Search

AimsFew reports have examined the incidence of ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) or their relationship with mortality in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) or heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).Methods and resultsData from the PARAGON-HF, TOPCAT, I-Preserve, and CHARM-Preserved trials were merged. VT/VF, reported as adverse events, were identified. Patients who experienced VT/VF were compared with patients who did not. The relationship between VT/VF and mortality was examined in time-updated Cox proportional hazard regression models. Variables associated with VT/VF were examined in Cox proportional hazard regression models. The rate of VT/VF in patients with HFmrEF compared with patients with HFpEF was examined in a Cox proportional hazards regression model. Of 13 609 patients, over a median follow-up of 1170 days (interquartile range: 966–1451), 146 (1.1%) experienced an investigator-reported VT/VF (incidence rate 0.3 per 100 person-years). Patients who experienced VT/VF were more likely to be male, have had a myocardial infarction, poorer renal function, more adverse left ventricular remodelling, and higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) than patients who did not. Occurrence of VT/VF was associated with NT-proBNP, history of atrial fibrillation/flutter, male sex, lower ejection fraction, and history of hypertension. VT/VF was associated with all-cause death [adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 3.95, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.80–5.57; P < 0.001] and cardiovascular death, driven by death from heart failure and not sudden death. Patients with HFmrEF had a higher rate of VT/VF than patients with HFpEF (adjusted HR: 2.19, 95% CI: 1.77–2.71).ConclusionVT/VF was uncommon in patients with HFmrEF and HFpEF. However, such events were strongly associated with mortality and appear to be a marker of disease severity rather than risk of sudden death.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov unique identifier: NCT01920711(PARAGON-HF); NCT00094302 (TOPCAT); NCT00095238 (I-Preserve); NCT00634712 (CHARM-Preserved)

International audience; Aims: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remains associated with high morbidity and mortality, poor quality of life (QoL) and significant exercise limitation. Sympatho-vagal imbalance has been shown to predict adverse prognosis and symptoms in HFrEF, yet it has not been specifically targeted by any guideline-recommended device therapy to date. Barostim™, which directly addresses this imbalance, is the first Food and Drug Administration approved neuromodulation technology for HFrEF. We aimed to analyse all randomized trial evidence to evaluate the effect of baroreflex activation therapy (BAT) on heart failure symptoms, QoL and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) in HFrEF.Methods and results: An individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis was performed on all eligible trials that randomized HFrEF patients to BAT + guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) or GDMT alone (open label). Endpoints included 6-month changes in 6-min hall walk (6MHW) distance, Minnesota Living With Heart Failure (MLWHF) QoL score, NT-proBNP, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class in all patients and three subgroups. A total of 554 randomized patients were included. In all patients, BAT provided significant improvement in 6MHW distance of 49 m (95% confidence interval [CI] 33, 64), MLWHF QoL of -13 points (95% CI -17, -10), and 3.4 higher odds of improving at least one NYHA class (95% CI 2.3, 4.9) when comparing from baseline to 6 months. These improvements were similar, or better, in patients who had baseline NT-proBNP

Up to 20% of patients in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) trials are not taking diuretic agents at baseline, but little is known about them.The aim of this study was to examine outcomes in patients with HFrEF not taking diuretic medications and after diuretic medications are started.Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between patients taking or not taking diuretic drugs at baseline in the ATMOSPHERE (Aliskiren Trial of Minimizing Outcomes for Patients With Heart Failure) and PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure Trial) trials combined. Patients starting diuretic medications were also compared with those remaining off diuretic drugs during follow-up. Symptoms (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score [KCCQ-CSS]), hospitalization for worsening heart failure (HF), mortality, and kidney function (estimated glomerular filtration rate slope) were examined.At baseline, the 3,079 of 15,415 patients (20%) not taking diuretic medications had a less severe HF profile, less neurohumoral activation, and better kidney function. They were less likely to experience the primary outcome (hospitalization for HF or cardiovascular death) than patients taking diuretic agents (adjusted HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.74-0.80; P 0.001) and death of any cause. Commencement of a diuretic drug was associated with higher subsequent risk for death (adjusted HR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.99-2.11; P 0.001) and greater decreases in KCCQ-CSS and estimated glomerular filtration rate. The 5 strongest predictors of initiation of diuretic medications were higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, higher body mass index, older age, history of diabetes, and worse KCCQ-CSS. In PARADIGM-HF, fewer patients who were treated with sacubitril/valsartan commenced diuretic agents (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.58-0.88; P = 0.002).Patients with HFrEF not taking diuretic medications and those who remained off them had better outcomes than patients treated with diuretic agents or who commenced them.

Arterial hypertension can lead to structural changes within the heart including left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) and eventually heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The initial diagnosis of HFpEF is costly and generally based on later stage remodeling; thus, improved predictive diagnostic tools offer potential clinical benefit. Recent work has shown predictive value of multibiomarker plasma panels for the classification of patients with LVH and HFpEF. We hypothesized that machine learning algorithms could substantially improve the predictive value of circulating plasma biomarkers by leveraging more sophisticated statistical approaches. In this work, we developed an ensemble classification algorithm for the diagnosis of HFpEF within a population of 480 individuals including patients with HFpEF, patients with LVH, and referent control patients. Algorithms showed strong diagnostic performance with receiver-operating-characteristic curve (ROC) areas of 0.92 for identifying patients with LVH and 0.90 for identifying patients with HFpEF using demographic information, plasma biomarkers related to extracellular matrix remodeling, and echocardiogram data. More impressively, the ensemble algorithm produced an ROC area of 0.88 for HFpEF diagnosis using only demographic and plasma panel data. Our findings demonstrate that machine learning-based classification algorithms show promise as a noninvasive diagnostic tool for HFpEF, while also suggesting priority biomarkers for future mechanistic studies to elucidate more specific regulatory roles. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Machine learning algorithms correctly classified patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction with over 90% area under receiver-operating-characteristic curves. Classifications using multidomain features (demographics and circulating biomarkers and echo-based ventricle metrics) proved more accurate than previous studies using single-domain features alone. Excitingly, HFpEF diagnoses were generally accurate even without echo-based measurements, demonstrating that such algorithms could provide an early screening tool using blood-based measurements before sophisticated imaging.

Sudden death is a leading cause of mortality in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). In PARADIGM-HF, sacubitril/valsartan reduced the incidence of sudden death. The purpose of this post hoc study was to analyse the effect of sacubitril/valsartan, compared to enalapril, on the incidence of ventricular arrhythmias.Adverse event reports related to ventricular arrhythmias were examined in PARADIGM-HF. The effect of randomized treatment on two arrhythmia outcomes was analysed: ventricular arrhythmias and the composite of a ventricular arrhythmia, implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shock or resuscitated cardiac arrest. The risk of death related to a ventricular arrhythmia was examined in time-updated models. The interaction between heart failure aetiology, or baseline ICD/cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) use, and the effect of sacubitril/valsartan was analysed. Of the 8399 participants, 333 (4.0%) reported a ventricular arrhythmia and 372 (4.4%) the composite arrhythmia outcome. Ventricular arrhythmias were associated with higher mortality. Compared with enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan reduced the risk of a ventricular arrhythmia (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.95; p = 0.015) and the composite arrhythmia outcome (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.97; p = 0.025). The treatment effect was maintained after adjustment and accounting for the competing risk of death. Baseline ICD/CRT-D use did not modify the effect of sacubitril/valsartan, but aetiology did: HR in patients with an ischaemic aetiology 0.93 (95% CI 0.71-1.21) versus 0.53 (95% CI 0.37-0.78) in those without an ischaemic aetiology (p for interaction = 0.020).Sacubitril/valsartan reduced the incidence of investigator-reported ventricular arrhythmias in patients with HFrEF. This effect may have been greater in patients with a non-ischaemic aetiology.

Aim: There is an association between heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and insulin resistance, but less is known about the diabetic continuum, and in particular about pre-diabetes, in HFpEF. We examined characteristics and outcomes of participants with diabetes or pre-diabetes in PARAGON-HF.Methods and results: Patients aged ≥50 years with left ventricular ejection fraction ≥45%, structural heart disease and elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were eligible. Patients were classified according to glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c): (i) normal HbA1c, Conclusion: Pre-diabetes is common in patients with HFpEF and is associated with worse clinical status and greater risk of HFH. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01920711.

Summary Background Previous studies have suggested that haemodynamic-guided management using an implantable pulmonary artery pressure monitor reduces heart failure hospitalisations in patients with moderately symptomatic (New York Heart Association [NYHA] functional class III) chronic heart failure and a hospitalisation in the past year, irrespective of ejection fraction. It is unclear if these benefits extend to patients with mild (NYHA functional class II) or severe (NYHA functional class IV) symptoms of heart failure or to patients with elevated natriuretic peptides without a recent heart failure hospitalisation. This trial was designed to evaluate whether haemodynamic-guided management using remote pulmonary artery pressure monitoring could reduce heart failure events and mortality in patients with heart failure across the spectrum of symptom severity (NYHA funational class II–IV), including those with elevated natriuretic peptides but without a recent heart failure hospitalisation. Methods The randomised arm of the haemodynamic-GUIDEed management of Heart Failure (GUIDE-HF) trial was a multicentre, single-blind study at 118 centres in the USA and Canada. Following successful implantation of a pulmonary artery pressure monitor, patients with all ejection fractions, NYHA functional class II–IV chronic heart failure, and either a recent heart failure hospitalisation or elevated natriuretic peptides (based on a-priori thresholds) were randomly assigned (1:1) to either haemodynamic-guided heart failure management based on pulmonary artery pressure or a usual care control group. Patients were masked to their study group assignment. Investigators were aware of treatment assignment but did not have access to pulmonary artery pressure data for control patients. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality and total heart failure events (heart failure hospitalisations and urgent heart failure hospital visits) at 12 months assessed in all randomly assigned patients. Safety was assessed in all patients. A pre-COVID-19 impact analysis for the primary and secondary outcomes was prespecified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03387813 . Findings Between March 15, 2018, and Dec 20, 2019, 1022 patients were enrolled, with 1000 patients implanted successfully, and follow-up was completed on Jan 8, 2021. There were 253 primary endpoint events (0·563 per patient-year) among 497 patients in the haemodynamic-guided management group (treatment group) and 289 (0·640 per patient-year) in 503 patients in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·88, 95% CI 0·74–1·05; p=0·16). A prespecified COVID-19 sensitivity analysis using a time-dependent variable to compare events before COVID-19 and during the pandemic suggested a treatment interaction (pinteraction=0·11) due to a change in the primary endpoint event rate during the pandemic phase of the trial, warranting a pre-COVID-19 impact analysis. In the pre-COVID-19 impact analysis, there were 177 primary events (0·553 per patient-year) in the intervention group and 224 events (0·682 per patient-year) in the control group (HR 0·81, 95% CI 0·66–1·00; p=0·049). This difference in primary events almost disappeared during COVID-19, with a 21% decrease in the control group (0·536 per patient-year) relative to pre-COVID-19, virtually no change in the treatment group (0·597 per patient-year), and no difference between groups (HR 1·11, 95% CI 0·80–1·55; p=0·53). The cumulative incidence of heart failure events was not reduced by haemodynamic-guided management (0·85, 0·70–1·03; p=0·096) in the overall study analysis but was significantly decreased in the pre-COVID-19 impact analysis (0·76, 0·61–0·95; p=0·014). 1014 (99%) of 1022 patients had freedom from device or system-related complications. Interpretation Haemodynamic-guided management of heart failure did not result in a lower composite endpoint rate of mortality and total heart failure events compared with the control group in the overall study analysis. However, a pre-COVID-19 impact analysis indicated a possible benefit of haemodynamic-guided management on the primary outcome in the pre-COVID-19 period, primarily driven by a lower heart failure hospitalisation rate compared with the control group. Funding Abbott.

OBJECTIVES This study examined the relationship among high-sensitivity troponin-T (hs-TnT), outcomes, and treatment with sacubitril/valsartan in patients with heart failure (HF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). BACKGROUND hs-TnT is a marker of myocardial injury in HF. METHODS The PARAGON-HF trial randomized 4,796 patients with HFpEF to sacubitril/valsartan or valsartan. We compared the risk of the composite outcome of cardiovascular death (CVD) and total HF hospitalization (HHF) according to hs-TnT. We also assessed the effect of allocated treatment on hs-TnT. RESULTS hs-TnT was available in 1,141 patients (24%) at run-in (median value: 17 ng/L) and 1,260 (26%) at randomization, with 58.3% having hs-TnT >14 ng/L (upper limit of normal). During a median follow-up of 34 months, there were 393 outcome events (82 CVD, 311 HHF). Adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), log-hs-TnT at randomization was an independent predictor of the composite outcome (HR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.19-1.59; P < 0.001). Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced hs-TnT by 9% at week 16 (P < 0.001). Patients whose hs-TnT decreased from randomization to 16 weeks to at or below the median value of 17 ng/L subsequently had a lower risk of CVD/HHF compared with those with persistently elevated hs-TnT (P = 0.046). Patients with higher baseline hs-TnT (>17 ng/L) appeared to have a greater benefit from sacubitril/valsartan treatment when accounting for other potential effect modifiers (P interaction = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS Higher baseline hs-TnT was associated with increased risk of CVD/HHF, whereas hs-TnT decrease at 16 weeks led to lower subsequent risk of CVD/HHF compared with those who had persistently elevated values. Sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced hs-TnT compared with valsartan. hs-TnT may be helpful in identifying patients with HFpEF who are more likely to benefit from sacubitril/valsartan. (J Am Coll Cardiol HF 2021;9:627-635) (c) 2021 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Background : N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) plasma concentrations are independent prognostic markers in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Whether a differential risk association between NT-proBNP plasma concentrations and risk of cardiovascular (CV) vs non-CV adverse events exists is not well known. Objective : To assess if there is a differential proportional risk of CV vs non-CV adverse events by NT-proBNP plasma concentrations. Methods : In this post hoc combined analysis of PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE trials, proportion of CV vs non-CV mortality and hospitalizations were assessed by NT-proBNP levels ( 3000 pg/mL) at baseline using Cox regression adjusting for traditional risk factors. Results : A total of 14,737 patients with mean age of 62 ± 8 years (24% history of atrial fibrillation [AF]) were studied. For CV deaths, the event rates per 1000 patient-years steeply increased from 33.8 in the ≤400 pg/mL group to 142.3 in the ≥3000 pg/mL group, while the non-CV death event rates modestly increased from 9.0 to 22.7, respectively. Proportion of non-CV deaths decreased across the 5 NT-proBNP groups (21.1%, 18.4%, 17.9%, 17.4%, and 13.7% respectively). Similar trend was observed for non-CV hospitalizations (46.4%, 42.6%, 42.9%, 42.0%, and 36.9% respectively). These results remained similar when stratified according to the presence of AF at baseline and prior HF hospitalization within last 12 months. Conclusions : The absolute CV event rates per patient years of follow-up were greater and had higher stepwise increases than non-CV event rates across a broad range of NT-proBNP plasma concentrations indicating a differential risk of CV events at varying baseline NT-proBNP values. These results have implications for future design of clinical trials.

Aims The 4822 patients randomized in the PARAGON-HF trial were a subset of 5746 initially eligible patients who entered sequential run-in periods. We identified patient factors associated with study discontinuation during the run-in period and estimated the implications of these discontinuations for the overall study result. Methods and results We utilized multivariable logistic regression models to identify patient factors associated with study discontinuation during the run-in period. The efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan in a broader cohort approximating the full run-in population was estimated by weighting randomized patients according to the inverse probability of run-in completion. A total of 924 (16.1%) subjects failed to complete the run-in period. In multivariable models, non-completion was associated with region other than Central Europe, lower systolic blood pressure, lower serum sodium, lower haemoglobin, lower estimated glomerular filtration rate, higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, higher New York Heart Association functional class, prior heart failure (HF) hospitalization, and lack of prior use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors or beta-blocker. In repeat analysis of the effect of randomized treatment in PARAGON-HF giving greater weight to participants resembling those who failed to complete the run-in period, the incidence of HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death was higher, and sacubitril/valsartan treatment reduced the composite of total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death compared with valsartan (rate ratio 0.86; 95% confidence interval 0.74-1.00). Conclusion Patients with more advanced HF were at higher risk for non-completion of the run-in period in PARAGON-HF. Re-analysis of study outcomes accounting for the effect of run-in non-completion did not alter the estimated treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan.

Background Sudden death (SD) and pump failure death (PFD) are the two leading causes of death in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Objective Identifying patients at higher risk for mode-specific death would allow better targeting of individual patients for relevant device and other therapies. Methods We developed models in 7156 patients with HFrEF from the Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) trial, using Fine-Gray regressions counting other deaths as competing risks. The derived models were externally validated in the Aliskiren Trial to Minimize Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure (ATMOSPHERE) trial. Results NYHA class and NT-proBNP were independent predictors for both modes of death. The SD model additionally included male sex, Asian or Black race, prior CABG or PCI, cancer history, MI history, treatment with LCZ696 vs. enalapril, QRS duration and ECG left ventricular hypertrophy. While LVEF, ischemic etiology, systolic blood pressure, HF duration, ECG bundle branch block, and serum albumin, chloride and creatinine were included in the PFD model. Model discrimination was good for SD and excellent for PFD with Harrell’s C of 0.67 and 0.78 after correction for optimism, respectively. The observed and predicted incidences were similar in each quartile of risk scores at 3 years in each model. The performance of both models remained robust in ATMOSPHERE. Conclusion We developed and validated models which separately predict SD and PFD in patients with HFrEF. These models may help clinicians and patients consider therapies targeted at these modes of death. Trial registration number PARADIGM-HF: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01035255, ATMOSPHERE: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00853658. Graphics abstract

The effect of loop diuretics on clinical outcomes in heart failure has not been evaluated in randomized controlled trials. In hospitalized patients with heart failure, a discharge loop diuretic prescription has been shown to be associated with improved 30-day outcomes, which appears to be more pronounced in subgroups with congestion. In the current study, we examined these associations and association modifications during longer follow-up.We assembled a propensity score-matched cohort of 2191 pairs of hospitalized heart failure patients discharged with, vs without, a prescription for loop diuretics, balanced on 74 baseline characteristics (mean age 78 years; 54% women; 11% African American).Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for 6-year combined endpoint of heart failure readmission or all-cause mortality was 1.02 (0.96-1.09). HRs and 95% CIs for this combined endpoint in patients with no, mild-to-moderate, and severe pulmonary rales were 1.19 (1.07-1.33), 0.95 (0.86-1.04), and 0.77 (0.63-0.94), respectively (P for interaction,.001). Respective HRs (95% CIs) for no, mild-to-moderate, and severe lower extremity edema were 1.16 (1.06-1.28), 0.94 (0.85-1.04), and 0.71 (0.56-0.89; interaction P.001).The association between a discharge loop diuretic prescription and long-term clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with heart failure is modified by admission congestion with worse, neutral, and better outcomes in patients with no, mild-to-moderate, and severe congestion, respectively. If these findings can be replicated, congestion may be used to risk-stratify patients with heart failure for potential optimization of loop diuretic prescription and outcomes.

Aims Diabetes mellitus (DM) is common in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Patients with DM and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction have higher levels of cardiac, profibrotic, and proinflammatory biomarkers relative to non‐diabetics. Limited data are available regarding the biomarker profiles of HFpEF patients with diabetes (DM) vs. no diabetes (non‐DM) and the impact of spironolactone on these biomarkers. This study aims to address such gaps in the literature. Methods and results Biomarkers were measured at randomization and at 12 months in 248 patients enrolled in Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist's North American cohort. At baseline, DM patients had significantly lower estimated glomerular filtration rate and higher high‐sensitivity C‐reactive protein, pro‐collagen type III amino‐terminal peptide, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 1 (TIMP‐1), and galectin‐3 levels than those without diabetes. There was a significantly larger 12 month increase in levels of high‐sensitivity troponin T (hs‐TnT), a marker of myocyte death, in DM patients. Elevated pro‐collagen type III amino‐terminal peptide and galectin‐3 levels were associated with an increased risk of the primary outcome (cardiovascular mortality, aborted cardiac arrest, or heart failure hospitalization) in DM patients, but not in those without diabetes. A statistically significant interaction between spironolactone and diabetes status was observed for hs‐TnT and for TIMP‐1, with greater biomarker reductions among those with diabetes treated with spironolactone. Conclusions The presence of diabetes is associated with higher levels of cardiac, profibrotic, and proinflammatory biomarkers in HFpEF. Spironolactone appears to alter the determinants of extracellular matrix remodelling in an anti‐fibrotic fashion in patients with diabetes, reflected by changes in hs‐TnT and TIMP‐1 levels over time.

BACKGROUND The incidence of pneumonia and subsequent outcomes has not been compared in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).OBJECTIVES This study aimed to examine the rate and impact of pneumonia in the PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) and PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI with ARB Global Outcomes in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction) trials.METHODS The authors analyzed the incidence of investigator-reported pneumonia and the rates of HF hospitalization, cardiovascular death, and all-cause death before and after the occurrence of pneumonia, and estimated risk after the first occurrence of pneumonia in unadjusted and adjusted analyses (the latter including N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide).RESULTS In PARADIGM-HF, 528 patients (6.3%) developed pneumonia after randomization, giving an incidence rate of 29 (95% CI: 27 to 32) per 1,000 patient-years. In PARAGON-HF, 510 patients (10.6%) developed pneumonia, giving an incidence rate of 39 (95% CI: 36 to 42) per 1,000 patient-years. The subsequent risk of all trial outcomes was elevated after the occurrence of pneumonia. In PARADIGM-HF, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for the risk of death from any cause was 4.34 (95% CI: 3.73 to 5.05). The corresponding adjusted HR in PARAGON-HF was 3.76 (95% CI: 3.09 to 4.58).CONCLUSIONS The incidence of pneumonia was high in patients with HF, especially HFpEF, at around 3 times the expected rate. A first episode of pneumonia was associated with 4-fold higher mortality. (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure [PARADIGM-HF], NCT01035255; Prospective Comparison of ARNI [Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor] With ARB [Angiotensin Receptor Blocker] Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction [PARAGON-HF], NCT01920711) (J Am Coll Cardiol 2021;77:1961-73) (c) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

BACKGROUND: New hypertension and heart failure guidelines recommend that systolic blood pressure (SBP) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and hypertension be lowered to

International audience; Aims: The relationship between serum potassium concentration and outcomes in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is not well-established. The aim of this study was to explore the association between serum potassium and clinical outcomes in the PARAGON-HF trial in which 4822 patients with HFpEF were randomised to treatment with sacubitril/valsartan or valsartan.Methods and results: The relationship between serum potassium concentrations and the primary study composite outcome of total (first and recurrent) heart failure hospitalisations and cardiovascular death was analysed. Hypo-, normo-, and hyperkalaemia were defined as serum potassium 5 mmol/L, respectively. Both screening and time-updated potassium (categorical and continuous spline-transformed) were studied. Patient mean age was 73 years and 52% were women. Patients with higher baseline potassium more often had an ischaemic aetiology and diabetes and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist treatment. Compared with normokalaemia, both time-updated (but not screening) hypo- and hyperkalaemia were associated with a higher risk of the primary outcome [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for hypokalaemia 1.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30-1.85; P < 0.001, and for hyperkalaemia HR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02-1.44; P = 0.025]. Hypokalaemia had a stronger association with a higher risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular death than hyperkalaemia. The association of hypokalaemia with increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular death was most marked in participants with impaired kidney function (interaction P < 0.05). Serum potassium did not significantly differ between sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan throughout the follow-up.Conclusions: Both hypo- and hyperkalaemia were associated with heart failure hospitalisation but only hypokalaemia was associated with mortality, especially in the context of renal impairment. Hypokalaemia was as strongly associated with death from non-cardiovascular causes as with cardiovascular death. Collectively, these findings suggest that potassium disturbances are a more of a marker of HFpEF severity rather than a direct cause of death.

BackgroundSystematically characterizing associations between circulating proteins and risk for subsequent clinical events may improve clinical risk prediction and shed light on unrecognized biological pathways in heart failure (HF). Large-scale assays measuring thousands of proteins now enable broad proteomic investigation in clinical trials.MethodsSerum levels of 4076 proteins were measured at baseline in the ATMOSPHERE (n=1258, 487 events over 6 years) and PARADIGM-HF (n=1257, 287 events over 4 years) trials of chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction using a modified aptamer-based proteomics assay. Proteins associated with the primary endpoint of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death were identified in the ATMOSPHERE discovery cohort by Cox regression adjusted for age, sex, treatment arm, and anticoagulant use (false discovery rateResultsWe identified 377 serum proteins that were associated with the primary endpoint in ATMOSPHERE and replicated 167 in PARADIGM-HF. Prognostic proteins included known HF biomarkers such as Growth Differentiation Factor 15, NT-BNP, and Angiopoietin-2, and also a previously unrecognized HF biomarker: Sushi, Von Willebrand Factor Type A, EGF and Pentraxin Domain Containing 1 (SVEP1, HR 1.60 [95% CI 1.44-1.79] per standard deviation [SD], p=2×10−17). A 64-protein risk score derived in ATMOSPHERE predicted the primary endpoint in PARADIGM-HF with greater discrimination (C-statistic 0.70) than the MAGGIC clinical score (C-statistic 0.61), NT-proBNP (C-statistic 0.65), or both (C-statistic 0.66). Genetically controlled levels of BNP, WISP2, FSTL1, and CTSS were associated with the primary endpoint by Mendelian randomization.ConclusionsWe identified SVEP1, an extracellular matrix protein known to cause inflammation in vascular smooth muscle cells, as a new HF biomarker associated with risk of hospitalization or death. A 64-protein score improved risk discrimination compared with NT-proBNP and may assist in identifying high-risk patients.

Aims Patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are at significant risk of stroke. Anticoagulation reduces this risk in patients with and without atrial fibrillation (AF), but the risk-to-benefit balance in the latter group, overall, is not favourable. Identification of patients with HFrEF, without AF, at the highest risk of stroke may allow targeted and safer use of prophylactic anticoagulant therapy. Methods and results In a pooled patient-level cohort of the PARADIGM-HF, ATMOSPHERE, and DAPA-HF trials, a previously derived simple risk model for stroke, consisting of three variables (history of prior stroke, insulin-treated diabetes, and plasma N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level), was validated. Of the 20 159 patients included, 12 751 patients did not have AF at baseline. Among patients without AF, 346 (2.7%) experienced a stroke over a median follow up of 2.0 years (rate 11.7 per 1000 patient-years). The risk for stroke increased with increasing risk score: fourth quintile hazard ratio (HR) 2.35 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.60–3.45]; fifth quintile HR 3.73 (95% CI 2.58–5.38), with the first quintile as reference. For patients in the top quintile, the rate of stroke was 21.2 per 1000 patient-years, similar to participants with AF not receiving anticoagulation (20.1 per 1000 patient-years). Model discrimination was good with a C-index of 0.84 (0.75–0.91). Conclusion It is possible to identify a subset of HFrEF patients without AF with a stroke-risk equivalent to that of patients with AF who are not anticoagulated. In these patients, the risk-to-benefit balance might justify the use of prophylactic anticoagulation, but this hypothesis needs to be tested prospectively.

Aims Determine the feasibility of implementing a heart failure (HF) management strategy that (i) uses a device‐based, remote, dynamic, multimetric risk stratification model to predict the risk of HF events and (ii) uses a standardized, centrally administered, ambulatory medication intervention protocol to reproducibly and safely decrease elevated risk scores. Methods and results Prospective, non‐randomized, single‐arm, multicenter feasibility study (Intervene‐HF) was conducted in HF patients implanted with a cardiac resynchronization therapy with implantable cardio defibrillator (CRT‐D) with TriageHF risk score feature. Certified HF nurses (CHFN) in the Medtronic Care Management Services Program implemented an ambulatory medication intervention strategy by following a standardized guided action pathway triggered by risk‐based alert. When CHFN received notification of increased risk score (HF care alert), they implemented a 3 day course of diuretic up‐titration (PRN) previously prescribed by a physician. Safety was monitored daily. Recovery after PRN was defined as ≥70% recovery of impedance toward baseline levels. Sixty‐six patients followed for 8.2 ± 3.9 months had 49 HF care alerts. Twenty‐three of 49 alerts did not receive PRN due to protocol‐mandated criteria. Twenty‐six of 49 alerts received PRN, 22 were completed, and 19 led to impedance recovery. Four interventions were stopped for safety without leading to an adverse event (AE). One of 26 PRNs was followed by a HF event. Eighty‐five per cent (22/26) of PRNs were completed without an AE; 69% (18/26) met the recovery criteria. Conclusions The Intervene‐HF study supports the feasibility of testing, in a large randomized clinical trial, an ambulatory medication intervention strategy that is physician‐directed, CHFN‐implemented, and based on individualized device risk stratification.

Background Sudden death (SD) and pump failure death (PFD) are leading modes of death in heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Risk stratification for mode-specific death may aid in patient enrichment for new device trials in HFpEF. Methods Models were derived in 4116 patients in the Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction trial (I-Preserve), using competing risks regression analysis. A series of models were built in a stepwise manner, and were validated in the Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity (CHARM)-Preserved and Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) trials. Results The clinical model for SD included older age, men, lower LVEF, higher heart rate, history of diabetes or myocardial infarction, and HF hospitalization within previous 6 months, all of which were associated with a higher SD risk. The clinical model predicting PFD included older age, men, lower LVEF or diastolic blood pressure, higher heart rate, and history of diabetes or atrial fibrillation, all for a higher PFD risk, and dyslipidaemia for a lower risk of PFD. In each model, the observed and predicted incidences were similar in each risk subgroup, suggesting good calibration. Model discrimination was good for SD and excellent for PFD with Harrell’s C of 0.71 (95% CI 0.68–0.75) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.75–0.82), respectively. Both models were robust in external validation. Adding ECG and biochemical parameters, model performance improved little in the derivation cohort but decreased in validation. Including NT-proBNP substantially increased discrimination of the SD model, and simplified the PFD model with marginal increase in discrimination. Conclusions The clinical models can predict risks for SD and PFD separately with good discrimination and calibration in HFpEF and are robust in external validation. Adding NT-proBNP further improved model performance. These models may help to identify high-risk individuals for device intervention in future trials. Clinical trial registration I-Preserve: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00095238; TOPCAT: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00094302; CHARM-Preserved: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00634712. Graphic abstract

Objectives The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of sacubitril/valsartan therapy on sudden cardiac death (SCD) according to the use of and eligibility for an implantable ...

Background Digoxin reduces the risk of heart failure hospitalization in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Less is known about this association in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), the examination of which was the objective of the current study. Methods In the Medicare-linked OPTIMIZE-HF registry, 7374 patients hospitalized for HF had ejection fraction ≥50% and were not receiving digoxin prior to admission. Of these, 5675 had a heart rate ≥50 beats per minute, an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m2 or did not receive inpatient dialysis, and digoxin was initiated in 524 of these patients. Using propensity scores for digoxin initiation, calculated for each of the 5675 patients, we assembled a matched cohort of 513 pairs of patients initiated and not initiated on digoxin, balanced on 58 baseline characteristics (mean age, 80 years; 66% women; 8% African American). Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for outcomes associated with digoxin initiation were estimated in the matched cohort. Results Among the 1026 matched patients with HFpEF, 30-day heart failure readmission occurred in 6% and 9% of patients initiated and not initiated on digoxin, respectively (HR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.45-1.10; P = .124). HRs (95% CIs) for 30-day all-cause readmission and all-cause mortality associated with digoxin initiation were 0.95 (0.73-1.23; P = .689) and 0.93 (0.55-1.56; P = .773), respectively. Digoxin initiation had no association with 6-year outcomes. Conclusion Digoxin initiation prior to hospital discharge was not associated with 30-day or 6-year outcomes in older hospitalized patients with HFpEF.

Background In heart failure (HF) patients, both natriuretic peptides (NP) and previous HF hospitalization (pHFH) have been used to predict prognosis. Hypothesis In a large real‐world population, both NP levels and pHFH have independent and interdependent predictive value for clinical outcomes of HFH and all‐cause mortality. Methods Linked electronic health records and insurance claims data from Decision Resource Group were used to identify HF patients that had a BNP or NT‐proBNP result between January 2012 and December 2016. NT‐proBNP was converted into BNP equivalents by dividing by 4. Index event was defined as most recent NP on or after 1 January 2012. Patients with incomplete records or age, In heart failure (HF) patients, both natriuretic peptides (NP) and previous HF hospitalization (pHFH) have been used to predict prognosis. However, this association has not been reported over a wide range of NP levels with and without pHFH for clinical outcomes of HFH and all‐cause mortality in a large real‐world population. The current study showed that in a large real‐world heart failure population, higher BNP levels were associated with increased risk for both HFH and mortality. At any given level of BNP, pHFH added greater prognostic value for prediction of future HFH than for mortality.

International audience; Background: Myocardial fibrosis may contribute to the pathophysiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Given the biochemical targets of sacubitril/valsartan, this study hypothesized that circulating biomarkers reflecting the mechanisms that determine extracellular matrix homeostasis are altered by sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan alone.Objectives: This study investigated the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on biomarkers of extracellular matrix homeostasis and the association between biomarkers and the primary endpoint (total heart failure hospitalizations and cardiovascular death).Methods: N-terminal propeptide of collagen I and III, tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase 1, carboxyl-terminal telopeptide of collagen type I, and soluble ST2 were measured at baseline (n = 1,135) and 16 (n = 1,113) and 48 weeks (n = 1,016) after randomization. The effects of sacubitril/valsartan on these biomarkers were compared with those of valsartan alone. Baseline biomarker values and changes from baseline to 16 weeks were related to primary endpoint.Results: At baseline, all 5 biomarkers were higher than published referent control values. Sixteen weeks after randomization, sacubitril/valsartan decreased tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase 1 by 8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6% to 10%; p < 0.001), soluble ST2 by 4% (95% CI: 1% to 7%; p = 0.002), and N-terminal propeptide of collagen III by 3% (95% CI: 0% to 6%; p = 0.04) and increased carboxyl-terminal telopeptide of collagen type I by 4% (95% CI: 1% to 8%; p = 0.02) compared with valsartan alone, consistently in men and women and patients with left ventricular ejection fraction above or below the median of 57%. Higher levels of tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase 1 and soluble ST2 at baseline and increases in these markers at 16 weeks were associated with higher primary endpoint event rates.Conclusions: Biomarkers reflecting extracellular matrix homeostasis are elevated in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, favorably altered by sacubitril/valsartan, and have important prognostic value. (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ARB Global Outcomes in HF With Preserved Ejection Fraction [PARAGON-HF]; NCT01920711).

Objectives The authors investigated the relationship between past or incident myocardial infarction (MI) and cardiovascular (CV) events in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Background MI and HFpEF share some common risk factors. The prognostic significance of MI in patients with HFpEF is uncertain. Methods The authors pooled data from 3 trials—CHARM Preserved (Candesartan Cilexietil in Heart Failure Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity), I-Preserve (Irbesartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Systolic Function), and the Americas region of TOPCAT (Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist) (N = 8,916)—and examined whether MI before or following enrollment independently predicted CV death and heart failure (HF) hospitalization. Results At baseline, 2,668 patients (30%) had history of MI. Prior MI was independently associated with greater risk of CV death (4.7 vs. 3.5 events/100 patient-years [py], adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.42 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.23 to 1.64]; p Conclusions Prior MI in HFpEF is associated with greater CV and sudden death but similar risk of HF outcomes. Patients with HFpEF who experience MI are at high risk of subsequent CV death and HF hospitalization. These data highlight the importance of primary and secondary prevention of MI in patients with HFpEF. (Candesartan Cilexietil in Heart Failure Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and Morbidity [CHARM Preserved]; NCT00634712; Irbesartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Systolic Function [I-Preserve]; NCT00095238; and Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist [TOPCAT]; NCT00094302)

Highlights •BNP and NT-proBNP are used as inclusion criteria in several HF clinical trials. •Despite widespread use, there is inconsistency in how BNP and NT-proBNP are utilized. •We call for standardization of natriuretic peptide inclusion criteria across HF trials.

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the prognostic significance of baseline N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), whether NT-proBNP modified the treatment response to sacubitril/valsartan, and the treatment effect of sacubitril/valsartan on NT-proBNP overall and in key subgroups. BACKGROUND: Sacubitril/valsartan reduces NT-proBNP in heart failure (HF) with both reduced and preserved ejection fraction (EF), but did not significantly reduce total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death compared with valsartan in patients with HF with preserved EF (HFpEF). METHODS: In the PARAGON-HF (Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 Compared to Valsartan, on Morbidity and Mortality in Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction) trial, 4,796 patients with HFpEF and elevated NT-proBNP were randomized to sacubitril/valsartan or valsartan. NT-proBNP was measured at screening in all patients and at 5 subsequent times in >2,700 patients: before, between, and after sequential valsartan and sacubitril/valsartan run-in periods, and 16 and 48 weeks post-randomization. RESULTS: Median NT-proBNP was 911 pg/ml (interquartile range: 464 to 1,613 pg/ml) at screening. Screening NT-proBNP was strongly associated with the primary endpoint, total HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death (rate ratio [RR]: 1.68 per log increase in NT-proBNP, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.53 to 1.85; p 57% (18%). Decreases in NT-proBNP predicted lower subsequent risk of the primary endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline NT-proBNP predicted HF events but did not modify the sacubitril/valsartan treatment effect in patients with HFpEF. Sacubitril/valsartan reduced NT-proBNP consistently in men and women, and in patients with lower or higher EF. (Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 Compared to Valsartan, on Morbidity and Mortality in Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction [PARAGON-HF]; NCT01920711). ispartof: JACC-HEART FAILURE vol:8 issue:5 pages:372-381 ispartof: location:United States status: published

Summary This study assessed the regional changes in myocardial geometry, microstructure, mechanical behavior, and properties that occur in response to progressive left ventricular pressure overload (LVPO) in a large animal model. Using an index of local biomechanical function at early onset of LVPO allowed for prediction of the magnitude of left ventricular chamber stiffness (Kc) and left atrial area at LVPO late timepoints. Our study found that LV myocardial collagen content alone was insufficient to identify mechanisms for LV myocardial stiffness with progression to heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Serial assessment of regional biomechanical function might hold value in monitoring the natural history and progression of HFpEF, which would allow evaluation of novel therapeutic approaches.

Aims: \ud Frailty, characterized by loss of homeostatic reserves and increased vulnerability to physiological decompensation, results from an aggregation of insults across multiple organ systems. Frailty can be quantified by counting the number of ‘health deficits’ across a range of domains. We assessed the frequency of, and outcomes related to, frailty in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).\ud \ud Methods and results: \ud Using a cumulative deficits approach, we constructed a 42‐item frailty index (FI) and applied it to identify frail patients enrolled in two HFrEF trials (PARADIGM‐HF and ATMOSPHERE). In keeping with previous studies, patients with FI ≤0.210 were classified as non‐frail and those with higher scores were divided into two categories using score increments of 0.100. Clinical outcomes were examined, adjusting for prognostic variables. Among 13 625 participants, mean (± standard deviation) FI was 0.250 (0.10) and 8383 patients (63%) were frail (FI >0.210). The frailest patients were older and had more symptoms and signs of heart failure. Women were frailer than men. All outcomes were worse in the frailest, with high rates of all‐cause death or all‐cause hospitalization: 40.7 (39.1–42.4) vs. 22.1 (21.2–23.0) per 100 person‐years in the non‐frail; adjusted hazard ratio 1.63 (1.53–1.75) (P

In this study, the authors sought to assess the relationship between AFF and outcomes, the treatment response to sacubitril/valsartan and first-detected AFF in patients with HFpEF enrolled in the PARAGON-HF trial.Atrial fibrillation and flutter (AFF) are common in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and increase the risk of adverse outcomes.A total of 4,776 patients formed 3 groups: those with AFF according to electrocardiography (ECG) at enrollment (n = 1,552; 33%), those with history of AFF but without AFF on ECG at enrollment (n = 1,005; 21%), and those without history of AFF or AFF on ECG at enrollment (n = 2,219, 46%). We assessed outcomes, treatment response to sacubitril/valsartan in each group, and the risk associated with first-detected AFF in patients without any known AFF. The primary outcome was a composite of total heart failure hospitalizations and cardiovascular death.History of AFF and AFF at enrollment were associated with higher risk of the primary outcome (risk ratio [RR]: 1.36 [95% CI: 1.12-1.65] and RR: 1.31 [1.11-1.54], respectively), than no AFF. Neither history of AFF nor AFF at enrollment modified the treatment effect of sacubitril/valsartan. Post randomization AFF occurred in 12% of patients without previous AFF and was associated with 2.8-fold higher risk of the primary outcome, but it was not influenced by sacubitril/valsartan.History of AFF and AFF on ECG at enrollment were associated with a higher risk of the primary outcome. First-detected AFF was not influenced by sacubitril/valsartan, yet it was associated with increased risk of all subsequent outcomes and may represent a potential target for future HFpEF trials. (Efficacy and Safety of LCZ696 Compared to Valsartan, on Morbidity and Mortality in Heart Failure Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction [PARAGON-HF]; NCT01920711).

BackgroundFrailty is an increasingly common problem, and frail patients are less likely to receive new pharmacologic therapies because the risk–benefit profile is perceived to be less favorable than in nonfrail patients.ObjectivesThis study investigated the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan according to frailty status in 4,796 patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction randomized in the PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ARB Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction) trial.MethodsFrailty was measured by using the Rockwood cumulative deficit approach. The primary endpoint was total heart failure hospitalizations or cardiovascular death.ResultsA frailty index (FI) was calculable in 4,795 patients. In total, 45.2% had class 1 frailty (FI ≤0.210, not frail), 43.5% had class 2 frailty (FI 0.211-0.310, more frail), and 11.4% had class 3 frailty (FI ≥0.311, most frail). There was a graded relationship between FI class and the primary endpoint, with a significantly higher risk associated with greater frailty (class 1: reference; class 2 rate ratio: 2.19 [95% CI: 1.85-2.60]; class 3 rate ratio: 3.29 [95% CI: 2.65-4.09]). The effect of sacubitril/valsartan vs valsartan on the primary endpoint from lowest to highest FI class (as a rate ratio) was: 0.98 [95% CI: 0.76-1.27], 0.92 [95% CI: 0.76-1.12], and 0.69 [95% CI: 0.51-0.95]), respectively (Pinteraction = 0.23). When FI was examined as a continuous variable, the interaction with treatment was significant for the primary outcome (Pinteraction = 0.002) and total heart failure hospitalizations (Pinteraction < 0.001), with those most frail deriving greater benefit.ConclusionsFrailty was common in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and associated with worse outcomes. Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan seemed to show a greater reduction in the primary endpoint with increasing frailty, although this was not significant when FI was examined as a categorical variable. (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ARB Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction BACKGROUND: Frailty is an increasingly common problem, and frail patients are less likely to receive new pharmacologic therapies because the risk-benefit profile is perceived to be less favorable than in nonfrail patients.OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan according to frailty status in 4,796 patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction randomized in the PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ARB Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction) trial.METHODS: Frailty was measured by using the Rockwood cumulative deficit approach. The primary endpoint was total heart failure hospitalizations or cardiovascular death.RESULTS: A frailty index (FI) was calculable in 4,795 patients. In total, 45.2% had class 1 frailty (FI ≤0.210, not frail), 43.5% had class 2 frailty (FI 0.211-0.310, more frail), and 11.4% had class 3 frailty (FI ≥0.311, most frail). There was a graded relationship between FI class and the primary endpoint, with a significantly higher risk associated with greater frailty (class 1: reference; class 2 rate ratio: 2.19 [95% CI: 1.85-2.60]; class 3 rate ratio: 3.29 [95% CI: 2.65-4.09]). The effect of sacubitril/valsartan vs valsartan on the primary endpoint from lowest to highest FI class (as a rate ratio) was: 0.98 [95% CI: 0.76-1.27], 0.92 [95% CI: 0.76-1.12], and 0.69 [95% CI: 0.51-0.95]), respectively (Pinteraction = 0.23). When FI was examined as a continuous variable, the interaction with treatment was significant for the primary outcome (Pinteraction = 0.002) and total heart failure hospitalizations (Pinteraction < 0.001), with those most frail deriving greater benefit.CONCLUSIONS: Frailty was common in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and associated with worse outcomes. Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan seemed to show a greater reduction in the primary endpoint with increasing frailty, although this was not significant when FI was examined as a categorical variable. (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ARB Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction [PARAGON-HF]; NCT01920711).

Background Little is known about the impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods and Results We examined outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, according to COPD status, in the PARAGON‐HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction) trial. The primary outcome was a composite of first and recurrent hospitalizations for heart failure and cardiovascular death. Of 4791 patients, 670 (14%) had COPD. Patients with COPD were more likely to be men (58% versus 47%; P P P Conclusions Approximately 1 in 7 patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction had concomitant COPD, which was associated with greater functional limitation and a higher risk of heart failure hospitalization and death. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01920711 .