Research Spotlight

Verma, S., Dhingra, N.K., Butler, J., Anker, S.D., Ferreira, J.P., Filippatos, G., Januzzi, J.L., Lam, C.S.P., Sattar, N., Peil, B., Nordaby, M., Brueckmann, M., Pocock, S.J., Zannad, F. and Packer, M. (2021). “Empagliflozin in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in addition to background therapies and therapeutic combinations (EMPEROR-Reduced): a post-hoc analysis of a randomised, double-blind trial.” Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol Nov 30;S2213-8587(21)00292-8. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: It is important to evaluate whether a new treatment for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) provides additive benefit to background foundational treatments. As such, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of empagliflozin in patients with HFrEF in addition to baseline treatment with specific doses and combinations of disease-modifying therapies. METHODS: We performed a post-hoc analysis of the EMPEROR-Reduced randomised, double-blind, parallel-group trial, which took place in 520 centres (hospitals and medical clinics) in 20 countries in Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, and South America. Patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification II-IV with an ejection fraction of 40% or less were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive the addition of either oral empagliflozin 10 mg per day or placebo to background therapy. The primary composite outcome was cardiovascular death and heart failure hospitalisation; the secondary outcome was total heart failure hospital admissions. An extended composite outcome consisted of inpatient and outpatient HFrEF events was also evaluated. Outcomes were analysed according to background use of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), as well as β blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) at less than 50% or 50% or more of target doses and in various combinations. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03057977. FINDINGS: In this post-hoc analysis of 3730 patients (mean age 66·8 years [SD 11·0], 893 [23·9%] women; 1863 [49·9%] in the empagliflozin group, 1867 [50·1%] in the placebo group) assessed between March 6, 2017, and May 28, 2020, empagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary outcome (361 in 1863 participants in the empagliflozin group and 462 of 1867 in the placebo group; HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·65-0·86]) regardless of background therapy or its target doses for ACE inhibitors or ARBs at doses of less than 50% of the target dose (HR 0·85 [0·69-1·06]) and for doses of 50% or more of the target dose (HR 0·67 [0·52-0·88]; p(interaction)=0·18). A similar result was seen for β blockers at doses of less than 50% of the target dose (HR 0·66 [0·54-0·80]) and for doses of 50% or more of the target dose (HR 0·81 [0·66-1·00]; p(interaction)=0·15). Empagliflozin also reduced the risk of the primary outcome irrespective of background use of triple therapy with an ACE inhibitor, ARB, or ARNI plus β blocker plus MRA (given combination HR 0·73 [0·61-0·88]; not given combination HR 0·76 [0·62-0·94]; p(interaction)=0·77). Similar patterns of benefit were observed for the secondary and extended composite outcomes. Empagliflozin was well tolerated and rates of hypotension, symptomatic hypotension, and hyperkalaemia were similar across all subgroups. INTERPRETATION: Empagliflozin reduced serious heart failure outcomes across doses and combinations of disease-modifying therapies for HFrEF. Clinically, these data suggest that empagliflozin might be considered as a foundational therapy in patients with HFrEF regardless of their existing background therapy.

Pocock, S.J., Ferreira, J.P., Gregson, J., Anker, S.D., Butler, J., Filippatos, G., Gollop, N.D., Iwata, T., Brueckmann, M., Januzzi, J.L., Voors, A.A., Zannad, F. and Packer, M. (2021). “Novel biomarker-driven prognostic models to predict morbidity and mortality in chronic heart failure: the EMPEROR-Reduced trial.” Eur Heart J 42(43): 4455-4464.

Full text of this article.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to generate a biomarker-driven prognostic tool for patients with chronic HFrEF. Circulating levels of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) each have a marked positive relationship with adverse outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). A risk model incorporating biomarkers and clinical variables has not been validated in contemporary heart failure (HF) trials. METHODS AND RESULTS: In EMPEROR-Reduced, 33 candidate variables were pre-selected. Multivariable Cox regression models were developed using stepwise selection for: (i) the primary composite outcome of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death, (ii) all-cause death, and (iii) cardiovascular mortality. A total of 3730 patients were followed up for a median of 16 months, 823 (22%) patients had a primary outcome and 515 (14%) patients died, of whom 389 (10%) died from a cardiovascular cause. NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT were the dominant predictors of the primary outcome, and in addition, a shorter time since last HF hospitalization, longer time since HF diagnosis, lower systolic blood pressure, New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class III or IV, higher heart rate and peripheral oedema were key predictors (eight variables in total, all P < 0.001). The primary outcome risk score discriminated well (c-statistic = 0.73), with patients in the top 10th of risk having an event rate >9 times higher than those in the bottom 10th. Empagliflozin benefitted patients across risk levels for the primary outcome. NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT were also the dominant predictors of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, followed by NYHA Class III or IV and ischaemic aetiology (four variables in total, all P < 0.001). The mortality risk model presented good event discrimination for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality (c-statistic = 0.69 for both). These simple models were externally validated in the BIOSTAT-CHF study, achieving similar c-statistics. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of NT-proBNP and hs-cTnT with a small number of readily available clinical variables provides prognostic assessment for patients with HFrEF. This predictive tool kit can be easily implemented for routine clinical use.

Lam, C.S.P., Ferreira, J.P., Pfarr, E., Sim, D., Tsutsui, H., Anker, S.D., Butler, J., Filippatos, G., Pocock, S.J., Sattar, N., Verma, S., Brueckmann, M., Schnee, J., Cotton, D., Zannad, F. and Packer, M. (2021). “Regional and ethnic influences on the response to empagliflozin in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction: the EMPEROR-Reduced trial.” Eur Heart J 42(43): 4442-4451.

Full text of this article.

AIMS: The aim of this article is to explore the influence of region and race/ethnicity on the effects of empagliflozin in the Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure and a Reduced Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Reduced) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 3730 patients, 1353 (36.3%) were enrolled in Europe, 1286 (34.5%) in Latin America, 425 (11.4%) in North America, and 493 (13.2%) in Asia; 2629 (70.5%) were White, 257 (6.9%) Black, and 672 (18.0%) Asian. Placebo event rates (per 100 patient-years) for cardiovascular death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization varied by region (Asia 27.7, North America 26.4, Latin America 21.4, and Europe 17.5) and race/ethnicity (Black 34.4, Asian 24.3, and White 18.7); driven by differences in HF hospitalization. The ratio of total HF hospitalization to cardiovascular death varied from 5.4 in Asia and 4.8 in North America to 2.1 in Europe; and from 4.8 in Black and 4.2 in Asian to 2.2 in White patients. Groups with the highest ratio had the greatest reduction in the primary outcome with empagliflozin. Inclusion of outpatient worsening HF episodes added more events in Europe vs. other regions; enhanced the placebo event rates in Europe vs. other regions; and increased the relative risk reduction with empagliflozin in Europe from 6% to 26%. CONCLUSIONS: There were notable differences in the placebo event rates for major HF events across diverse regions and race/ethnic groups. The benefit of empagliflozin was most pronounced in groups with the highest ratio of HF hospitalization to cardiovascular death. Regional differences were attenuated when the definition of HF events was expanded to include outpatient worsening HF events.

Butler, J., Filippatos, G., Siddiqi, T.J., Brueckmann, M., Böhm, M., Chopra, V., Ferreira, J.P., Januzzi, J.L., Kaul, S., Piña, I.L., Ponikowski, P., Shah, S.J., Senni, M., Vedin, O., Verma, S., Peil, B., Pocock, S.J., Zannad, F., Packer, M. and Anker, S.D. (2021). “Empagliflozin, Health Status, and Quality of Life in Patients with Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction: The EMPEROR-Preserved Trial.” Circulation Nov 15. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

Background: Patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have significant impairment in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). In EMPEROR-Preserved, we evaluated the efficacy of empagliflozin on HRQoL in patients with HFpEF and whether the clinical benefit observed with empagliflozin varies according to baseline health status. Methods: HRQoL was measured using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) at baseline, 12, 32 and 52 weeks. Patients were divided by baseline KCCQ Clinical Summary Score (CSS) tertiles and the effect of empagliflozin on outcomes were examined. The effect of empagliflozin on KCCQ-CSS, Total Symptom Score (TSS) and Overall Summary Score (OSS) were evaluated. Responder analyses were performed to compare the odds of improvement and deterioration in KCCQ related to treatment with empagliflozin. Results: The effect of empagliflozin on reducing the risk of time to cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization was consistent across baseline KCCQ-CSS tertiles (HR 0.83 [0.69-1.00], HR 0.70 [0.55-0.88] and HR 0.82 [0.62-1.08] for scores <62.5, 62.5-83.3 and ≥83.3, respectively; P trend=0.77). Similar results were seen for total HF hospitalizations. Patients treated with empagliflozin had significant improvement in KCCQ-CSS versus placebo (+1.03, +1.24 and +1.50 at 12, 32 and 52 weeks, respectively P<0.01); similar results were seen for TSS and OSS. At 12 weeks, patients on empagliflozin had higher odds of improvement ≥5 points (OR 1.23; 95%CI 1.10, 1.37), ≥10 points (1.15; 95%CI 1.03, 1.27), and ≥15 points (1.13; 95%CI 1.02, 1.26) and lower odds of deterioration ≥5 points in KCCQ-CSS (0.85; 95%CI 0.75, 0.97). A similar pattern was seen at 32 and 52 weeks, and results were consistent for TSS and OSS. Conclusions: In patients with HFpEF, empagliflozin reduced the risk for major HF outcomes across the range of baseline KCCQ scores. Empagliflozin improved HRQoL, an effect that appeared early and was sustained for at least one year.

Turner, N., Dent, R.A., O’Shaughnessy, J., Kim, S.B., Isakoff, S.J., Barrios, C., Saji, S., Bondarenko, I., Nowecki, Z., Lian, Q., Reilly, S.J., Hinton, H., Wongchenko, M.J., Kovic, B., Mani, A. and Oliveira, M. (2021). “Ipatasertib plus paclitaxel for PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: primary results from cohort B of the IPATunity130 randomized phase 3 trial.” Breast Cancer Res Treat Dec 3. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

PURPOSE: PI3K/AKT pathway alterations are frequent in hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancers. IPATunity130 Cohort B investigated ipatasertib-paclitaxel in PI3K pathway-mutant HR+ unresectable locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer (aBC). METHODS: Cohort B of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 IPATunity130 trial enrolled patients with HR+ HER2-negative PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered measurable aBC who were considered inappropriate for endocrine-based therapy (demonstrated insensitivity to endocrine therapy or visceral crisis) and were candidates for taxane monotherapy. Patients with prior chemotherapy for aBC or relapse < 1 year since (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy were ineligible. Patients were randomized 2:1 to ipatasertib (400 mg, days 1-21) or placebo, plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2), days 1, 8, 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Overall, 146 patients were randomized to ipatasertib-paclitaxel and 76 to placebo-paclitaxel. In both arms, median investigator-assessed PFS was 9.3 months (hazard ratio, 1.00, 95% CI 0.71-1.40) and the objective response rate was 47%. Median paclitaxel duration was 6.9 versus 8.8 months in the ipatasertib-paclitaxel versus placebo-paclitaxel arms, respectively; median ipatasertib/placebo duration was 8.0 versus 9.1 months, respectively. The most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were diarrhea (12% with ipatasertib-paclitaxel vs 1% with placebo-paclitaxel), neutrophil count decreased (9% vs 7%), neutropenia (8% vs 9%), peripheral neuropathy (7% vs 3%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (3% vs 5%) and hypertension (1% vs 5%). CONCLUSION: Adding ipatasertib to paclitaxel did not improve efficacy in PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered HR+ HER2-negative aBC. The ipatasertib-paclitaxel safety profile was consistent with each agent's known adverse effects. Trial registration NCT03337724.