Search

AimsCurrently, no acute heart failure (AHF) therapy definitively improves outcomes. Reducing morbidity and mortality from acute heart failure (AHF) remains an unmet need. TRV027 is a novel 'biased' ligand of the angiotensin II type 1 receptor (AT1R), selectively antagonizing the negative effects of angiotensin II, while preserving the potential pro-contractility effects of AT1R stimulation. BLAST-AHF was designed to determine the safety, efficacy, and optimal dose of TRV027 to advance into future studies.Methods and resultsBLAST-AHF was a multi-centre, international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group, phase IIb dose-ranging study, enrolling patients with AHF into 4 groups: placebo, 1, 5, or 25 mg/h of TRV027. Treatment was by IV infusion for 48-96 h. The primary composite endpoint was comprised of the following: (i) time from baseline to death through day 30, (ii) time from baseline to heart failure re-hospitalization through day 30, (iii) the first assessment time point following worsening heart failure through day 5, (iv) change in dyspnea visual analogue scale (VAS) score calculated as the area under the curve (AUC) representing the change from baseline over time from baseline through day 5, and (v) length of initial hospital stay (in days) from baseline. Analyses were by modified intention-to-treat. Overall, 621 patients were enrolled. After 254 patients, a pre-specified interim analysis resulted in several protocol changes, including a lower blood pressure inclusion criterion as well as a new allocation scheme of 2:1:2:1, overweighting both placebo, and the 5 mg/h dose. TRV027 did not confer any benefit over placebo at any dose with regards to the primary composite endpoint or any of the individual components. There were no significant safety issues with TRV027.ConclusionIn this phase IIb dose-ranging AHF study, TRV027 did not improve clinical status through 30-day follow-up compared with placebo.

Patients admitted for acute heart failure (AHF) experience high rates of in-hospital and post-discharge morbidity and mortality despite current therapies. Serelaxin is recombinant human relaxin-2, a hormone with vasodilatory and end-organ protective effects believed to play a central role in the cardiovascular and renal adaptations of human pregnancy. In the phase 3 RELAX-AHF trial, serelaxin met its primary endpoint of improving dyspnoea through day 5 in patients admitted for AHF. Compared to placebo, serelaxin also reduced worsening heart failure (WHF) by 47% through day 5 and both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality by 37% through day 180. RELAX-AHF-2 ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01870778) is designed to confirm serelaxin's effect on these clinical outcomes. RELAX-AHF-2 is a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven, phase 3 trial enrolling ∼6800 patients hospitalized for AHF with dyspnoea, congestion on chest radiograph, increased natriuretic peptide levels, mild-to-moderate renal insufficiency, and systolic blood pressure ≥125 mmHg. Patients are randomized within 16 h of presentation to 48 h intravenous infusions of serelaxin (30 µg/kg/day) or placebo, both in addition to standard of care treatments. The primary objectives are to demonstrate that serelaxin is superior to placebo in reducing: (i) 180 day cardiovascular death, and (ii) occurrence of WHF through day 5. Key secondary endpoints include 180 day all-cause mortality, composite of 180 day combined cardiovascular mortality or heart failure/renal failure rehospitalization, and in-hospital length of stay during index AHF. The results from RELAX-AHF-2 will provide data on the potential beneficial effect of serelaxin on cardiovascular mortality and WHF in selected patients with AHF.

BackgroundAtrial fibrillation (AFib) is a common comorbidity in HF and affects patients' outcome. We sought to assess the effects of serelaxin in patients with and without AFib.MethodsIn a post hoc analysis of the RELAX-AHF trial, we compared the effects of serelaxin on efficacy end points, safety end points and biomarkers in 1161 patients with and without AFib on admission electrocardiogram.ResultsAFib was present in 41.3% of patients. Serelaxin had a similar effect in patients with and without AFib, including dyspnea relief by visual analog scale through day 5 [mean change in area under the curve, 541.11 (33.79, 1048.44), p = 0.0366 in AFib versus 361.80 (-63.30, 786.90), p = 0.0953 in non-AFib, interaction p = 0.5954] and all-cause death through day 180 [HR = 0.42 (0.23, 0.77), p = 0.0051 in AFib versus 0.90 (0.53, 1.52), p = 0.6888 in non-AFib, interaction p = 0.0643]. Serelaxin was similarly safe in the two groups and induced similar reductions in biomarkers of cardiac, renal and hepatic damage. Stroke occurred more frequently in AFib patients (2.8 vs. 0.8%, p = 0.0116) and there was a trend for lower stroke incidence in the serelaxin arm in AFib patients (odds ratios, 0.31, p = 0.0759 versus 3.88, p = 0.2255 in non-AFib, interaction p = 0.0518).ConclusionsSerelaxin was similarly safe and efficacious in improving short- and long-term outcomes and inducing organ protection in acute HF patients with and without AFib.

AimsWomen with heart failure are typically older, and more often have hypertension and a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction as compared with men. We sought to analyze if these sex differences influence the course and outcome of acute heart failure.Methods and resultsWe analyzed sex differences in acute heart failure in 1161 patients enrolled in the RELAX-AHF study. The pre-specified study endpoints were used. At baseline, women (436/1161 patients) were older, had a higher left ventricular ejection fraction, a higher rate of hypertension, and were treated differently from men. Early dyspnea improvement (moderate or marked dyspnea improvement measured by Likert scale during the first 24 h) was greater in women. However, dyspnea improvement over the first 5 days (change from baseline in the visual analog scale area under the curve (VAS AUC) to day 5) was similar between men and women. Women reported greater improvements in general wellbeing by Likert, but no such benefits were evident with the VAS score. Multi-variable predictors of moderate or marked dyspnea improvement were female sex (p = 0.0011), lower age (p = 0.0026) and lower diuretic dose (p = 0.0067). The additional efficacy endpoints of RELAX-AHF were similar between men and women and serelaxin was equally effective in men and women.ConclusionsWomen exhibit better earlier dyspnea relief and improvement in general wellbeing compared with men, even adjusted for age and left ventricular ejection fraction. However, in-hospital and post-discharge clinical outcomes were similar between men and women. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00520806.

ObjectivesThis study sought to examine the relationships between in-hospital and post-discharge body weight changes and outcomes among patients hospitalized for acute heart failure (AHF).BackgroundBody weight changes during and after hospitalization for AHF and the relationships with outcomes have not been well characterized.MethodsA post hoc analysis was performed of the ASCEND-HF (Acute Study of Clinical Effectiveness of Nesiritide and Decompensated Heart Failure) trial, which enrolled patients admitted for AHF regardless of ejection fraction. In-hospital body weight change was defined as the difference between baseline and discharge/day 10, whereas post-discharge body weight change was defined as the difference between discharge/day 10 and day 30. Spearman rank correlations of weight change, urine output (UOP), and dyspnea relief as assessed by a 7-point Likert scale are described. Logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate the relationship between weight change and outcomes.ResultsStudy participants with complete body weight data (n = 4,172) had a mean age of 65 ± 14 years, and 66% were male. Ischemic heart disease was reported in 60% of patients and the average ejection fraction was 30 ± 13%. The median change in body weight was -1.0 kg (interquartile range: -2.1 to 0.0 kg) at 24 h and -2.3 kg (interquartile range: -5.0 to -0.7 kg) by discharge/day 10. At hour 24, there was a weak correlation between change in body weight and UOP (r = -0.381), and minimal correlation between body weight change and dyspnea relief (r = -0.096). After risk adjustment, increasing body weight during hospitalization was associated with a 16% increase per kg in the likelihood of 30-day mortality or HF readmission for patients showing weight loss ≤1 kg or weight gain during hospitalization (odds ratio per kg increase 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09 to 1.27; p < 0.001). Among the subset of patients experiencing >1-kg increase in body weight post-discharge, increasing body weight was associated with higher risk of 180-day mortality (hazard ratio per kg increase 1.16; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.23; p < 0.001).ConclusionsA substantial number of patients experienced minimal weight loss or frank weight gain in the context of an AHF trial, and increasing body weight in this subset of patients was independently associated with a worse post-discharge prognosis.

BackgroundSerelaxin showed beneficial effects on clinical outcome and trajectories of renal markers in patients with acute heart failure. We aimed to study the interaction between renal function and the treatment effect of serelaxin.MethodsIn the current post hoc analysis of the RELAX-AHF trial, we included all patients with available estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at baseline (n = 1132). Renal impairment was defined as an eGFR

Heart failure (HF) afflicts nearly 6 million Americans, resulting in one million emergency department (ED) visits and over one million annual hospital discharges. An aging population and improved survival from cardiovascular diseases is expected to further increase HF prevalence. Emergency providers play a significant role in the management of patients with acute heart failure (AHF). It is crucial that emergency physicians and other providers involved in early management understand the latest developments in diagnostic testing, therapeutics and alternatives to hospitalization. Further, clinical trials must be conducted in the ED in order to improve the evidence base and drive optimal initial therapy for AHF. Should ongoing and future studies suggest early phenotype-driven therapy improves in-hospital and post-discharge outcomes, ED treatment decisions will need to evolve accordingly. The potential impact of future studies which incorporate risk-stratification into ED disposition decisions cannot be underestimated. Predictive instruments that identify a cohort of patients safe for ED discharge, while simultaneously addressing barriers to successful outpatient management, have the potential to significantly impact quality of life and resource expenditures.

Heart failure (HF) afflicts nearly 6 million Americans, resulting in 1 million emergency department (ED) visits and over 1 million annual hospital discharges. The majority of inpatient admissions originate in the ED; thus, it is crucial that emergency physicians and other providers involved in early management understand the latest developments in diagnostic testing, therapeutics, and alternatives to hospitalization. This article discusses contemporary ED management as well as the necessary next steps for ED-based acute HF research.

ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate if diastolic pulmonary gradient (DPG) can predict survival in patients with pulmonary hypertension due to left heart disease (PH-LHD).BackgroundPatients with combined post- and pre-capillary PH-LHD have worse prognosis than those with passive pulmonary hypertension. The transpulmonary gradient (TPG) and pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) have commonly been used to identify high-risk patients. However, these parameters have significant shortcomings and do not always correlate with pulmonary vasculature remodeling. Recently, it has been suggested that DPG may be better a marker, yet its prognostic ability in patients with cardiomyopathy has not been fully assessed.MethodsA retrospective cohort of 1,236 patients evaluated for unexplained cardiomyopathy at Johns Hopkins Hospital was studied. All patients underwent right heart catheterization and were followed until death, cardiac transplantation, or the end of the study period (mean time 4.4 years). The relationships between DPG, TPG, or PVR and survival in subjects with PH-LHD (n = 469) were evaluated with Cox proportional hazards regression and Kaplan-Meier analyses.ResultsDPG was not significantly associated with mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.02, p = 0.10) in PH-LHD whereas elevated TPG and PVR predicted death (HR: 1.02, p = 0.046; and HR: 1.11, p = 0.002, respectively). Similarly, DPG did not differentiate survivors from non-survivors at any selected cut points including a DPG of 7 mm Hg.ConclusionsIn this retrospective study of patients with cardiomyopathy and PH-LHD, an elevated DPG was not associated with worse survival.

Heart failure is a syndrome with a pathophysiological basis that can be traced to dysfunction in several interconnected molecular pathways. Identification of biomarkers of heart failure that allow measurement of the disease on a molecular level has resulted in enthusiasm for their use in prognostication and selection of appropriate therapies. However, despite considerable amounts of information available on numerous biomarkers, inconsistent research methodologies and lack of clinical correlations have made bench-to-bedside translations rare and left the literature with countless publications of varied quality. There is a need for a systematic and collaborative approach aimed at definitively studying the clinical benefits of novel biomarkers. In this review, on the basis of input from academia, industry, and governmental agencies, we propose a systematized approach based on adherence to specific quality measures for studies looking to augment current prediction model or use biomarkers to tailor therapeutics. We suggest that study quality, rather than results, should determine publication and propose a system for grading biomarker studies. We outline the need for collaboration between clinical investigators and statisticians to introduce more advanced statistical methodologies into the field of biomarkers that would allow for data from a large number of variables to be distilled into clinically actionable information. Lastly, we propose the creation of a heart failure biomarker consortium that would allow for a comprehensive list of biomarkers to be concomitantly analyzed in a pooled sample of randomized clinical trials and hypotheses to be generated for testing in biomarker-guided trials. Such a consortium could collaborate in sharing samples to identify biomarkers, undertake meta-analyses on completed trials, and spearhead clinical trials to test the clinical utility of new biomarkers.