Background

The best catecholamine regimen for cardiogenic shock has been poorly evaluated. When a vasopressor is required to treat patients with the most severe form of cardiogenic shock, whether inodilators should be added or whether inopressors can be used alone has not been established. The purpose of this study was to compare the impact of these two strategies on short-term mortality in patients with severe cardiogenic shocks.

Methods and results

Three observational cohorts of patients with decompensated heart failure were pooled to comprise a total of 1,272 patients with cardiogenic shocks. Of these 1,272 patients, 988 were considered to be severe because they required a vasopressor during the first 24 hours. We developed a propensity-score (PS) model to predict the individual probability of receiving one of the two regimens (inopressors alone or a combination) conditionally on baseline-measured covariates. The benefit of the treatment regimen on the mortality rate was estimated by fitting a weighted Cox regression model. A total of 643 patients (65.1%) died within the first 30 days (inopressors alone: 293 (72.0%); inopressors and inodilators: 350 (60.0%)). After PS weighting, we observed that the use of an inopressor plus an inodilator was associated with an improved short-term mortality (HR: 0.66 [0.55-0.80]) compared to inopressors alone.

Conclusions

In the most severe forms of cardiogenic shock where a vasopressor is immediately required, adding an inodilator may improve short-term mortality. This result should be confirmed in a randomized, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: COMMANDER-HF was a randomised trial comparing rivaroxaban 2.5 mg two times a day to placebo, in addition to antiplatelet therapy, in patients hospitalised for worsening heart failure with coronary artery disease and sinus rhythm. Patients with diabetes are at increased risk of cardiovascular events and therefore have more to gain. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this post-hoc analysis, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in patients with (n=2052) and without diabetes (n=2970). The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI) or ischaemic stroke. HRs and 95% CIs with interaction analyses were used to describe event-rates and treatment effects. Patients with diabetes had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular comorbidities (eg, hypertension, obesity) and increased incidence of cardiovascular events. Adjusted HRs for events in people with versus without diabetes were 1.34 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.50) for the primary outcome, 1.21 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.75) for stroke, 1.51 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.99) for MI, 1.17 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.31) for heart failure hospitalisation and 1.06 (95% CI 0.56 to 2.01) for major bleeding. Rivaroxaban had no significant effect on event-rates in patients with and without diabetes (all interaction p values >0.05). Low-dose rivaroxaban was associated with an overall reduction in ischaemic stroke (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95), with no apparent subgroup interaction according to diabetes status (p-int=0.93). CONCLUSIONS: In COMMANDER-HF a diagnosis of diabetes conferred higher rates of cardiovascular events that, with exception of ischaemic stroke, was not substantially reduced by rivaroxaban. Rivaroxaban was associated with reduced risk of ischaemic stroke for patients with and without diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01877915; Post-results.

With few notable exceptions, drug development for heart failure (HF) has become progressively more challenging, and there remain no definitively proven therapies for patients with acute HF or HF with preserved ejection fraction. Inspection of temporal trends suggests an increasing rate of disagreement between early-phase and phase III trial end points. Preliminary results from phase II HF trials are frequently promising, but increasingly followed by disappointing phase III results. Given this potential disconnect, it is reasonable to carefully re-evaluate the purpose, design, and execution of phase II HF trials, with particular attention directed toward the surrogate end points commonly used by these studies. In this review, we offer a critical reappraisal of the role of phase II HF trials and surrogate end points, highlighting challenges in their use and interpretation, lessons learned from past experiences, and specific strengths and weaknesses of various surrogate outcomes. We conclude by proposing a series of approaches that should be considered for the goal of optimizing the efficiency of HF drug development. This review is based on discussions between scientists, clinical trialists, industry and government sponsors, and regulators that took place at the Cardiovascular Clinical Trialists Forum in Washington, DC, on December 2, 2016.

Aims

Thrombin is a critical element of crosstalk between pathways contributing to worsening of established heart failure (HF). The aim of this study is to explore the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg bid compared with placebo (with standard care) after an exacerbation of HF in patients with reduced ejection fraction (HF-rEF) and documented coronary artery disease.

Methods

This is an international prospective, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, event-driven study of approximately 5000 patients for a targeted 984 events. Patients must have a recent symptomatic exacerbation of HF, increased plasma concentrations of natriuretic peptides (B-type natriuretic peptide ≥200 pg/mL or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide ≥800 pg/mL), with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% and coronary artery disease. Patients requiring anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation or other conditions will be excluded. After an index event (overnight hospitalization, emergency department or observation unit admission, or unscheduled outpatient parenteral treatment for worsening HF), patients will be randomized 1:1 to rivaroxaban or placebo (with standard of care). The primary efficacy outcome event is a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction or stroke. The principal safety outcome events are the composite of fatal bleeding or bleeding into a critical space with potential permanent disability, bleeding events requiring hospitalization and major bleeding events according to International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis bleeding criteria.

Conclusion

COMMANDER HF is the first prospective study of a target-specific oral antithrombotic agent in HF. It will provide important information regarding rivaroxaban use following an HF event in an HF-rEF patient population with coronary artery disease.

Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of death and disability in older adults. Despite decades of high-quality evidence to support their use, guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMTs) that reduce death and disease burden in HF have been suboptimally implemented. Approaches to closing care gaps have focused largely on strategies proven to be ineffective, whilst effective interventions shown to improve GDMT uptake have not been instituted. This review synthesizes implementation interventions that increase the uptake of GDMT, discusses barriers and facilitators of implementation, summarizes conceptual frameworks in implementation science that could improve knowledge uptake, and offers suggestions for trial design that could better facilitate end-of-trial implementation. We propose an evidence-to-care conceptual model that could foster the simultaneous generation of evidence and long-term implementation. By adopting principles of implementation science, policymakers, researchers, and clinicians can help reduce the burden of HF on patients and health care systems worldwide.

Aims

Change in NT-proBNP level is a common surrogate endpoint in early phase heart failure (HF) trials, but whether this endpoint is influenced by atrial fibrillation/flutter (AFF) is unclear.

Methods and results

This analysis included 1358 patients from the ASTRONAUT trial, which randomized patients hospitalized for HF with EF ≤40% to aliskiren or placebo in addition to standard care. Patients were stratified by presence of AFF on baseline ECG. NT-proBNP was measured longitudinally by a core laboratory at baseline, 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months. Compared with non-AFF patients, AFF patients experienced greater reduction from baseline in log-transformed NT-proBNP (interaction P < 0.001), but this difference was not significant after adjustment (interaction P = 0.726). The ability of aliskiren to lower NT-proBNP during follow-up differed by AFF status (interaction P = 0.001), with aliskiren lowering NT-proBNP more than placebo among non-AFF patients only. After adjustment, baseline AFF was not associated with mortality or HF hospitalization at 12 months (all P ≥ 0.152).

Conclusion

In this hospitalized HF cohort, AFF status did not influence post-discharge NT-proBNP trajectory or clinical outcomes after adjustment for patient characteristics. Aliskiren lowered follow-up NT-proBNP levels in patients without AFF, but had no influence among patients with AFF. This study generates the hypothesis that the ability of a HF trial to meet an NT-proBNP defined endpoint may be influenced by the prevalence of AFF in the population. Because aliskiren did not improve outcomes in patients without AFF, this analysis suggests changes in NT-proBNP induced by investigational therapies may be dissociated from clinical effects.

Aims

The direct renin inhibitor, aliskiren, is known to reduce plasma renin activity (PRA), but whether the efficacy of aliskiren varies based on an individual's baseline PRA in patients hospitalized for heart failure (HF) is presently unknown. We characterized the prognostic value of PRA and determined if this risk is modifiable with use of aliskiren.

Methods and results

This pre-specified neurohormonal substudy of ASTRONAUT analysed all patients hospitalized for HF with ejection fraction (EF) ≤40% with available baseline PRA data (n = 1306, 80.9%). Risk associated with baseline PRA and short-term changes in PRA from baseline to 1 month was modelled with respect to 12-month clinical events. Median baseline PRA was 3.0 (interquartile range 0.6-16.4) ng/mL/h. Aliskiren significantly reduced PRA early after treatment initiation through 12-month follow-up compared with placebo (P < 0.001). The lowest baseline PRA quartile (<0.6 ng/mL/h) was independently predictive of lower all-cause mortality [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.81] and the composite of cardiovascular mortality and HF hospitalization (adjusted HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40-0.79). Delta log-normalized PRA (from baseline to 1 month) was not predictive of either primary endpoint at 12 months (P ≥ 0.43). The prognostic value of baseline PRA and short-term changes in PRA did not vary by randomization to aliskiren or placebo (interaction P ≥ 0.13).

Conclusions

Plasma renin activity is reduced early and durably by aliskiren, but this did not translate into improved clinical outcomes in ASTRONAUT. Baseline PRA or short-term reduction in PRA do not identify a subgroup who may preferentially benefit from direct renin inhibition. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Unique Identifier: NCT00894387.

Serum magnesium levels may be impacted by neurohormonal activation, renal function, and diuretics. The clinical profile and prognostic significance of serum magnesium level concentration in patients hospitalized for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction is unclear. In this retrospective analysis of the placebo group of the Efficacy of Vasopressin Antagonism in Heart Failure Outcome Study with Tolvaptan trial, we evaluated 1,982 patients hospitalized for worsening HF with ejection fractions ≤40%. Baseline magnesium levels were measured within 48 hours of admission and analyzed as a continuous variable and in quartiles. The primary end points of all-cause mortality (ACM) and cardiovascular mortality or HF rehospitalization were analyzed using Cox regression models. Mean baseline magnesium level was 2.1 ± 0.3 mg/dl. Compared with the lowest quartile, patients in the highest magnesium level quartile were more likely to be older, men, have lower heart rates and blood pressures, have ischemic HF origin, and have higher creatinine and natriuretic peptide levels (all p <0.003). During a median follow-up of 9.9 months, every 1-mg/dl increase in magnesium level was associated with higher ACM (hazard ratio [HR] 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35 to 2.32; p <0.001) and the composite end point (HR 1.44; 95% CI 1.15 to 1.81; p = 0.002). However, after adjustment for known baseline covariates, serum magnesium level was no longer an independent predictor of either ACM (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.28; p = 0.7) or the composite end point (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.30; p = 0.9). In conclusion, despite theoretical concerns, baseline magnesium level was not independently associated with worse outcomes in this cohort. Further research is needed to understand the importance of serum magnesium levels in specific HF patient populations.

Aims

Stroke is often a devastating event among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection (HFrEF). In COMMANDER HF, rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. did not reduce the composite of first occurrence of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction compared with placebo in patients with HFrEF, coronary artery disease (CAD), and sinus rhythm. We now examine the incidence, timing, type, severity, and predictors of stroke or a transient ischaemic attack (TIA), and seek to establish the net clinical benefit of treatment with low-dose rivaroxaban.

Methods and results

In this double-blind, randomized trial, 5022 patients who had HFrEF(≤40%), elevated natriuretic peptides, CAD, and who were in sinus rhythm were treated with rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. or placebo in addition to antiplatelet therapy, after an episode of worsening HF. The primary neurological outcome for this post hoc analysis was time to first event of any stroke or TIA. Over a median follow-up of 20.5 (25th-75th percentiles 20.0-20.9) months, 150 all-cause stroke (127) or TIA (23) events occurred (ischaemic stroke in 82% and haemorrhagic stroke in 11% of stroke events). Overall, 47.5% of first-time strokes were either disabling (16.5%) or fatal (31%). Prior stroke, low body mass index, geographic region, and the CHA2DS2-VASc score were predictors of stroke/TIA. Rivaroxaban significantly reduced the primary neurological endpoint of all-cause stroke or TIA compared with placebo by 32% (1.29 events vs. 1.90 events per 100 patient-years), adjusted for the time from index HF event to randomization and stratified by geographic region (adjusted hazard ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.49-0.94), with a number needed to treat of 164 patients per year to prevent one stroke/TIA event. The principal safety endpoint of fatal bleeding or bleeding into a critical space, occurred at a similar rate on rivaroxaban and placebo (0.44 events vs. 0.55 events per 100 patient-years).

Conclusions

Patients with HFrEF and CAD are at risk for stroke or TIA in the period following an episode of worsening heart failure in the absence of atrial fibrillation. Most strokes are of ischaemic origin and nearly half are either disabling or fatal. Rivaroxaban at a dose of 2.5 mg b.i.d. reduced rates of stroke or TIA compared with placebo in this population.

Trial registration

COMMANDER HF (A Study to Assess the Effectiveness and Safety of Rivaroxaban in Reducing the Risk of Death, Myocardial Infarction, or Stroke in Participants with Heart Failure and Coronary Artery Disease Following an Episode of Decompensated Heart Failure); ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01877915.

Heart failure (HF) is a major and increasing global public health problem. In Asia, aging populations and recent increases in cardiovascular risk factors have contributed to a particularly high burden of HF, with outcomes that are poorer than those in the rest of the world. Representation of Asians in landmark HF trials has been variable. In addition, HF patients from Asia demonstrate clinical differences from patients in other geographic regions. Thus, the generalizability of some clinical trial results to the Asian population remains uncertain. In this article, we review differences in HF phenotype, HF management, and outcomes in patients from East and Southeast Asia. We describe lessons learned in Asia from recent HF registries and clinical trial databases and outline strategies to improve the potential for success in future trials. This review is based on discussions among scientists, clinical trialists, industry representatives, and regulatory representatives at the CardioVascular Clinical Trialist Asia Forum in Singapore on July 4, 2014.