology underlying both pathologies. Inflammation emerges as a common hallmark for both diseases as it contributes to the initiation and progression of both HF and cancer. Under stress, malignant and cardiac cells change their metabolic preferences to survive, which makes these metabolic derangements a great basis to develop intersection strategies and therapies to combat both diseases. Furthermore, genetic predisposition and clonal haematopoiesis are common drivers for both conditions and they hold great clinical relevance in the context of personalized medicine. Additionally, altered angiogenesis is a common hallmark for failing hearts and tumours and represents a promising substrate to target in both diseases. Cardiac cells and malignant cells interact with their surrounding environment called stroma. This interaction mediates the progression of the two pathologies and understanding the structure and function of each stromal component may pave the way for innovative therapeutic strategies and improved outcomes in patients. The interdisciplinary collaboration between cardiologists and oncologists is essential to establish unified guidelines. To this aim, pre-clinical models that mimic the human situation, where both pathologies coexist, are needed to understand all the aspects of the bidirectional relationship between cancer and HF. Finally, adequately powered clinical studies, including patients from all ages, and men and women, with proper adjudication of both cancer and cardiovascular endpoints, are essential to accurately study these two pathologies at the same time.

This position statement from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology Cardio-Oncology Study Group in collaboration with the International Cardio-Oncology Society presents practical, easy-to-use and evidence-based risk stratification tools for oncologists, haemato-oncologists and cardiologists to use in their clinical practice to risk stratify oncology patients prior to receiving cancer therapies known to cause heart failure or other serious cardiovascular toxicities. Baseline risk stratification proformas are presented for oncology patients prior to receiving the following cancer therapies: anthracycline chemotherapy, HER2-targeted therapies such as trastuzumab, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors, second and third generation multi-targeted kinase inhibitors for chronic myeloid leukaemia targeting BCR-ABL, multiple myeloma therapies (proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs), RAF and MEK inhibitors or androgen deprivation therapies. Applying these risk stratification proformas will allow clinicians to stratify cancer patients into low, medium, high and very high risk of cardiovascular complications prior to starting treatment, with the aim of improving personalised approaches to minimise the risk of cardiovascular toxicity from cancer therapies.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has important implications for the safety of participants in clinical trials and the research staff caring for them and, consequently, for the trials themselves. Patients with heart failure may be at greater risk of infection with COVID-19 and the consequences might also be more serious, but they are also at risk of adverse outcomes if their clinical care is compromised. As physicians and clinical trialists, it is our responsibility to ensure safe and effective care is delivered to trial participants without affecting the integrity of the trial. The social contract with our patients demands no less. Many regulatory authorities from different world regions have issued guidance statements regarding the conduct of clinical trials during this COVID-19 crisis. However, international trials may benefit from expert guidance from a global panel of experts to supplement local advice and regulations, thereby enhancing the safety of participants and the integrity of the trial. Accordingly, the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology on 21 and 22 March 2020 conducted web-based meetings with expert clinical trialists in Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and Asia. The main objectives of this Expert Position Paper are to highlight the challenges that this pandemic poses for the conduct of clinical trials in heart failure and to offer advice on how they might be overcome, with some practical examples. While this panel of experts are focused on heart failure clinical trials, these discussions and recommendations may apply to clinical trials in other therapeutic areas.

The term sarcopenia was introduced in 1988. The original definition was a "muscle loss" of the appendicular muscle mass in the older people as measured by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). In 2010, the definition was altered to be low muscle mass together with low muscle function and this was agreed upon as reported in a number of consensus papers. The Society of Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders supports the recommendations of more recent consensus conferences, i.e. that rapid screening, such as with the SARC-F questionnaire, should be utilized with a formal diagnosis being made by measuring grip strength or chair stand together with DXA estimation of appendicular muscle mass (indexed for height2). Assessments of the utility of ultrasound and creatine dilution techniques are ongoing. Use of ultrasound may not be easily reproducible. Primary sarcopenia is aging associated (mediated) loss of muscle mass. Secondary sarcopenia (or disease-related sarcopenia) has predominantly focused on loss of muscle mass without the emphasis on muscle function. Diseases that can cause muscle wasting (i.e. secondary sarcopenia) include malignant cancer, COPD, heart failure, and renal failure and others. Management of sarcopenia should consist of resistance exercise in combination with a protein intake of 1 to 1.5 g/kg/day. There is insufficient evidence that vitamin D and anabolic steroids are beneficial. These recommendations apply to both primary (age-related) sarcopenia and secondary (disease related) sarcopenia. Secondary sarcopenia also needs appropriate treatment of the underlying disease. It is important that primary care health professionals become aware of and make the diagnosis of age-related and disease-related sarcopenia. It is important to address the risk factors for sarcopenia, particularly low physical activity and sedentary behavior in the general population, using a life-long approach. There is a need for more clinical research into the appropriate measurement for muscle mass and the management of sarcopenia. Accordingly, this position statement provides recommendations on the management of sarcopenia and how to progress the knowledge and recognition of sarcopenia.

BackgroundPrevious systematic reviews have indicated that exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (ExCR) for patients with heart failure (HF) has a beneficial effect on health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) and exercise capacity. However, there is uncertainty regarding potential differential effects of ExCR across HF patient subgroups.ObjectivesThe authors sought to undertake an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis to: 1) assess the impact of ExCR on HRQoL and exercise capacity in patients with HF; and 2) investigate differential effects of ExCR according to a range of patient characteristics: age, sex, ethnicity, New York Heart Association functional class, ischemic etiology, ejection fraction, and exercise capacity.MethodsA single dataset was produced, comprising randomized trials where ExCR (delivered for 3 weeks or more) was compared with a no exercise control group. Each trial provided IPD on HRQoL or exercise capacity (or both), with follow-up of 6 months or more. One- and 2-stage meta-analysis models were used to investigate the effect of ExCR overall and the interactions between ExCR and participant characteristics.ResultsIPD was obtained from 13 trials for 3,990 patients, predominantly (97%) with reduced ejection fraction HF. Compared with the control group, there was a statistically significant difference in favor of ExCR for HRQoL and exercise capacity. At 12-month follow-up, improvements were seen in 6-min walk test (mean 21.0 m; 95% confidence interval: 1.57 to 40.4 m; p = 0.034) and Minnesota Living With HF score (mean improvement 5.9; 95% confidence interval: 1.0 to 10.9; p = 0.018). No consistent evidence was found of differential intervention effects across patient subgroups.ConclusionsThese results, based on an IPD meta-analysis of randomized trials, confirm the benefit of ExCR on HRQoL and exercise capacity and support the Class I recommendation of current international clinical guidelines that ExCR should be offered to all HF patients. (Exercise Training for Chronic Heart Failure [ExTraMATCH II]: protocol for an individual participant data meta-analysis; PROSPERO: international database of systematic reviews CRD42014007170).

AimsTo undertake an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis to assess the impact of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (ExCR) in patients with heart failure (HF) on mortality and hospitalisation, and differential effects of ExCR according to patient characteristics: age, sex, ethnicity, New York Heart Association functional class, ischaemic aetiology, ejection fraction, and exercise capacity.Methods and resultsRandomised trials of exercise training for at least 3 weeks compared with no exercise control with 6-month follow-up or longer, providing IPD time to event on mortality or hospitalisation (all-cause or HF-specific). IPD were combined into a single dataset. We used Cox proportional hazards models to investigate the effect of ExCR and the interactions between ExCR and participant characteristics. We used both two-stage random effects and one-stage fixed effect models. IPD were obtained from 18 trials including 3912 patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction. Compared to control, there was no statistically significant difference in pooled time to event estimates in favour of ExCR although confidence intervals (CIs) were wide [all-cause mortality: hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% CI 0.67-1.04; HF-specific mortality: HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.49-1.46; all-cause hospitalisation: HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.76-1.06; and HF-specific hospitalisation: HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.72-1.35]. No strong evidence was found of differential intervention effects across patient characteristics.ConclusionExercise-based cardiac rehabilitation did not have a significant effect on the risk of mortality and hospitalisation in HF with reduced ejection fraction. However, uncertainty around effect estimates precludes drawing definitive conclusions.

Aims: To update the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) quality indicators (QIs) for the evaluation of the care and outcomes of adults with heart failure. Methods and results: The Working Group comprised experts in heart failure including members of the ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines Task Force for heart failure, members of the Heart Failure Association, and a patient representative. We followed the ESC methodology for QI development. The 2023 focused guideline update was reviewed to assess the suitability of the recommendations with strongest association with benefit and harm against the ESC criteria for QIs. All the new proposed QIs were individually graded by each panellist via online questionnaires for both validity and feasibility. The existing heart failure QIs also underwent voting to 'keep', 'remove' or 'modify'. Five domains of care for the management of heart failure were identified: (1) structural QIs, (2) patient assessment, (3) initial treatment, (4) therapy optimization, and (5) patient health‐related quality of life. In total, 14 'main' and 3 'secondary' QIs were selected across the five domains. Conclusion: This document provides an update of the previously published ESC QIs for heart failure to ensure that these measures are aligned with contemporary evidence. The QIs may be used to quantify adherence to clinical practice as recommended in guidelines to improve the care and outcomes of patients with heart failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Little is known either about either physical activity patterns, or other lifestyle‐related prevention measures in heart transplantation (HTx) recipients. The history of HTx started more than 50 years ago but there are still no guidelines or position papers highlighting the features of prevention and rehabilitation after HTx. The aims of this scientific statement are (i) to explain the importance of prevention and rehabilitation after HTx, and (ii) to promote the factors (modifiable/non‐modifiable) that should be addressed after HTx to improve patients' physical capacity, quality of life and survival. All HTx team members have their role to play in the care of these patients and multidisciplinary prevention and rehabilitation programmes designed for transplant recipients. HTx recipients are clearly not healthy disease‐free subjects yet they also significantly differ from heart failure patients or those who are supported with mechanical circulatory support. Therefore, prevention and rehabilitation after HTx both need to be specifically tailored to this patient population and be multidisciplinary in nature. Prevention and rehabilitation programmes should be initiated early after HTx and continued during the entire post‐transplant journey. This clinical consensus statement focuses on the importance and the characteristics of prevention and rehabilitation designed for HTx recipients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with heart failure (HF), particularly those with impaired renal function receiving renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASis), are at risk of hyperkalaemia; when hyperkalaemia is severe, this can have serious clinical consequences. The incidence, prevalence, and risk factors for hyperkalaemia reported in randomized trials of RAASis may not reflect clinical practice due to exclusion of patients with elevated serum potassium (sK+) or severe renal impairment: information on patients managed in routine clinical care is important to understanding the actual burden of hyperkalaemia. This paper reviews the available clinical epidemiology data on hyperkalaemia in HF and considers areas requiring further research. Observational studies published since 2017 that focused on hyperkalaemia, included patients with HF, and had ≥1000 participants were considered. Hyperkalaemia occurrence in HF varied widely from 7% to 39% depending on the setting, HF severity, follow‐up length, and concomitant medications. Rates were lowest in patients with newly diagnosed HF and highest in patients with greater disease severity; comorbidities, such as chronic kidney disease and diabetes, and RAASi use, reflected commonly identified risk factors for hyperkalaemia in patients with HF. Hyperkalaemia was most often mild; however, from the limited data available, persistence of mild hyperkalaemia was associated with an increased risk of mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events. There were also limited data available on the progression of hyperkalaemia. Recurrence was common, occurring in one‐quarter to two‐fifths of hyperkalaemia cases. Despite HF guidelines recommending close monitoring of sK+, 55–93% of patients did not receive appropriate testing before or after initiation of RAASi or in follow‐up to moderate/severe hyperkalaemia detection. Many of the observational studies were retrospective and from a single country. There is a need for international, prospective, longitudinal, observational studies, such as the CARE‐HK in HF study (NCT04864795), to understand hyperkalaemia's prevalence, incidence, and severity; to identify and characterize cases that persist, progress, and recur; to highlight the importance of sK+ monitoring when using RAASi; and to assess the impact of newer HF therapies and potassium binders in clinical practice. Data from both clinical trials and observational studies with adjustments for confounding variables will be needed to assess the contribution of hyperkalaemia to clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AIMS: AUGMENT-HF was an international, multi-centre, prospective, randomized, controlled trial to evaluate the benefits and safety of a novel method of left ventricular (LV) modification with alginate-hydrogel. METHODS: Alginate-hydrogel is an inert permanent implant that is directly injected into LV heart muscle and serves as a prosthetic scaffold to modify the shape and size of the dilated LV. Patients with advanced chronic heart failure (HF) were randomized (1 : 1) to alginate-hydrogel (n = 40) in combination with standard medical therapy or standard medical therapy alone (Control, n = 38). The primary endpoint of AUGMENT-HF was the change in peak VO2 from baseline to 6 months. Secondary endpoints included changes in 6-min walk test (6MWT) distance and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, as well as assessments of procedural safety. RESULTS: Enrolled patients were 63 ± 10 years old, 74% in NYHA functional class III, had a LV ejection fraction of 26 ± 5% and a mean peak VO2 of 12.2 ± 1.8 mL/kg/min. Thirty-five patients were successfully treated with alginate-hydrogel injections through a limited left thoracotomy approach without device-related complications; the 30-day surgical mortality was 8.6% (3 deaths). Alginate-hydrogel treatment was associated with improved peak VO2 at 6 months-treatment effect vs. CONTROL: +1.24 mL/kg/min (95% confidence interval 0.26-2.23, P = 0.014). Also 6MWT distance and NYHA functional class improved in alginate-hydrogel-treated patients vs. Control (both P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Alginate-hydrogel in addition to standard medical therapy for patients with advanced chronic HF was more effective than standard medical therapy alone for improving exercise capacity and symptoms. The results of AUGMENT-HF provide proof of concept for a pivotal trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01311791.

Muscle wasting and cachexia are the ultimate consequence of aging and a variety of acute and chronic illnesses. Significant efforts are made by many stakeholders to develop effective therapies. An important aspect of successful therapeutic development research is a common nomenclature for effective communication between researchers and clinicians, to the public, and also with regulatory bodies. Despite several efforts to develop consensus definitions for cachexia and sarcopenia, including such new terms for muscle wasting as myopenia, a common conceptual approach and acceptable vocabulary and classification system are yet to be established. Notwithstanding the potential need to translate such disease definitions and terminologies into different languages, we advocate the use of the term "muscle wasting" as the unifying entity that represents the single most common disease process across a large spectrum of cachexia and in sarcopenia-associated disorders. In this paper, we outline a first proposal for the disease nomenclature and classification of "Muscle Wasting Diseases." This concept can be applied in acute and chronic disease settings. It is pertinent for wasting diseases, cachexia, and sarcopenia of any severity and due to any underlying illness. The concept of muscle wasting disease underscores the most common denominator of the underlying wasting processes, i.e., muscle wasting, without ignoring the advanced disease states that are also accompanied by fat tissue wasting. The term muscle wasting disease is easily understood by both the scientific community and the lay public. This may promote its general use and efforts to heighten education and awareness in the field.

Aims: Recent guidelines recommend four core drug classes (renin–angiotensin system inhibitor/angiotensin receptor–neprilysin inhibitor [RASi/ARNi], beta‐blocker, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist [MRA], and sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor [SGLT2i]) for the pharmacological management of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We assessed physicians' perceived (i) comfort with implementing the recent HFrEF guideline recommendations; (ii) status of guideline‐directed medical therapy (GDMT) implementation; (iii) use of different GDMT sequencing strategies; and (iv) barriers and strategies for achieving implementation. Methods and results: A 26‐question survey was disseminated via bulletin, e‐mail and social channels directed to physicians with an interest in HF. Of 432 respondents representing 91 countries, 36% were female, 52% were aged <50 years, and 90% mainly practiced in cardiology (30% HF). Overall comfort with implementing quadruple therapy was high (87%). Only 12% estimated that >90% of patients with HFrEF without contraindications received quadruple therapy. The time required to initiate quadruple therapy was estimated at 1–2 weeks by 34% of respondents, 1 month by 36%, 3 months by 24%, and ≥6 months by 6%. The average respondent favoured traditional drug sequencing strategies (RASi/ARNi with/followed by beta‐blocker, and then MRA with/followed by SGLT2i) over simultaneous initiation or SGLT2i‐first sequences. The most frequently perceived clinical barriers to implementation were hypotension (70%), creatinine increase (47%), hyperkalaemia (45%) and patient adherence (42%). Conclusions: Although comfort with implementing all four core drug classes in patients with HFrEF was high among physicians, a majority estimated implementation of GDMT in HFrEF to be low. We identified several important perceived clinical and non‐clinical barriers that can be targeted to improve implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A consensus conference convened by the Society of Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders has concluded that "Sarcopenia, ie, reduced muscle mass, with limited mobility" should be considered an important clinical entity and that most older persons should be screened for this condition. "Sarcopenia with limited mobility" is defined as a person with muscle loss whose walking speed is equal to or less than 1 m/s or who walks less than 400 m during a 6-minute walk, and who has a lean appendicular mass corrected for height squared of 2 standard deviations or more below the mean of healthy persons between 20 and 30 years of age of the same ethnic group. The limitation in mobility should not clearly be a result of otherwise defined specific diseases of muscle, peripheral vascular disease with intermittent claudication, central and peripheral nervous system disorders, or cachexia. Clinically significant interventions are defined as an increase in the 6-minute walk of at least 50 meters or an increase of walking speed of at least 0.1 m/s.

Cardio‐oncology is a rapidly growing field of cardiovascular (CV) medicine that has resulted from the continuously increasing clinical demand for specialized CV evaluation, prevention and management of patients suffering or surviving from malignant diseases. Dealing with CV disease in patients with cancer requires special knowledge beyond that included in the general core curriculum for cardiology. Therefore, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) has developed a special core curriculum for cardio‐oncology, a consensus document that defines the level of experience and knowledge required for cardiologists in this particular field. It is structured into 8 chapters, including (i) principles of cancer biology and therapy; (ii) forms and definitions of cancer therapy‐related cardiovascular toxicity (CTR‐CVT); (iii) risk stratification, prevention and monitoring protocols for CTR‐CVT; (iv) diagnosis and management of CV disease in patients with cancer; (v) long‐term survivorship programmes and cardio‐oncology rehabilitation; (vi) multidisciplinary team management of special populations; (vii) organization of cardio‐oncology services; (viii) research in cardio‐oncology. The core curriculum aims at promoting standardization and harmonization of training and evaluation in cardio‐oncology, while it further provides the ground for an ESC certification programme designed to recognize the competencies of certified specialists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]