-
1.
Effect of Treatment With Sacubitril/Valsartan in Patients With Advanced Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Mann, DL, Givertz, MM, Vader, JM, Starling, RC, Shah, P, McNulty, SE, Anstrom, KJ, Margulies, KB, Kiernan, MS, Mahr, C, et al
JAMA cardiology. 2022;(1):17-25
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
IMPORTANCE The use of sacubitril/valsartan is not endorsed by practice guidelines for use in patients with New York Heart Association class IV heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction because of limited clinical experience in this population. OBJECTIVE To compare treatment with sacubitril/valsartan treatment with valsartan in patients with advanced heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction and recent New York Heart Association class IV symptoms. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted; a total of 335 patients with advanced heart failure were included. The trial began on March 2, 2017, and was stopped early on March 23, 2020, owing to COVID-19 risk. INTERVENTION Patients were randomized to receive sacubitril/valsartan (target dose, 200 mg twice daily) or valsartan (target dose, 160 mg twice daily) in addition to recommended therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The area under the curve (AUC) for the ratio of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) compared with baseline measured through 24 weeks of therapy. RESULTS Of the 335 patients included in the analysis, 245 were men (73%); mean (SD) age was 59.4 (13.5) years. Seventy-two eligible patients (18%) were not able to tolerate sacubitril/valsartan, 100 mg/d, during the short run-in period, and 49 patients (29%) discontinued sacubitril/valsartan during the 24 weeks of the trial. The median NT-proBNP AUC for the valsartan treatment arm (n = 168) was 1.19 (IQR, 0.91-1.64), whereas the AUC for the sacubitril/valsartan treatment arm (n = 167) was 1.08 (IQR, 0.75-1.60). The estimated ratio of change in the NT-proBNP AUC was 0.95 (95% CI 0.84-1.08; P = .45). Compared with valsartan, treatment with sacubitril/valsartan did not improve the clinical composite of number of days alive, out of hospital, and free from heart failure events. Aside from a statistically significant increase in non-life-threatening hyperkalemia in the sacubitril/valsartan arm (28 [17%] vs 15 [9%]; P = .04), there were no observed safety concerns. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The findings of this trial showed that, in patients with chronic advanced heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction, there was no statistically significant difference between sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan with respect to reducing NT-proBNP levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02816736.
-
2.
Tolerability of Sacubitril/Valsartan in Patients With Advanced Heart Failure: Analysis of the LIFE Trial Run-In.
Vader, JM, Givertz, MM, Starling, RC, McNulty, SE, Anstrom, KJ, Desvigne-Nickens, P, Hernandez, AF, Braunwald, E, Mann, DL, ,
JACC. Heart failure. 2022;(7):449-456
Abstract
BACKGROUND The LIFE (LCZ696 In Hospitalized Advanced Heart FailurE) trial, which evaluated sacubitril/valsartan in patients with advanced heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction and recent New York Heart Association functional class IV symptomatology, did not require tolerance to a renin angiotensin system antagonist before initiating sacubitril/valsartan, thus affording an opportunity to study the tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan in advanced HF with reduced ejection fraction. OBJECTIVES The goal of this analysis of the LIFE trial is to characterize the tolerability of initiating sacubitril/valsartan in patients with chronic advanced HF with reduced ejection fraction. METHODS In the LIFE trial, 445 subjects with advanced HF entered an unblinded run-in period of 3-7 days with sacubitril/valsartan 24/26 mg twice a day. The authors compared characteristics of subjects completing and failing run-in, performed multivariable analysis of clinical parameters associated with run-in failure, and developed a predictive model for short-term intolerance to sacubitril/valsartan. RESULTS Of 445 subjects entering run-in, 73 (18%) were intolerant of sacubitril/valsartan. Reasons for intolerance included systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg (59%), symptoms of hypotension/dizziness with systolic blood pressure >90 mm Hg (19%), and renal dysfunction (creatinine >2.0 mg/dL) (12%). Multivariable predictors of intolerance included lower mean arterial pressure, lower serum chloride, presence of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and/or cardiac resynchronization device, moderate or greater mitral regurgitation, nonuse of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker at the screening visit, and use of insulin at screening. Subjects with 4 or more predictors had a 48.9% probability of sacubitril/valsartan intolerance. CONCLUSIONS Intolerance to low doses of sacubitril/valsartan is common in patients with advanced chronic HF with reduced ejection fraction and may be predicted by the presence of certain risk factors. (EntrestoTM [LCZ696] in Advanced Heart Failure [LIFE Study] [HFN-LIFE] NCT02816736).
-
3.
Sacubitril/Valsartan in Advanced Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: Rationale and Design of the LIFE Trial.
Mann, DL, Greene, SJ, Givertz, MM, Vader, JM, Starling, RC, Ambrosy, AP, Shah, P, McNulty, SE, Mahr, C, Gupta, D, et al
JACC. Heart failure. 2020;(10):789-799
Abstract
The PARADIGM-HF (Prospective Comparison of Angiotensin II Receptor Blocker Neprilysin Inhibitor With Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure) trial reported that sacubitril/valsartan (S/V), an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, significantly reduced mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization in HF patients with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, fewer than 1% of patients in the PARADIGM-HF study had New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class IV symptoms. Accordingly, data that informed the use of S/V among patients with advanced HF were limited. The LIFE (LCZ696 in Hospitalized Advanced Heart Failure) study was a 24-week prospective, multicenter, double-blinded, double-dummy, active comparator trial that compared the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of S/V with those of valsartan in patients with advanced HFrEF. The trial planned to randomize 400 patients ≥18 years of age with advanced HF, defined as an EF ≤35%, New York Heart Association functional class IV symptoms, elevated natriuretic peptide concentration (B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP] ≥250 pg/ml or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP] ≥800 pg/ml), and ≥1 objective finding of advanced HF. Following a 3- to 7-day open label run-in period with S/V (24 mg/26 mg twice daily), patients were randomized 1:1 to S/V titrated to 97 mg/103 mg twice daily versus 160 mg of V twice daily. The primary endpoint was the proportional change from baseline in the area under the curve for NT-proBNP levels measured through week 24. Secondary and tertiary endpoints included clinical outcomes and safety and tolerability. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, enrollment in the LIFE trial was stopped prematurely to ensure patient safety and data integrity. The primary analysis consists of the first 335 randomized patients whose clinical follow-up examination results were not severely impacted by COVID-19. (Entresto [LCZ696] in Advanced Heart Failure [LIFE STUDY] [HFN-LIFE]; NCT02816736).
-
4.
Timing and Causes of Readmission After Acute Heart Failure Hospitalization-Insights From the Heart Failure Network Trials.
Vader, JM, LaRue, SJ, Stevens, SR, Mentz, RJ, DeVore, AD, Lala, A, Groarke, JD, AbouEzzeddine, OF, Dunlay, SM, Grodin, JL, et al
Journal of cardiac failure. 2016;(11):875-883
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Readmission or death after heart failure (HF) hospitalization is a consequential and closely scrutinized outcome, but risk factors may vary by population. We characterized the risk factors for post-discharge readmission/death in subjects treated for acute heart failure (AHF). METHODS AND RESULTS A post hoc analysis was performed on data from 744 subjects enrolled in 3 AHF trials conducted within the Heart Failure Network (HFN): Diuretic Optimization Strategies Evaluation in Acute Heart Failure (DOSE-AHF), Cardiorenal Rescue Study in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure (CARRESS-HF), and Renal Optimization Strategies Evaluation in Acute Heart Failure (ROSE-AHF). All-cause readmission/death occurred in 26% and 38% of subjects within 30 and 60 days of discharge, respectively. Non-HF cardiovascular causes of readmission were more common in the ≤30-day timeframe than in the 31-60-day timeframe (23% vs 10%, P = .016). In a Cox proportional hazards model adjusting a priori for left ventricular ejection fraction <50% and trial, the risk factors for all-cause readmission/death included: elevated baseline blood urea nitrogen, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) non-use, lower baseline sodium, non-white race, elevated baseline bicarbonate, lower systolic blood pressure at discharge or day 7, depression, increased length of stay, and male sex. CONCLUSIONS In an AHF population with prominent congestion and prevalent renal dysfunction, early readmissions were more likely to be due to non-HF cardiovascular causes compared with later readmissions. The association between use of ACEI/ARB and lower all-cause readmission/death in Cox proportional hazards model suggests a role for these drugs to improve post-discharge outcomes in AHF.
-
5.
Serum Bicarbonate in Acute Heart Failure: Relationship to Treatment Strategies and Clinical Outcomes.
Cooper, LB, Mentz, RJ, Gallup, D, Lala, A, DeVore, AD, Vader, JM, AbouEzzeddine, OF, Bart, BA, Anstrom, KJ, Hernandez, AF, et al
Journal of cardiac failure. 2016;(9):738-42
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Though commonly noted in clinical practice, it is unknown if decongestion in acute heart failure (AHF) results in increased serum bicarbonate. METHODS AND RESULTS For 678 AHF patients in the DOSE-AHF, CARRESS-HF, and ROSE-AHF trials, we assessed change in bicarbonate (baseline to 72-96 hours) according to decongestion strategy, and the relationship between bicarbonate change and protocol-defined decongestion. Median baseline bicarbonate was 28 mEq/L. Patients with baseline bicarbonate ≥28 mEq/L had lower ejection fraction, worse renal function and higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide than those with baseline bicarbonate <28 mEq/L. There were no differences in bicarbonate change between treatment groups in DOSE-AHF or ROSE-AHF (all P > .1). In CARRESS-HF, bicarbonate increased with pharmacologic care but decreased with ultrafiltration (median +3.3 vs -0.9 mEq/L, respectively; P < .001). Bicarbonate change was not associated with successful decongestion (P > .2 for all trials). CONCLUSIONS In AHF, serum bicarbonate is most commonly elevated in patients with more severe heart failure. Despite being used in clinical practice as an indicator for decongestion, change in serum bicarbonate was not associated with significant decongestion.
-
6.
Decongestion strategies and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system activation in acute heart failure.
Mentz, RJ, Stevens, SR, DeVore, AD, Lala, A, Vader, JM, AbouEzzeddine, OF, Khazanie, P, Redfield, MM, Stevenson, LW, O'Connor, CM, et al
JACC. Heart failure. 2015;(2):97-107
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between biomarkers of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) activation and decongestion strategies, worsening renal function, and clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND High-dose diuretic therapy in patients with acute heart failure (AHF) is thought to activate the RAAS; and alternative decongestion strategies, such as ultrafiltration (UF), have been proposed to mitigate this RAAS activation. METHODS This study analyzed 427 AHF patients enrolled in the DOSE-AHF (Diuretic Optimization Strategies in Acute Heart Failure) and CARRESS-HF (Cardiorenal Rescue Study in Acute Decompensated Heart Failure) trials. We assessed the relationship between 2 markers of RAAS activation (plasma renin activity [PRA] and aldosterone) from baseline to 72 h and 96 h and decongestion strategy: high- versus low-dose and continuous infusion versus bolus furosemide for DOSE-AHF and UF versus stepped pharmacologic care for CARRESS-HF. We determined the relationships between RAAS biomarkers and 60-day outcomes. RESULTS Patients with greater RAAS activation at baseline had lower blood pressures, lower serum sodium levels, and higher blood urea nitrogen (BUN) concentration. Continuous infusion furosemide and UF were associated with greater PRA increases (median: +1.66 vs. +0.66 ng/ml/h with continuous vs. bolus infusion, respectively, p = 0.021; +4.05 vs. +0.56 ng/ml/h with UF vs. stepped care, respectively, p = 0.014). There were no significant differences in RAAS biomarker changes with high- versus low-dose diuretic therapy (both: p > 0.5). Neither baseline log PRA nor log aldosterone was associated with increased death or HF hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] for a doubling of 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98 to 1.13; p = 0.18; and HR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.28; p = 0.069, respectively). The change in RAAS biomarkers from baseline to 72 and 96 h was not associated with outcomes (both: p > 0.5). CONCLUSIONS High-dose loop diuretic therapy did not result in RAAS activation greater than that with low-dose diuretic therapy. UF resulted in greater PRA increase than stepped pharmacologic care. Neither PRA nor aldosterone was significantly associated with short-term outcomes in this cohort. (Determining Optimal Dose and Duration of Diuretic Treatment in People With Acute Heart Failure [DOSE-AHF]; NCT00577135; Effectiveness of Ultrafiltration in Treating People With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure and Cardiorenal Syndrome [CARRESS]; NCT00608491).