Baylor Heart and Vascular Institute

Packer, M. (2016). “Development and evolution of a hierarchical clinical composite end point for the evaluation of drugs and devices for acute and chronic heart failure: A 20-year perspective.” Circulation 134(21): 1664-1678.

Full text of this article.

Traditional approaches to the assessment of new treatments for heart failure have generally evaluated individual components of the syndrome at fixed points in time or have relied on surrogate physiological measures that are poorly correlated with the clinical status of patients. Conventional time-to-event trials that focus on morbidity and mortality represent an important methodological advance, but they generally assign undue weight to clinical events of less importance and are insensitive to difference in functional capacity among individuals who do not experience a clinical event during follow-up. Twenty years ago, a hierarchical clinical composite was developed to address these limitations; it aims to assess the clinical course of patients as a physician would in practice by combining a symptomatic assessment of the patient at each visit with an evaluation of the clinical stability of the patient between visits. The composite does not generate a numeric score by summing arbitrarily assigned weights to certain symptoms or events; instead, the composite ranks relevant measures and outcomes according to clinical priority. In doing so, the clinical composite minimizes the biases created by noncompleting patients in the assessment of symptoms or exercise tolerance while expanding the range of patients who contribute to the treatment difference in a typical morbidity and mortality trial. When applied appropriately, the hierarchical clinical composite end point has reliably distinguished effective from ineffective treatments. The composite may have particular advantages in the evaluation of new devices and transcatheter interventions in chronic heart failure and of new drugs for acute heart failure. Recent modifications enhance its discriminant characteristics and its ability to accurately assess the efficacy of novel interventions for heart failure.

Packer, M., R. Holcomb, W. T. Abraham, S. Anker, K. Dickstein, G. Filippatos, H. Krum, A. P. Maggioni, J. J. McMurray, A. Mebazaa, C. O’Connor, F. Peacock, P. Ponikowski, F. Ruschitzka, D. J. van Veldhuisen and J. Holzmeister (2016). “Rationale for and design of the true-ahf trial: The effects of ularitide on the short-term clinical course and long-term mortality of patients with acute heart failure.” Eur J Heart Fail: 2016 Nov [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

The TRUE-AHF is a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial which is evaluating the effects of a 48-h infusion of ularitide (15 ng/kg/min) on the short- and long-term clinical course of patients with acute heart failure. Noteworthy features of the study include the early enrolment of patients following their initial clinical presentation (within 12 h), and entry blood pressure criteria and thresholds for the adjustment of drug infusion rates, which aim to minimize the risk of hypotension. The trial has two primary endpoints: (i) cardiovascular mortality during long-term follow-up; and (ii) the clinical course of patients during their index hospitalization. Cardiovascular mortality is evaluated in this event-driven trial by following all randomized patients for the occurrence of death until the end of the entire study without truncation at an arbitrarily determined early time point. The clinical course during the index hospitalization is evaluated using the hierarchical clinical composite endpoint, which combines information regarding changes in symptoms and the occurrence of in-hospital worsening heart failure events and death into a single ranked metric that captures interval clinical events and minimizes the likelihood of missing data and confounding due to intensification of background therapy. The design of the TRUE-AHF trial capitalizes on lessons learned from earlier trials and aims to evaluate definitively the potential benefit of ularitide in patients with acute heart failure.

Cannon, J. A., L. Shen, P. S. Jhund, S. L. Kristensen, L. Kober, F. Chen, J. Gong, M. P. Lefkowitz, J. L. Rouleau, V. C. Shi, K. Swedberg, M. R. Zile, S. D. Solomon, M. Packer and J. J. McMurray (2016). “Dementia-related adverse events in paradigm-hf and other trials in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.” Eur J Heart Fail: 2016 Nov [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

AIMS: Inhibition of neprilysin, an enzyme degrading natriuretic and other vasoactive peptides, is beneficial in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), as shown in PARADIGM-HF which compared the angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan with enalapril. As neprilysin is also one of many enzymes clearing amyloid-beta peptides from the brain, there is a theoretical concern about the long-term effects of sacubitril/valsartan on cognition. Therefore, we have examined dementia-related adverse effects (AEs) in PARADIGM-HF and placed these findings in the context of other recently conducted HFrEF trials. METHODS AND RESULTS: In PARADIGM-HF, patients with symptomatic HFrEF were randomized to sacubitril/valsartan 97/103 mg b.i.d. or enalapril 10 mg b.i.d. in a 1:1 ratio. We systematically searched AE reports, coded using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA), using Standardized MedDRA Queries (SMQs) with ‘broad’ and ‘narrow’ preferred terms related to dementia. In PARADIGM-HF, 8399 patients aged 18-96 years were randomized and followed for a median of 2.25 years (up to 4.3 years). The narrow SMQ search identified 27 dementia-related AEs: 15 (0.36%) on enalapril and 12 (0.29%) on sacubitril/valsartan [hazard ratio (HR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33-1.59]. The broad search identified 97 (2.30%) and 104 (2.48%) AEs (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.75-1.37), respectively. The rates of dementia-related AEs in both treatment groups in PARADIGM-HF were similar to those in three other recent trials in HFrEF. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence that sacubitril/valsartan, compared with enalapril, increased dementia-related AEs, although longer follow-up may be necessary to detect such a signal and more sensitive tools are needed to detect lesser degrees of cognitive impairment. Further studies to address this question are warranted.

Gandhi, S. S., J. V. Blas, S. Lee, J. F. Eidt and C. G. Carsten, 3rd (2016). “Nonoperative management of grade iii blunt thoracic aortic injuries.” J Vasc Surg 64(6): 1580-1586.

Full text of this article.

OBJECTIVE: Blunt thoracic aortic injuries (BTAIs) have historically been treated with open surgery; thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), however, is rapidly becoming the standard of care for all grades of injury. Previous studies have shown successful, conservative management of low-grade (I and II) BTAI, but limited literature exists regarding nonoperative management (NOM) for high-grade BTAI. The purpose of this study was to evaluate NOM for grade III BTAI compared with TEVAR. METHODS: There were 75 patients diagnosed with BTAI between January 2004 and June 2015. Of these, 40 were excluded for different grades of BTAI (17), death before any treatment (6), and need for urgent open repair (17). The remaining 35 patients were divided into two groups by treatment approach: NOM (n = 18) and TEVAR (n = 17). Primary end points were complications and mortality. The secondary end point was difference in pseudoaneurysm and aortic diameter measurements between groups. RESULTS: The groups of patients were similar in age, gender, Injury Severity Score, length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and hospital-associated complications. There were four TEVAR-related complications: graft involutions (2), type I endoleak (1), and distal embolization (1). All TEVAR-related complications required either an adjunctive procedure at the time of the primary procedure or an additional procedure. No patients from the NOM group required operative intervention. There were seven in-hospital mortalities: two in the TEVAR group (11.8%) and five in the NOM group (27.8%; P = .402). One death in the NOM group was related to aortic disease. Follow-up computed tomography imaging revealed similar aortic-related outcomes between groups, with a high proportion showing resolved or improved aortic injury (NOM, 87.5%; TEVAR, 92.9%; P = .674). Initial computed tomography imaging showed similar aortic diameters between groups. The average diameter of the aorta distal to the subclavian artery was 22.6 mm in the NOM group vs 22.8 mm in the TEVAR group (P = .85). The average maximum diameter of the pseudoaneurysm was 30.1 mm in the TEVAR group and 29.9 mm in the NOM group (P = .90). The average ratio of diameter of the pseudoaneurysm to diameter of the aorta distal to the subclavian artery was 1.32 for the TEVAR group and 1.33 for the NOM group (P = .85). CONCLUSIONS: The natural history of grade III BTAIs is not well described. This study suggests that observation and NOM of grade III BTAI may be a reasonable therapeutic option in selected patients. It also speaks to the need for further delineation of the natural history of this injury. Serial imaging and long-term follow-up are necessary to monitor the progression of the pseudoaneurysm.

Mikhalkova, D., E. Novak and A. Cedars (2016). “Short-term costs and hospitalization rates in patients with adult congenital heart disease after pulmonic valve replacement.” Am J Cardiol 118(10): 1552-1557.

Full text of this article.

In the adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) population, pulmonary valve replacement (PVR) is a common intervention, its benefit, however, has been incompletely investigated. This study investigates short- and intermediate-term outcomes after PVR in ACHD. Using State Inpatient Databases from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, we investigated both hospitalization rate and financial burden accrued over the 12-month period after PVR compared with the 12 months before. Among 202 patients who underwent PVR, per patient-year hospitalization rates doubled in the year after PVR compared with the year before (0.16 vs 0.36, p = 0.006). With the exception of postprocedural complications, the most common reasons for hospitalization were unchanged after surgery: 22% of patients were admitted with equal or greater frequency after PVR. These patients experienced higher inpatient costs both at index admission and in the year after PVR (p = 0.004 and p <0.001, respectively). Univariate predictors of increased hospitalizations after PVR were age >/=50 years (p = 0.016), transposition of the great arteries, or conotruncal abnormalities (p <0.001), lipid disorders (p = 0.025), hypertension (p = 0.033), and number of chronic conditions >/=4 (p = 0.004). Multivariate analysis identified transposition of the great arteries or conotruncal abnormalities as an independent risk factor for increased hospitalization and cost post-PVR (p /=0.001). In conclusion, short-term costs and hospitalization rates increase after PVR in a small group of patients with ACHD.