Dapagliflozin in HFrEF Patients Treated With Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists An Analysis of DAPA-HF

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in patients taking or not taking an mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) at baseline in the DAPA-HF (Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse outcomes in Heart Failure) trial. BACKGROUND MRAs and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors each have diuretic activity, lower blood pressure, and reduce glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Therefore, it is important to investigate the safety, as well as efficacy, of their combination. METHODS A total of 4,744 patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) were randomized to placebo or dapagliflozin 10mg daily. The efficacy of dapagliflozin on the primary composite outcome (cardiovascular death or episode of worsening heart failure) and its components was examined according to MRA use, as were predefined safety outcomes. RESULTS A total of 3,370 patients (71%) were treated with an MRA and they were younger (65 vs. 69 years of age), less often from North America (9% vs. 26%), had worse New York Heart Association functional class (35% vs. 25% in class III/ IV), lower left ventricular ejection fraction (30.7% vs. 31.9%) and systolic blood pressure (120.3 vs. 125.5 mm Hg), but higher estimated GFR (67.1 vs. 62.6 ml/min/1.73 m(2)), than patients not taking an MRA. The benefit of dapagliflozin compared with placebo was similar in patients taking or not taking an MRA: hazard ratio: 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63 to 0.87) versus 0.74 (95% CI: 0.57 to 0.95), respectively, for the primary endpoint (p value for interaction - 0.97); similar findings were observed for secondary endpoints. In both MRA subgroups, safety outcomes were similar in patients randomized to dapagliflozin or placebo. CONCLUSIONS Dapagliflozin was similarly efficacious and safe in patients with HFrEF taking or not taking an MRA, supporting the use of both drugs together. (Study to Evaluate the Effect of Dapagliflozin on the Incidence of Worsening Heart Failure or Cardiovascular Death in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure [DAPA-HF]; NCT03036124) (C)2021 Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation

Effect of Dapagliflozin on Outpatient Worsening of Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction A Prespecified Analysis of DAPA-HF

BACKGROUND: In the DAPA-HF trial (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure), dapagliflozin, added to guideline-recommended therapies, reduced the risk of mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization. We examined the frequency and significance of episodes of outpatient HF worsening, requiring the augmentation of oral therapy, and the effects of dapagliflozin on these additional events. METHODS: Patients in New York Heart Association functional class II to IV, with a left ventricular ejection fraction RESULTS: Overall, 36% more patients experienced the expanded, in comparison with the primary, composite outcome. In the placebo group, 684 of 2371 (28.8%) patients and, in the dapagliflozin group, 527 of 2373 (22.2%) participants experienced the expanded outcome (hazard ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.65-0.82]; P CONCLUSION: In DAPA-HF, outpatient episodes of HF worsening were common, were of prognostic importance, and were reduced by dapagliflozin

Dapagliflozin and Diuretic Use in Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction in DAPA-HF

Background: In the DAPA-HF trial (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse-Outcomes in Heart Failure), the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor dapagliflozin reduced the risk of worsening heart failure and death in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. We examined the efficacy and tolerability of dapagliflozin in relation to background diuretic treatment and change in diuretic therapy after randomization to dapagliflozin or placebo. Methods: We examined the effects of study treatment in the following subgroups: No diuretic and diuretic dose equivalent to furosemide 40 mg daily at baseline. We examined the primary composite end point of cardiovascular death or a worsening heart failure event and its components, all-cause death and symptoms. Results: Of 4616 analyzable patients, 736 (15.9%) were on no diuretic, 1311 (28.4%) were on 40 mg. Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary end point across each of these subgroups: Hazard ratios were 0.57 (95% CI, 0.36-0.92), 0.83 (95% CI, 0.63-1.10), 0.77 (95% CI, 0.60-0.99), and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.63-0.97), respectively (P for interaction=0.61). The hazard ratio in patients taking any diuretic was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.68-0.90). Improvements in symptoms and treatment toleration were consistent across the diuretic subgroups. Diuretic dose did not change in most patients during follow-up, and mean diuretic dose did not differ between the dapagliflozin and placebo groups after randomization. Conclusions: The efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin were consistent across the diuretic subgroups examined in DAPA-HF

Effect of dapagliflozin according to baseline systolic blood pressure in the Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure trial (DAPA-HF)

Aims: Concern about hypotension often leads to withholding of beneficial therapy in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin, which lowers systolic blood pressure (SBP),according to baseline SBP in Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure trial (DAPA-HF). Methods and results: Key inclusion criteria were: New York Heart Association Class II−IV, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40%, elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level, and SBP ≥95 mmHg. The primary outcome was a composite of worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death. The efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin were examined using SBP as both a categorical and continuous variable. A total of 1205 patients had a baseline SBP <110 mmHg; 981 ≥ 110 < 120; 1149 ≥ 120 < 130; and 1409 ≥ 130 mmHg. The placebo-corrected reduction in SBP from baseline to 2 weeks with dapagliflozin was −2.54 (−3.33 to −1.76) mmHg (P < 0.001), with a smaller between-treatment difference in patients in the lowest compared to highest SBP category. Patients in the lowest SBP category had a much higher rate (per 100 person-years) of the primary outcome [20.6, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 17.6–24.2] than those in the highest SBP category (13.8, 11.7–16.4). The benefit and safety of dapagliflozin was consistent across the range of SBP; hazard ratio (95% CI) in each SBP group, lowest to highest: 0.76 (0.60–0.97), 0.76 (0.57–1.02), 0.81 (0.61–1.08), and 0.67 (0.51–0.87), P interaction = 0.78. Study drug discontinuation did not differ between dapagliflozin and placebo across the SBP categories examined. Conclusion: Dapagliflozin had a small effect on SBP in patients with HFrEF and was superior to placebo in improving outcomes, and well tolerated, across the range of SBP included in DAPA-HF. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03036124

Effect of dapagliflozin in patients with HFrEF treated with sacubitril/valsartan: the DAPA-HF trial

Objectives: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in patients who were or were not taking sacubitril/valsartan at baseline in the DAPA-HF (Study to Evaluate the Effect of Dapagliflozin on the Incidence of Worsening Heart Failure or Cardiovascular Death in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure) trial. Background: Both the angiotensin receptor neprilysin-inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan and the sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor dapagliflozin reduced cardiovascular death and heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Whether either of these classes of drugs influences the effectiveness or safety of the other remains unknown. Methods: DAPA-HF was a 4,744 patient trial that compared dapagliflozin with placebo in patients with HFrEF. Patients were analyzed according to whether they were taking sacubitril/valsartan at randomization. The efficacy of dapagliflozin on the primary composite outcome (CV death or episode of worsening heart failure), its components, and all-cause death was examined according to sacubitril/valsartan and the interaction tested. Predefined safety outcomes were examined by sacubitril/valsartan group. Results: A total of 508 patients (10.7%) enrolled in DAPA-HF were treated with sacubitril/valsartan at baseline. Patients prescribed sacubitril/valsartan were more likely to be from North America or Europe, to have lower ejection fractions and systolic and diastolic blood pressures, but were similar with respect to age, New York Heart Association functional class, history of diabetes, and use of other evidence-based HF therapies. The benefit of dapagliflozin compared with placebo was similar in patients taking sacubitril/valsartan (hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval 0.50 to 1.13) compared with those not taking sacubitril/valsartan (hazard ratio: 0.74; 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 0.86) for the primary endpoint of cardiovascular death or worsening HF; similar findings were observed for secondary endpoints. All measures of safety, including episodes related to hypovolemia, were similar among patients randomized to dapagliflozin or placebo, whether they received background sacubitril/valsartan. Conclusions: Dapagliflozin was similarly efficacious and safe in patients who were and who were not taking sacubitril/valsartan in the DAPA-HF trial, which suggested that the use of both agents together could further lower morbidity and mortality in patients with HFrEF. (Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse outcomes in Heart Failure [DAPA-HF]; NCT03036124

Liver tests and outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: findings from DAPA-HF

Aims Reflecting both increased venous pressure and reduced cardiac output, abnormal liver tests are common in patients with severe heart failure and are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. We aimed to investigate the prognostic significance of abnormal liver tests in ambulatory patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), explore any treatment interaction between bilirubin and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and examine change in liver tests with SGLT2 inhibitor treatment. Methods and results We explored these objectives in the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF) trial, with focus on bilirubin. We calculated the incidence of cardiovascular death or worsening heart failure by bilirubin tertile. Secondary cardiovascular outcomes were examined, along with the change in liver tests at the end-of-study visit. Baseline bilirubin was available in 4720 patients (99.5%). Participants in the highest bilirubin tertile (T3) have more severe HFrEF (lower left ventricular ejection fraction, higher N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP] and worse New York Heart Association class), had a greater burden of atrial fibrillation but less diabetes. Higher bilirubin (T3 vs. T1) was associated with worse outcomes even after adjustment for other predictive variables, including NT-proBNP and troponin T (adjusted hazard ratio for the primary outcome 1.73 [95% confidence interval 1.37-2.17], p < 0.001; and 1.52 [1.12-2.07], p = 0.01 for cardiovascular death). Baseline bilirubin did not modify the benefits of dapagliflozin. During follow-up, dapagliflozin had no effect on liver tests. Conclusion Bilirubin concentration was an independent predictor of worse outcomes but did not modify the benefits of dapagliflozin in HFrEF. Dapagliflozin was not associated with change in liver tests. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03036124

Use of win statistics to analyze outcomes in the DAPA-HF and DELIVER trials

BACKGROUND: The primary end point in most heart failure (HF) trials is a composite of time to a first worsening HF event or cardiovascular death. Prevention of recurrent events and improvements in symptoms/quality of life are also important for patients but are usually analyzed separately. Win statistics can integrate all these outcomes into a single composite end point, which is analyzed in hierarchical order, reflecting the clinical importance of each component. METHODS: The Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF, n=4744) and Dapagliflozin Evaluation to Improve the Lives of Patients with Preserved Ejection Fraction Heart Failure (DELIVER, n=6263) trials enrolled patients with New York Heart Association class II, III, or IV HF, elevated natriuretic peptides, and either an ejection fraction of 40% or less (DAPA-HF) or greater than 40% and left atrial enlargement/left ventricular hypertrophy (DELIVER). We examined the effects of dapagliflozin compared with placebo on a hierarchical composite outcome, including cardiovascular death, total (first and recurrent) HF hospitalizations, total urgent HF visits, and improvement/deterioration in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score (KCCQ-TSS; range from 0 to 100, with a higher score indicating fewer symptoms and physical limitations) at 8 months. RESULTS: For this composite outcome, the win ratio was 1.30 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.23 to 1.36) in the pooled cohort, 1.33 (95% CI, 1.23 to 1.43) in the DAPA-HF trial, and 1.27 (95% CI, 1.18 to 1.36) in the DELIVER trial. Win odds and net benefit in overall patients were 1.19 (95% CI, 1.14 to 1.24) and 8.7% (95% CI, 6.6 to 10.9%), respectively. In the overall pooled cohort, the majority of wins and losses were accounted for by KCCQ-TSS; 52.4% were settled by the KCCQ-TSS tier in the pooled cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In both the DAPA-HF and DELIVER trials, dapagliflozin led to a significant improvement in composite outcomes that incorporated patient-reported outcomes along with total HF events, as well as cardiovascular deaths. These analyses provided a comprehensive presentation of win statistics and illustrated the utility and flexibility of win statistics in describing the effects of dapagliflozin in two recent clinical trials in patients with HF. (Funded by British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence and others; clinical trial registration numbers, NCT03036124 and NCT03619213.