Dapagliflozin in patients with heart failure and previous myocardial infarction:A participant-level pooled analysis of DAPA-HF and DELIVER

Aims: Patients with heart failure (HF) and history of myocardial infarction (MI) face a higher risk of disease progression and clinical events. Whether sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors may modify clinical trajectory in such individuals remains incompletely understood. Methods and results: The DAPA-HF and DELIVER trials compared dapagliflozin with placebo in patients with symptomatic HF with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40% and &gt; 40%, respectively. In this pooled participant-level analysis, we assessed efficacy and safety outcomes by history of MI. The primary outcome in both trials was the composite of cardiovascular death or worsening HF. Of the total of 11 007 patients, 3731 (34%) had a previous MI and were at higher risk of the primary outcome across the spectrum of LVEF in covariate-adjusted models (hazard ratio [HR] 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02–1.24). Dapagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary outcome to a similar extent in patients with (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72–0.96) and without previous MI (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.68–0.85; pinteraction = 0.36), with consistent benefits on key secondary outcomes as well. Serious adverse events did not occur more frequently with dapagliflozin, irrespective of previous MI. Conclusion: History of MI confers increased risks of adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with HF across the LVEF spectrum, even among those with preserved ejection fraction. Dapagliflozin consistently and safely reduces the risk of cardiovascular death or worsening HF, regardless of previous MI.</p

Sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction: a pre-specified participant-level pooled analysis of PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF

Background and aims: The PARAGLIDE-HF trial demonstrated reductions in natriuretic peptides with sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan in patients with heart failure (HF) with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction who had a recent worsening HF event, but was not adequately powered to examine clinical outcomes. PARAGON-HF included a subset of PARAGLIDE-HF-like patients who were recently hospitalized for HF. Participant-level data from PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF were pooled to better estimate the efficacy and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in reducing cardiovascular and renal events in HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. Methods: Both PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF were multicenter, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled trials of sacubitril/valsartan vs. valsartan in patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF &gt;40% in PARAGLIDE-HF and ≥45% in PARAGON-HF). In the pre-specified primary analysis, we pooled participants in PARAGLIDE-HF (all of whom were enrolled during or within 30 days of a worsening HF event) with a ‘PARAGLIDE-like’ subset of PARAGON-HF (those hospitalized for HF within 30 days). We also pooled the entire PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF populations for a broader context. The primary endpoint for this analysis was the composite of total worsening HF events (including first and recurrent HF hospitalizations and urgent visits) and cardiovascular death. The secondary endpoint was the pre-specified renal composite endpoint for both studies (≥50% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline, end-stage renal disease, or renal death). Results: Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced total worsening HF events and cardiovascular death in both the primary pooled analysis of participants with recent worsening HF (n=1,088; rate ratio [RR] 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.99; P=0.042) and in the pooled analysis of all participants (n=5,262; RR 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75-0.98; P=0.027). In the pooled analysis of all participants, first nominal statistical significance was reached by day 9 after randomization and treatment benefits were larger in those with LVEF ≤60% (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.66-0.91) compared with those with LVEF &gt;60% (RR 1.09; 95% CI 0.86-1.40; Pinteraction=0.021). Sacubitril/valsartan was also associated with lower rates of the renal composite endpoint in the primary pooled analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0.67; 95% CI 0.43-1.05; P=0.080) and the pooled analysis of all participants (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.44-0.83; P=0.002). Conclusions: In pooled analyses of PARAGLIDE-HF and PARAGON-HF, sacubitril/valsartan reduced cardiovascular and renal events among patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. These data provide support for use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, particularly among those with an LVEF below normal, regardless of care setting

Cost effectiveness of dapagliflozin for heart failure across the spectrum of ejection fraction: an economic evaluation based on pooled, individual participant data from the DELIVER and DAPA-HF trials

Background The sodium glucose cotransporter‐2 inhibitors are guideline‐recommended to treat heart failure across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction; however, economic evaluations of adding sodium glucose cotransporter‐2 inhibitors to standard of care in chronic heart failure across a broad left ventricular ejection fraction range are lacking. Methods and Results We conducted a US‐based cost‐effectiveness analysis of dapagliflozin added to standard of care in a chronic heart failure population using pooled, participant data from the DAPA‐HF (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure) and DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure) trials. The 3‐state Markov model used estimates of transitional probabilities, effectiveness of dapagliflozin, and utilities from the pooled trials. Costs estimates were obtained from published sources, including published rebates in dapagliflozin cost. Adding dapagliflozin to standard of care was estimated to produce an additional 0.53 quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with standard of care alone. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios were $85 554/QALY when using the publicly reported full (undiscounted) Medicare cost ($515/month) and $40 081/QALY, at a published nearly 50$263/month). The addition of dapagliflozin to standard of care would be of at least intermediate value (&lt;150 000/QALY) at a cost of <872.58/month, of high value (&lt;50 000/QALY) at <317.66/month, and cost saving at &lt;$40.25/month. Dapagliflozin was of at least intermediate value in 92% of simulations when using the full (undiscounted) Medicare list cost in probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Cost effectiveness was most sensitive to the dapagliflozin cost and the effect on cardiovascular death. Conclusions The addition of dapagliflozin to standard of care in patients with heart failure across the spectrum of ejection fraction was at least of intermediate value at the undiscounted Medicare cost and may be potentially of higher value on the basis of the level of discount, rebates, and price negotiations offered

Effect of dapagliflozin in patients with diabetes and heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction according to background glucose‐lowering therapy: a pre‐specified analysis of the DELIVER trial

Aims: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and heart failure (HF) frequently coexist, but whether clinical outcomes and treatment effects of sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) vary in relation to background glucose-lowering therapy (GLT) in this population is uncertain. Methods and results: DELIVER randomized patients with HF and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) &gt;40% to dapagliflozin or placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of worsening HF (HF hospitalization or urgent HF visit) or cardiovascular death. In this pre-specified analysis of participants with T2D, treatment effects were assessed by number and class of background GLT(s). Of 3150 participants with T2D at baseline, 22.9% were on no GLT, 36.5% were treated with 1 GLT, and 40.6% with ≥2 GLTs. During follow-up (median: 2.3 years), treatment benefits of dapagliflozin (vs. placebo) on the primary outcome were consistent irrespective of the number of background GLTs (0 GLTs: hazard ratio [HR] 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50–1.00; 1 GLT: HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.80–1.34; ≥2 GLTs: HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56–0.90; pinteraction = 0.59). Similar findings were observed among participants with (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59–0.92) and without background metformin use (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.72–1.11; pinteraction = 0.22) and in participants with (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.69–1.16) and without background insulin use (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65–0.95; pinteraction = 0.45). Dapagliflozin was well-tolerated irrespective of the number of background GLTs. Conclusions: Dapagliflozin safely and consistently improved clinical outcomes among individuals with T2D and HF with LVEF &gt;40% irrespective of the number and class of background GLTs, and the benefits were not influenced by concomitant metformin or insulin use. These data bolster contemporary guidelines supporting first-line SGLT2i among individuals with T2D and HF, irrespective of background GLT

Dapagliflozin in patients with heart failure and previous myocardial infarction: A participant‐level pooled analysis of DAPA-HF and DELIVER

Aims Patients with heart failure (HF) and history of myocardial infarction (MI) face a higher risk of disease progression and clinical events. Whether sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors may modify clinical trajectory in such individuals remains incompletely understood. Methods and results The DAPA-HF and DELIVER trials compared dapagliflozin with placebo in patients with symptomatic HF with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40% and &gt; 40%, respectively. In this pooled participant-level analysis, we assessed efficacy and safety outcomes by history of MI. The primary outcome in both trials was the composite of cardiovascular death or worsening HF. Of the total of 11 007 patients, 3731 (34%) had a previous MI and were at higher risk of the primary outcome across the spectrum of LVEF in covariate-adjusted models (hazard ratio [HR] 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02–1.24). Dapagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary outcome to a similar extent in patients with (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72–0.96) and without previous MI (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.68–0.85; pinteraction = 0.36), with consistent benefits on key secondary outcomes as well. Serious adverse events did not occur more frequently with dapagliflozin, irrespective of previous MI. Conclusion History of MI confers increased risks of adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with HF across the LVEF spectrum, even among those with preserved ejection fraction. Dapagliflozin consistently and safely reduces the risk of cardiovascular death or worsening HF, regardless of previous MI

Dapagliflozin in patients recently hospitalized with heart failure and mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction

Background: Patients recently hospitalized for heart failure (HF) are at high risk for rehospitalization and death. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate clinical outcomes and response to dapagliflozin in patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) who were enrolled during or following hospitalization. Methods: The DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the LIVES of Patients With PReserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure) trial randomized patients with HF and LVEF &gt;40% to dapagliflozin or placebo. DELIVER permitted randomization during or shortly after hospitalization for HF in clinically stable patients off intravenous HF therapies. This prespecified analysis investigated whether recent HF hospitalization modified risk of clinical events or response to dapagliflozin. The primary outcome was worsening HF event or cardiovascular death. Results: Of 6,263 patients in DELIVER, 654 (10.4%) were randomized during HF hospitalization or within 30 days of discharge. Recent HF hospitalization was associated with greater risk of the primary outcome after multivariable adjustment (HR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.60-2.21; P &lt; 0.001). Dapagliflozin reduced the primary outcome by 22% in recently hospitalized patients (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.60-1.03) and 18% in patients without recent hospitalization (HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.72-0.94; Pinteraction = 0.71). Rates of adverse events, including volume depletion, diabetic ketoacidosis, or renal events, were similar with dapagliflozin and placebo in recently hospitalized patients. Conclusions: Dapagliflozin safely reduced risk of worsening HF or cardiovascular death similarly in patients with and without history of recent HF hospitalization. Starting dapagliflozin during or shortly after HF hospitalization in patients with mildly reduced or preserved LVEF appears safe and effective. (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the LIVEs of Patients With PReserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure [DELIVER]; NCT03619213)

Cardiac biomarkers and effects of aficamten in obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: the SEQUOIA-HCM trial

Background and Aims: The role of biomarker testing in the management of obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is not well defined. This pre-specified analysis of SEQUOIA-HCM (NCT05186818) sought to define the associations between clinical characteristics and baseline concentrations of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI), and to evaluate the effect of treatment with aficamten on biomarker concentrations. Methods: Cardiac biomarkers were measured at baseline and serially throughout the study. Regression analyses determined predictors of baseline NT-proBNP and hs-cTnI concentrations, and evaluated whether early changes in these biomarkers relate to later changes in left ventricular outflow tract gradient (LVOT-G), other echocardiographic measures, health status, and functional capacity. Results: Baseline concentration of NT-proBNP was associated with LVOT-G and measures of diastolic function, while hs-cTnI was associated with left ventricular thickness. Within 8 weeks of treatment with aficamten, NT-proBNP was reduced by 79% (95% confidence interval 76%–83%, P &lt; .001) and hs-cTnI by 41% (95% confidence interval 32%–49%, P &lt; .001); both biomarkers reverted to baseline after washout. Reductions in NT-proBNP and hs-cTnI by 24 weeks were strongly associated with a lowering of LVOT-G, improvement in health status, and increased peak oxygen uptake. N-Terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide reduction strongly correlated with the majority of improvements in exercise capacity. Furthermore, the change in NT-proBNP by Week 2 was associated with the 24-week change in key endpoints. Conclusions: N-Terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide and hs-cTnI concentrations are associated with key variables in obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Serial measurement of NT-proBNP and hs-cTnI appears to reflect clinical response to aficamten therapy

Cost Effectiveness of Dapagliflozin for Heart Failure Across the Spectrum of Ejection Fraction: An Economic Evaluation Based on Pooled, Individual Participant Data From the DELIVER and DAPA‐HF Trials

Background The sodium glucose cotransporter‐2 inhibitors are guideline‐recommended to treat heart failure across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction; however, economic evaluations of adding sodium glucose cotransporter‐2 inhibitors to standard of care in chronic heart failure across a broad left ventricular ejection fraction range are lacking. Methods and Results We conducted a US‐based cost‐effectiveness analysis of dapagliflozin added to standard of care in a chronic heart failure population using pooled, participant data from the DAPA‐HF (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure) and DELIVER (Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients With Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure) trials. The 3‐state Markov model used estimates of transitional probabilities, effectiveness of dapagliflozin, and utilities from the pooled trials. Costs estimates were obtained from published sources, including published rebates in dapagliflozin cost. Adding dapagliflozin to standard of care was estimated to produce an additional 0.53 quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with standard of care alone. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios were $85 554/QALY when using the publicly reported full (undiscounted) Medicare cost ($515/month) and $40 081/QALY, at a published nearly 50$263/month). The addition of dapagliflozin to standard of care would be of at least intermediate value (<$150 000/QALY) at a cost of <$872.58/month, of high value (<$50 000/QALY) at <$317.66/month, and cost saving at <$40.25/month. Dapagliflozin was of at least intermediate value in 92% of simulations when using the full (undiscounted) Medicare list cost in probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Cost effectiveness was most sensitive to the dapagliflozin cost and the effect on cardiovascular death. Conclusions The addition of dapagliflozin to standard of care in patients with heart failure across the spectrum of ejection fraction was at least of intermediate value at the undiscounted Medicare cost and may be potentially of higher value on the basis of the level of discount, rebates, and price negotiations offered. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01035255 & NCT01920711

Changes in mid‐regional pro‐adrenomedullin during treatment with sacubitril/valsartan

Background: Adrenomedullin is a vasodilatory peptide with a role in microcirculatory and endothelial homeostasis. Adrenomedullin is a substrate for neprilysin and may therefore play a role in beneficial effects of sacubitril/valsartan (Sac/Val) treatment. Methods: Mid-regional pro-peptide of adrenomedullin (MR-proADM) was measured in 156 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) treated with Sac/Val and 264 patients with HF with preserved EF (HFpEF) randomized to treatment with Sac/Val or valsartan. Echocardiography and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire results were collected at baseline and after 6 and 12 months in the HFrEF cohort. Results: Median (Q1-Q3) baseline MR-proADM concentrations were 0.80 (0.59–0.99) nMol/L in HFrEF and 0.88 (0.68–1.20) nMoL/L in HFpEF. After 12 weeks of treatment with Sac/Val, MR-proADM increased by median 49% in HFrEF and 60% in HFpEF, while there were no significant changes in valsartan-treated patients (median 2%). Greater increases in MR-proADM were associated with higher Sac/Val doses. Changes in MR-proADM correlated weakly with changes in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, cardiac troponin T and urinary cyclic guanosine monophosphate. Increases in MR-proADM were associated with decreases in blood pressure, but not significantly associated with changes in echocardiographic parameters or health status. Conclusions: MR-proADM concentrations rise substantially following treatment with Sac/Val, in contrast to no change from valsartan. Change in MR-proADM from neprilysin inhibition did not correlate with improvements in cardiac structure and function or health status. More data are needed regarding the role of adrenomedullin and its related peptides in the treatment of HF