Rolofylline, an adenosine A1−receptor antagonist, in acute heart failure

Background: Worsening renal function, which is associated with adverse outcomes, often develops in patients with acute heart failure. Experimental and clinical studies suggest that counterregulatory responses mediated by adenosine may be involved. We tested the hypothesis that the use of rolofylline, an adenosine A1−receptor antagonist, would improve dyspnea, reduce the risk of worsening renal function, and lead to a more favorable clinical course in patients with acute heart failure. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients hospitalized for acute heart failure with impaired renal function. Within 24 hours after presentation, 2033 patients were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive daily intravenous rolofylline (30 mg) or placebo for up to 3 days. The primary end point was treatment success, treatment failure, or no change in the patient’s clinical condition; this end point was defined according to survival, heart-failure status, and changes in renal function. Secondary end points were the post-treatment development of persistent renal impairment and the 60-day rate of death or readmission for cardiovascular or renal causes. Results: Rolofylline, as compared with placebo, did not provide a benefit with respect to the primary end point (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.09; P=0.35). Persistent renal impairment developed in 15.0% of patients in the rolofylline group and in 13.7% of patients in the placebo group (P=0.44). By 60 days, death or readmission for cardiovascular or renal causes had occurred in similar proportions of patients assigned to rolofylline and placebo (30.7% and 31.9%, respectively; P=0.86). Adverse-event rates were similar overall; however, only patients in the rolofylline group had seizures, a known potential adverse effect of A1-receptor antagonists. Conclusions: Rolofylline did not have a favorable effect with respect to the primary clinical composite end point, nor did it improve renal function or 60-day outcomes. It does not show promise in the treatment of acute heart failure with renal dysfunction. (Funded by NovaCardia, a subsidiary of Merck; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00328692 and NCT00354458.

Effect of Oral Iron Repletion on Exercise Capacity in Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction and Iron Deficiency: The IRONOUT HF Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Iron deficiency is present in approximately 50% of patients with heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF) and is an independent predictor of reduced functional capacity and mortality. However, the efficacy of inexpensive readily available oral iron supplementation in heart failure is unknown. Objective: To test whether therapy with oral iron improves peak exercise capacity in patients with HFrEF and iron deficiency. Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial of patients with HFrEF ( Interventions: Oral iron polysaccharide (n = 111) or placebo (n = 114), 150 mg twice daily for 16 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was a change in peak oxygen uptake (V̇o2) from baseline to 16 weeks. Secondary end points were change in 6-minute walk distance, plasma N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels, and health status as assessed by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ, range 0-100, higher scores reflect better quality of life). Results: Among 225 randomized participants (median age, 63 years; 36% women) 203 completed the study. The median baseline peak V̇o2 was 1196 mL/min (interquartile range [IQR], 887-1448 mL/min) in the oral iron group and 1167 mL/min (IQR, 887-1449 mL/min) in the placebo group. The primary end point, change in peak V̇o2 at 16 weeks, did not significantly differ between the oral iron and placebo groups (+23 mL/min vs -2 mL/min; difference, 21 mL/min [95% CI, -34 to +76 mL/min]; P = .46). Similarly, at 16 weeks, there were no significant differences between treatment groups in changes in 6-minute walk distance (-13 m; 95% CI, -32 to 6 m), NT-proBNP levels (159; 95% CI, -280 to 599 pg/mL), or KCCQ score (1; 95% CI, -2.4 to 4.4), all P \u3e .05. Conclusions and Relevance: Among participants with HFrEF with iron deficiency, high-dose oral iron did not improve exercise capacity over 16 weeks. These results do not support use of oral iron supplementation in patients with HFrEF. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02188784

A combined clinical and biomarker approach to predict diuretic response in acute heart failure

Background: Poor diuretic response in acute heart failure is related to poor clinical outcome. The underlying mechanisms and pathophysiology behind diuretic resistance are incompletely understood. We evaluated a combined approach using clinical characteristics and biomarkers to predict diuretic response in acute heart failure (AHF). Methods and results: We investigated explanatory and predictive models for diuretic response—weight loss at day 4 per 40 mg of furosemide—in 974 patients with AHF included in the PROTECT trial. Biomarkers, addressing multiple pathophysiological pathways, were determined at baseline and after 24 h. An explanatory baseline biomarker model of a poor diuretic response included low potassium, chloride, hemoglobin, myeloperoxidase, and high blood urea nitrogen, albumin, triglycerides, ST2 and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (r2 = 0.086). Diuretic response after 24 h (early diuretic response) was a strong predictor of diuretic response (β = 0.467, P < 0.001; r2 = 0.523). Addition of diuretic response after 24 h to biomarkers and clinical characteristics significantly improved the predictive model (r2 = 0.586, P < 0.001). Conclusions: Biomarkers indicate that diuretic unresponsiveness is associated with an atherosclerotic profile with abnormal renal function and electrolytes. However, predicting diuretic response is difficult and biomarkers have limited additive value. Patients at risk of poor diuretic response can be identified by measuring early diuretic response after 24 h

A network analysis to compare biomarker profiles in patients with and without diabetes mellitus in acute heart failure

Aims: It is unclear whether distinct pathophysiological processes are present among patients with acute heart failure (AHF), with and without diabetes. Network analysis of biomarkers may identify correlative associations that reflect different pathophysiological pathways. Methods and results: We analysed a panel of 48 circulating biomarkers measured within 24 h of admission for AHF in a subset of patients enrolled in the PROTECT trial. In patients with and without diabetes, we performed a network analysis to identify correlations between measured biomarkers. Compared with patients without diabetes (n = 1111), those with diabetes (n = 922) had a higher prevalence of ischaemic heart disease and traditional coronary risk factors. After multivariable adjustment, patients with and without diabetes had significantly different levels of biomarkers across a spectrum of pathophysiological domains, including inflammation (TNFR-1a, periostin), cardiomyocyte stretch (BNP), angiogenesis (VEGFR, angiogenin), and renal function (NGAL, KIM-1) (adjusted P-value <0.05). Among patients with diabetes, network analysis revealed that periostin strongly clustered with C-reactive protein and interleukin-6. Furthermore, renal markers (creatinine and NGAL) closely associated with potassium and glucose. These findings were not seen among patients without diabetes. Conclusion: Patients with AHF and diabetes, compared with those without diabetes, have distinct biomarker profiles. Network analysis suggests that cardiac remodelling, inflammation, and fibrosis are closely associated with each other in patients with diabetes. Furthermore, potassium levels may be sensitive to changes in renal function as reflected by the strong renal–potassium–glucose correlation. These findings were not seen among patients without diabetes and may suggest distinct pathophysiological processes among AHF patients with diabetes

Biomarker profiles of acute heart failure patients with a mid-range ejection fraction

OBJECTIVES: In this study, the authors used biomarker profiles to characterize differences between patients with acute heart failure with a midrange ejection fraction (HFmrEF) and compare them with patients with a reduced (heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction [HFrEF]) and preserved (heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction [HFpEF]) ejection fraction. BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on biomarker profiles in acute HFmrEF. METHODS: A panel of 37 biomarkers from different pathophysiological domains (e.g., myocardial stretch, inflammation, angiogenesis, oxidative stress, hematopoiesis) were measured at admission and after 24 h in 843 acute heart failure patients from the PROTECT trial. HFpEF was defined as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of ≥50% (n = 108), HFrEF as LVEF of <40% (n = 607), and HFmrEF as LVEF of 40% to 49% (n = 128). RESULTS: Hemoglobin and brain natriuretic peptide levels (300 pg/ml [HFpEF]; 397 pg/ml [HFmrEF]; 521 pg/ml [HFrEF]; ptrend <0.001) showed an upward trend with decreasing LVEF. Network analysis showed that in HFrEF interactions between biomarkers were mostly related to cardiac stretch, whereas in HFpEF, biomarker interactions were mostly related to inflammation. In HFmrEF, biomarker interactions were both related to inflammation and cardiac stretch. In HFpEF and HFmrEF (but not in HFrEF), remodeling markers at admission and changes in levels of inflammatory markers across the first 24 h were predictive for all-cause mortality and rehospitalization at 60 days (pinteraction <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Biomarker profiles in patients with acute HFrEF were mainly related to cardiac stretch and in HFpEF related to inflammation. Patients with HFmrEF showed an intermediate biomarker profile with biomarker interactions between both cardiac stretch and inflammation markers. (PROTECT-1: A Study of the Selective A1 Adenosine Receptor Antagonist KW-3902 for Patients Hospitalized With Acute HF and Volume Overload to Assess Treatment Effect on Congestion and Renal Function; NCT00328692)

Exhaled nitric oxide: a marker of pulmonary hemodynamics in heart failure

AbstractObjectivesWe sought to test the hypothesis that patients with decompensated heart failure (HF) lose a compensatory process whereby nitric oxide (NO) maintains pulmonary vascular tone.BackgroundExhaled nitric oxide (eNO) partially reflects vascular endothelial NO release. Levels of eNO are elevated in patients with compensated HF and correlate inversely with pulmonary artery pressures (PAP), reflecting pulmonary vasodilatory activity.MethodsWe measured the mean mixed expired NO content of a vital-capacity breath using chemiluminescence in patients with compensated HF (n = 30), decompensated HF (n = 7) and in normal control subjects (n = 90). Pulmonary artery pressures were also measured in patients with HF. The eNO and PAP were determined sequentially during therapy with intravenous vasodilators in patients with decompensated HF (n = 7) and in an additional group of patients with HF (n = 13) before and during administration of milrinone.ResultsThe eNO was higher in patients with HF than in control subjects (9.9 ± 1.1 ppb vs. 6.2 ± 0.4 ppb, p = 0.002) and inversely correlated with PAP (r = −0.81, p < 0.00001). In marked contrast, patients with decompensated HF exhibited even higher levels of eNO (20.4 ± 6.2 ppb) and PAP, but there was a loss of the inverse relationship between these two variables. During therapy (7.3 ± 6 days) with sodium nitroprusside and diuresis, hemodynamics improved, eNO concentrations fell (11.2 ± 1.2 ppb vs. before treatment, p < 0.05), and the relationship between eNO and PAP was restored. After milrinone, eNO rose proportionally with decreased PAP (p < 0.05).ConclusionsElevated eNO may reflect a compensatory circulatory mechanism in HF that is lost in patients with clinically decompensated HF. The eNO may be an easily obtainable and quantifiable measure of the response to therapy in advanced HF

Serum potassium levels and outcome in acute heart failure (data from the PROTECT and COACH trials)

Serum potassium is routinely measured at admission for acute heart failure (AHF), but information on association with clinical variables and prognosis is limited. Potassium measurements at admission were available in 1,867 patients with AHF in the original cohort of 2,033 patients included in the Patients Hospitalized with acute heart failure and Volume Overload to Assess Treatment Effect on Congestion and Renal FuncTion trial. Patients were grouped according to low potassium (&lt;3.5 mEq/l), normal potassium (3.5 to 5.0 mEq/l), and high potassium (&gt;5.0 mEq/l) levels. Results were verified in a validation cohort of 1,023 patients. Mean age of patients was 71 – 11 years, and 66% were men. Low potassium was present in 115 patients (6%), normal potassium in 1,576 (84%), and high potassium in 176 (9%). Potassium levels increased during hospitalization (0.18 – 0.69 mEq/l). Patients with high potassium more often used angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists before admission, had impaired baseline renal function and a better diuretic response (p [ 0.005), independent of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist usage. During 180-day follow-up, a total of 330 patients (18%) died. Potassium levels at admission showed a univariate linear association with mortality (hazard ratio [log] 2.36, 95% confidence interval 1.07 to 5.23; p [ 0.034) but not after multivariate adjustment. Changes of potassium levels during hospitalization or potassium levels at discharge were not associated with outcome after multivariate analysis. Results in the validation cohort were similar to the index cohort. In conclusion, high potassium levels at admission are associated with an impaired renal function but a better diuretic response. Changes in potassium levels are common, and overall levels increase during hospitalization. In conclusion, potassium levels at admission or its change during hospitalization are not associated with mortality after multivariate adjustment

Genetic Evaluation of Cardiomyopathy - a Heart Failure Society of America Practice Guideline

This guideline describes the approach and expertise needed for the genetic evaluation of cardiomyopathy. First published in 2009 by the Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA), this guidance has now been updated in collaboration with the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). The writing group, composed of cardiologists and genetics professionals with expertise in adult and pediatric cardiomyopathy, reflects the emergence and increased clinical activity devoted to cardiovascular genetic medicine. The genetic evaluation of cardiomyopathy is a rapidly emerging key clinical priority, as high throughput sequencing is now feasible for clinical testing, and conventional interventions can improve survival, reduce morbidity, and enhance quality of life. Moreover, specific interventions may be guided by genetic analysis. A systematic approach is recommended: always a comprehensive family history; an expert phenotypic evaluation of the proband and at-risk family members to confirm a diagnosis and guide genetic test selection and interpretation; referral to expert centers as needed; genetic testing, with pre- and post-test genetic counseling; and specific guidance as indicated for drug and device therapies. The evaluation of infants and children demands special expertise. The approach to manage secondary and incidental sequence findings as recommended by the ACMG is provided

What’s Next for Acute Heart Failure Research?

Each year over one million patients with acute heart failure (AHF) present to a United States emergency department (ED). The vast majority are hospitalized for further management. The length of stay and high postdischarge event rate in this cohort have changed little over the past decade. Therapeutic trials have failed to yield substantive improvement in postdischarge outcomes; subsequently, AHF care has changed little in the past 40 years. Prior research studies have been fragmented as either “inpatient” or “ED-based.” Recognizing the challenges in identification and enrollment of ED patients with AHF, and the lack of robust evidence to guide management, an AHF clinical trials network was developed. This network has demonstrated, through organized collaboration between cardiology and emergency medicine, that many of the hurdles in AHF research can be overcome. The development of a network that supports the collaboration of acute care and HF researchers, combined with the availability of federally funded infrastructure, will facilitate more efficient conduct of both explanatory and pragmatic trials in AHF. Yet many important questions remain, and in this document our group of emergency medicine and cardiology investigators have identified four high-priority research areas