An Analysis of the TRANSITION Study

Funding Information: This study was funded by Novartis . Funding Information: This study was funded by Novartis. The authors thank Tripti Sahu of Novartis Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. for providing medical writing support in accordance with Good Publication Practice (GPP 2022) guidelines (https://www.ismpp.org/gpp-2022). Publisher Copyright: © 2023 The AuthorsBackground: Treatment of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and renal dysfunction (RD) is challenging owing to the risk of further deterioration in renal function, especially after acute decompensated HF (ADHF). Methods and Results: We assessed the effect of RD (estimated glomerular filtration rate of ≥30 to <60 mL/min/1.73 m2) on initiation, up-titration, and tolerability of sacubitril/valsartan in hemodynamically stabilized patients with HFrEF admitted for ADHF (RD, n = 476; non-RD, n = 483). At week 10, the target dose of sacubitril/valsartan (97/103 mg twice daily) was achieved by 42% patients in RD subgroup vs 54% in non-RD patients (P < .001). Sacubitril/valsartan was associated with greater estimated glomerular filtration rate improvements in RD subgroup than non-RD (change from baseline least squares mean 4.1 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% confidence interval 2.2–6.1, P < .001). Cardiac biomarkers improved significantly in both subgroups; however, compared with the RD subgroup, the improvement was greater in those without RD (N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, −28.6% vs −44.8%, high-sensitivity troponin T −20.3% vs −33.9%) (P < .001). Patients in the RD subgroup compared with those without RD experienced higher rates of hyperkalemia (16.3% vs 6.5%, P < .001), investigator-reported cardiac failure (9.7% vs 5.6%, P = .029), and renal impairment (6.4% vs 2.1%, P = .002). Conclusions: Most patients with HFrEF and concomitant RD hospitalized for ADHF tolerated early initiation of sacubitril/valsartan and showed significant improvements in estimated glomerular filtration rate and cardiac biomarkers. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02661217.proofepub_ahead_of_prin

Sex- and age-related differences in the management and outcomes of chronic heart failure: an analysis of patients from the ESC HFA EORP Heart Failure Long-Term Registry

Aims: This study aimed to assess age- and sex-related differences in management and 1-year risk for all-cause mortality and hospitalization in chronic heart failure (HF) patients. Methods and results: Of 16 354 patients included in the European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Long-Term Registry, 9428 chronic HF patients were analysed [median age: 66 years; 28.5% women; mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 37%]. Rates of use of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) were high (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists: 85.7%, 88.7% and 58.8%, respectively). Crude GDMT utilization rates were lower in women than in men (all differences: P\ua0 64 0.001), and GDMT use became lower with ageing in both sexes, at baseline and at 1-year follow-up. Sex was not an independent predictor of GDMT prescription; however, age >75 years was a significant predictor of GDMT underutilization. Rates of all-cause mortality were lower in women than in men (7.1% vs. 8.7%; P\ua0=\ua00.015), as were rates of all-cause hospitalization (21.9% vs. 27.3%; P\ua075 years. Conclusions: There was a decline in GDMT use with advanced age in both sexes. Sex was not an independent predictor of GDMT or adverse outcomes. However, age >75 years independently predicted lower GDMT use and higher all-cause mortality in patients with LVEF 6445%

Association between loop diuretic dose changes and outcomes in chronic heart failure: observations from the ESC-EORP Heart Failure Long-Term Registry

[Abstract] Aims. Guidelines recommend down-titration of loop diuretics (LD) once euvolaemia is achieved. In outpatients with heart failure (HF), we investigated LD dose changes in daily cardiology practice, agreement with guideline recommendations, predictors of successful LD down-titration and association between dose changes and outcomes. Methods and results. We included 8130 HF patients from the ESC-EORP Heart Failure Long-Term Registry. Among patients who had dose decreased, successful decrease was defined as the decrease not followed by death, HF hospitalization, New York Heart Association class deterioration, or subsequent increase in LD dose. Mean age was 66±13 years, 71% men, 62% HF with reduced ejection fraction, 19% HF with mid-range ejection fraction, 19% HF with preserved ejection fraction. Median [interquartile range (IQR)] LD dose was 40 (25–80) mg. LD dose was increased in 16%, decreased in 8.3% and unchanged in 76%. Median (IQR) follow-up was 372 (363–419) days. Diuretic dose increase (vs. no change) was associated with HF death [hazard ratio (HR) 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12–2.08; P = 0.008] and nominally with cardiovascular death (HR 1.25, 95% CI 0.96–1.63; P = 0.103). Decrease of diuretic dose (vs. no change) was associated with nominally lower HF (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.33–1.07; P = 0.083) and cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.62 95% CI 0.38–1.00; P = 0.052). Among patients who had LD dose decreased, systolic blood pressure [odds ratio (OR) 1.11 per 10 mmHg increase, 95% CI 1.01–1.22; P = 0.032], and absence of (i) sleep apnoea (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.09–0.69; P = 0.008), (ii) peripheral congestion (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29–0.80; P = 0.005), and (iii) moderate/severe mitral regurgitation (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37–0.87; P = 0.008) were independently associated with successful decrease. Conclusion. Diuretic dose was unchanged in 76% and decreased in 8.3% of outpatients with chronic HF. LD dose increase was associated with worse outcomes, while the LD dose decrease group showed a trend for better outcomes compared with the no-change group. Higher systolic blood pressure, and absence of (i) sleep apnoea, (ii) peripheral congestion, and (iii) moderate/severe mitral regurgitation were independently associated with successful dose decrease

Performance of Prognostic Risk Scores in Chronic Heart Failure Patients Enrolled in the European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure Long-Term Registry

Objectives: This study compared the performance of major heart failure (HF) risk models in predicting mortality and examined their utilization using data from a contemporary multinational registry. Background: Several prognostic risk scores have been developed for ambulatory HF patients, but their precision is still inadequate and their use limited. Methods: This registry enrolled patients with HF seen in participating European centers between May 2011 and April 2013. The following scores designed to estimate 1- to 2-year all-cause mortality were calculated in each participant: CHARM (Candesartan in Heart Failure-Assessment of Reduction in Mortality), GISSI-HF (Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Streptochinasi nell'Infarto Miocardico-Heart Failure), MAGGIC (Meta-analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure), and SHFM (Seattle Heart Failure Model). Patients with hospitalized HF (n = 6,920) and ambulatory HF patients missing any variable needed to estimate each score (n = 3,267) were excluded, leaving a final sample of 6,161 patients. Results: At 1-year follow-up, 5,653 of 6,161 patients (91.8%) were alive. The observed-to-predicted survival ratios (CHARM: 1.10, GISSI-HF: 1.08, MAGGIC: 1.03, and SHFM: 0.98) suggested some overestimation of mortality by all scores except the SHFM. Overprediction occurred steadily across levels of risk using both the CHARM and the GISSI-HF, whereas the SHFM underpredicted mortality in all risk groups except the highest. The MAGGIC showed the best overall accuracy (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.743), similar to the GISSI-HF (AUC = 0.739; p = 0.419) but better than the CHARM (AUC = 0.729; p = 0.068) and particularly better than the SHFM (AUC = 0.714; p = 0.018). Less than 1% of patients received a prognostic estimate from their enrolling physician. Conclusions: Performance of prognostic risk scores is still limited and physicians are reluctant to use them in daily practice. The need for contemporary, more precise prognostic tools should be considered

Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in haemodynamically stabilised heart failure patients in hospital or early after discharge: primary results of the randomised TRANSITION study

Aims: To assess tolerability and optimal time point for initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in patients stabilised after acute heart failure (AHF). Methods and results: TRANSITION was a randomised, multicentre, open-label study comparing two treatment initiation modalities of sacubitril/valsartan. Patients aged ≥ 18 years, hospitalised for AHF were stratified according to pre-admission use of renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitors and randomised (n = 1002) after stabilisation to initiate sacubitril/valsartan either ≥ 12-h pre-discharge or between Days 1–14 post-discharge. Starting dose (as per label) was 24/26 mg or 49/51 mg bid with up- or down-titration based on tolerability. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients attaining 97/103 mg bid target dose after 10 weeks. Median time of first dose of sacubitril/valsartan from. the day of discharge was Day –1 and Day +1 in the pre-discharge group and the post-discharge group, respectively. Comparable proportions of patients in the pre- and post-discharge initiation groups met the primary endpoint [45.4% vs. 50.7%; risk ratio (RR) 0.90; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79–1.02]. The proportion of patients who achieved and maintained for ≥ 2 weeks leading to Week 10, either 49/51 or 97/103 mg bid was 62.1% vs. 68.5% (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.83–0.99); or any dose was 86.0% vs. 89.6% (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.92–1.01). Discontinuation due to adverse events occurred in 7.3% vs. 4.9% of patients (RR 1.49; 95% CI 0.90–2.46). Conclusions: Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in a wide range of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients stabilised after an AHF event, either in hospital or shortly after discharge, is feasible with about half of the patients achieving target dose within 10 weeks. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02661217. © 2019 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology

NT-proBNP Response to Sacubitril/Valsartan in Hospitalized Heart Failure Patients With Reduced Ejection Fraction: TRANSITION Study

Objectives: This study examined the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on N-terminal pro\u2013B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels and determined patient characteristics associated with favorable NT-proBNP reduction response. Background: NT-proBNP levels reflect cardiac wall stress and predict event risk in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). Methods: Post-hoc analysis of the TRANSITION (Comparison of Pre- and Post-discharge Initiation of Sacubitril/Valsartan Therapy in HFrEF Patients After an Acute Decompensation Event) study, including stabilized ADHF patients with reduced ejection fraction, randomized to open-label sacubitril/valsartan initiation in-hospital (pre-discharge) versus post-discharge. NT-proBNP was measured at randomization (baseline), discharge, and 4 and 10 weeks post-randomization. A favorable NT-proBNP response was defined as reduction to 641,000 pg/ml or &gt;30% from baseline. Results: In patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan in-hospital, NT-proBNP was reduced by 28% at discharge, with 46% of patients obtaining favorable NT-proBNP reduction response compared with a 4% reduction and 18% favorable response rate in patients initiated post-discharge (p &lt; 0.001). NT-proBNP was reduced similarly in patients initiating sacubitril/valsartan pre- and post-discharge (reduction at 4 weeks: 25%/22%; 10 weeks: 38%/34%) with comparable favorable response rates (46%/42% and 51%/48% at 4 and 10 weeks, respectively). NT-proBNP favorable response at 4 weeks was associated with lower risk of first heart failure (HF) rehospitalization or cardiovascular death through 26 weeks (hazard ratio: 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38 to 0.86; p = 0.007). Predictors of a favorable response at 4 weeks were starting dose 6549/51 mg twice daily, higher baseline NT-proBNP, lower baseline serum creatinine, de novo HF, no atrial fibrillation, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor\u2013naive or angiotensin receptor blocker\u2013naive, and no prior myocardial infarction. Conclusions: In-hospital initiation of sacubitril/valsartan produced rapid reductions in NT-proBNP, statistically significant at discharge. A favorable NT-proBNP response over time was associated with a better prognosis and predicted by higher starting dose and predisposing clinical profile. (Comparison of Pre- and Post-discharge Initiation of LCZ696 Therapy in HFrEF Patients After an Acute Decompensation Event [TRANSITION]; NCT02661217