Semaglutide in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: Benefits Above and Beyond Weight Loss.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kobak KA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10714162 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Semaglutide in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: Benefits Above and Beyond Weight Loss.
Kobak Kamil A KA Chiao Ying Ann YA
JACC. Basic to translational science 20231023 10
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMany therapies for heart failure (HF) have shown differential impact across the spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).ObjectivesIn this prespecified analysis, the authors assessed the effects of semaglutide across the baseline LVEF strata in patients with the obesity phenotype of HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in the STEP-HFpEF (Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with obesity and HFpEF) trial.MethodsSTEP-HFpEF randomized 529 patients (263 semaglutide; 266 placebo). For this prespecified analysis, patients were categorized into 3 groups based on LVEF: 45% to 49% (n = 85), 50% to 59% (n = 215), and ≥60% (n = 229).ResultsAt 52 weeks, semaglutide improved the dual primary endpoints of Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (estimated treatment difference: EF [ejection fraction] 45%-49%: 5.0 points [95% CI: -2.7 to 12.8 points], EF 50%-59%: 9.8 points [95% CI: 5.0 to 14.6 points], and EF ≥60%: 7.4 points [95% CI: 2.8 to 12.0 points]; P interaction = 0.56) and body weight (EF: 45%-49%: -7.6 [95% CI: -10.7 to -4.4], EF 50%-59%: -10.6 [95% CI: -12.6 to -8.6] and EF ≥60%: -11.9 [95% CI: -13.8 to -9.9]; P interaction = 0.08), to a similar extent across LVEF categories. Likewise, LVEF did not influence the benefit of semaglutide on confirmatory secondary endpoints: 6-minute walk distance (P interaction = 0.19), hierarchal composite endpoint (P interaction = 0.43), and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (P interaction = 0.26); or exploratory endpoint of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (P interaction = 0.96). Semaglutide was well-tolerated across LVEF categories.ConclusionsIn patients with HFpEF and obesity, semaglutide 2.4 mg improved symptoms, physical limitations, and exercise function, and reduced inflammation and body weight to a similar extent across LVEF categories. These data support treatment with semaglutide in patients with the obesity phenotype of HFpEF regardless of LVEF. (Research Study to Investigate How Well Semaglutide Works in People Living With Heart Failure and Obesity [STEP-HFpEF]; NCT04788511).
| S-EPMC11185158 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aims: The aim of the study was to determine the associations of weight loss or gain with all-cause mortality risk in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods and Results: Non-lean patients from the Americas from the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist study were analyzed (n = 1,515). Weight loss and weight gain were defined as a decrease or increase in weight ≥5% between baseline and 1 year. To determine the associations of weight change and mortality risk, we used adjusted Cox proportional hazards models and restricted cubic spline models. The mean age was 71.5 (9.6) years. Weight loss and gain were witnessed in 19.3 and 15.9% patients, respectively. After multivariable adjustment, weight loss was associated with higher risk of mortality (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.06-1.89, P = 0.002); weight gain had similar risk of mortality (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.68-1.42, P = 0.932) compared with weight stability. There was linear relationship between weight change and mortality risk. The association of weight loss and mortality was different for patients with and without diabetes mellitus (interaction p = 0.009). Conclusion: Among patients with HFpEF, weight loss was independently associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality, and weight gain was not associated with better survival. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier: NCT00094302.
| S-EPMC8213199 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) represents a heterogeneous collection of conditions that are unified by the presence of a left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50%, evidence of impaired diastolic function and elevated natriuretic peptide levels, all within the context of typical heart failure signs and symptoms. However, while HFpEF is steadily becoming the predominant form of heart failure, disease-modifying treatment options for this population remain sparse. This review provides an overview of the diagnosis, management and prevention of HFpEF for general physicians.
| S-EPMC6334030 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Although potential therapeutic candidates for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) are emerging, it is still unclear whether they will be effective in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 60% or higher. Our aim was to identify the clinical characteristics of these patients with HFpEF by comparing them to patients with LVEF below 60%. Methods and Results From a multicenter, prospective, observational cohort (PURSUIT-HFpEF [Prospective Multicenter Obsevational Study of Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction]), we investigated 812 consecutive patients (median age, 83 years; 57% women), including 316 with 50% ≤ LVEF <60% and 496 with 60% ≤ LVEF, and compared the clinical backgrounds of the 2 groups and their prognoses for cardiac mortality or HF readmission. Two hundred four adverse outcomes occurred at a median of 366 days. Multivariable Cox regression tests adjusted for age, sex, heart rate, atrial fibrillation, estimated glomerular filtration rate, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and prior heart failure hospitalization revealed that systolic blood pressure (hazard ratio [HR], 0.925 [95% CI, 0.862-0.992]; P=0.028), high-density lipoprotein to C-reactive protein ratio (HR, 0.975 [95% CI, 0.944-0.995]; P=0.007), and left ventricular end-diastolic volume index (HR, 0.870 [95% CI, 0.759-0.997]; P=0.037) were uniquely associated with outcomes among patients with 50% ≤ LVEF <60%, whereas only the ratio of peak early mitral inflow velocity to velocity of mitral annulus early diastolic motion e'(HR, 1.034 [95% CI, 1.003-1.062]; P=0.034) was associated with outcomes among patients with 60% ≤ LVEF. Conclusions Prognostic factors show distinct differences between patients with HFpEF with 50% ≤ LVEF <60% and with 60% ≤ LVEF. These findings suggest that the 2 groups have different inherent pathophysiology. Registration URL: https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000024414; Unique identifier: UMIN000021831 PURSUIT-HFpEF.
| S-EPMC9375469 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsWeight loss (WL) is a poor prognostic factor for patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction. However, its prognostic impact on patients with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains unestablished. The evidence regarding the effects of obesity on the prognosis of WL is also unclear. We aimed to identify the risk factors for WL and examine the association between WL and prognosis of HFpEF in obese and non-obese patients.Methods and resultsIn this multicentre cohort study, the data of 573 patients hospitalized with HFpEF [median age: 78 years (interquartile range, 71-84 years); 49.2% female] were identified from hospital databases. WL was defined as ≥5% weight reduction within 6 months after discharge. Obesity was defined according to Japanese criteria as body mass index ≥25 kg/m2 . The main study outcomes were all-cause mortality and HF rehospitalization between 6 and 24 months after hospital discharge. Logistic regression analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis were performed to identify independent the risk factors associated with WL and to calculate the hazard ratios (HRs) associated with adverse outcomes. The prevalence of obesity at discharge was 21.1%. At 6 month follow-up, WL occurred in 17.4% and 10.8% of the obese and non-obese patients, respectively. Onset of WL in non-obese patients was associated with prior hospitalization for HF [odds ratio (OR) 2.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.22-4.68, P = 0.011] and high levels of brain natriuretic peptide (OR 2.32, CI 1.17-4.60, P = 0.015). In obese patients, WL was associated with the use of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (OR 3.26, CI 1.08-9.76, P = 0.03) and vasopressin receptor antagonists (OR 6.61, CI 2.03-21.2, P = 0.001). During 1021.3 person-years of follow-up, 31 patients died, and upon 1081.0 person-years follow-up, 84 patients required rehospitalization for HF. In proportional hazards analysis, WL was associated with all-cause mortality (HR 5.12, CI 2.08-12.5, P < 0.001) and HF rehospitalization (HR 2.63, CI 1.38-5.01, P = 0.003) after adjustment for confounders in non-obese patients, but not in obese patients.ConclusionsWeight loss should be considered as an indicator for monitoring worsening of HF condition in non-obese patients with HFpEF. WL was not associated with adverse events in obese patients with HFpEF, possibly due to appropriate fluid management during follow-up.
| S-EPMC8712923 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11486552 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is increasing in prevalence as the general population ages. Poorly managed heart failure symptoms of decompensated HFpEF is one of the most common reasons for prolonged hospital admission. The high rate of morbidity and mortality associated with HFpEF is compounded by a poor understanding of the underpinning pathophysiology. Randomized controlled trials have so far been unable to identify an evidence base for reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with HFpEF, although there is some evidence to support quality of life (QOL) improvement. In this review, we described the recent advances on the pathophysiological understanding of HFpEF, the current and emerging treatment strategies, and what this may mean for individual patients. Potential treatments for HFpEF were divided into their relative management strategies and the current evidence assessed for effect on HFpEF mortality, hospital admission frequency, and QOL improvement. Overall, the understanding of HFpEF pathophysiology is improving and has been made a priority in identifying potential therapeutic targets. There is growing evidence that patients with ejection fractions (EF) of less than 60% may obtain a mortality benefit from ACE-inhibitors, angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitors, Angiotensin Receptor Blockers, and Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists. However, this covers only a small proportion of the HFpEF spectrum. Therefore, currently there are no universal treatment strategies recommended for HFpEF, and management should focus on an individualised approach and this should take into account the comorbidities of each patient.
| S-EPMC7186731 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study was to determine whether left atrial ejection fraction (LAEF) quantified with cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) was different between heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and controls, and its relation to prognosis. As part of our single-centre, prospective, observational study, 188 subjects (HFpEF n = 140, controls n = 48) underwent phenotyping with contrast-enhanced CMR, transthoracic echocardiography, blood sampling and six-minute walk testing. LAEF was calculated using the biplane method. Atrial fibrillation (AF) was present in 43 (31%) of HFpEF subjects. Overall, LAEF (%) was lower in HFpEF patients inclusive of AF (32 ± 16) or those in sinus rhythm alone (41 ± 12) compared to controls (51 ± 11), p < 0.0001. LAEF correlated inversely with maximal and minimal left atrial volumes indexed (r = - 0.602, r = - 0.762), and plasma N-terminal pro-atrial natriuretic peptide (r = - 0.367); p < 0.0001. During median follow-up (1429 days), there were 67 composite events of all-cause death or hospitalization for heart failure (22 deaths, 45 HF hospitalizations) in HFpEF. Lower LAEF (below median) was associated with an increased risk of composite endpoints (Log-Rank: all p = 0.028; sinus p = 0.036). In multivariable Cox regression analysis, LAEF (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.767, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.591-0.996; p = 0.047) and indexed extracellular volume (HR 1.422, CI 1.015-1.992; p = 0.041) were the only parameters that remained significant when added to a base prognostic model comprising age, prior HF hospitalization, diastolic blood pressure, lung disease, NYHA, six-minute-walk-test-distance, haemoglobin, creatinine and B-type natriuretic peptide. CMR-derived LAEF is lower in HFpEF compared to healthy controls and is a strong prognostic biomarker.
| S-EPMC6942575 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aims: To investigate the relationship between body-weight fluctuation and risks of clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Methods and Results:We measured intra-individual variations in body weight from baseline and follow-up visits in 1,691 participants with HFpEF from the Americas from the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure with an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) trial. The primary endpoint was any cardiovascular events (a composite of death from cardiovascular disease, non-fatal myocardial infarction, aborted cardiac arrest, or hospitalization for HF). The body-weight fluctuation was measured according to average successive variability and high variability was defined as greater than or equal to the median. After adjustment for risk factors, mean body weight and weight change, each increase of 1 standard deviation in body-weight variability was significantly associated with increased risks of any cardiovascular events (hazard ratio [HR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-1.33, P < 0.001). Patients with high variability had a 47% increased risk of any cardiovascular events and 27% increased risk of all-cause death compared with those with low variability. Such association was similar among patients with New York Heart Association functional class I/II vs. III/IV, obesity vs. non-obesity, and weight loss, gain vs. stability (the P-values for interaction were all insignificant). Conclusion: Among patients with HFpEF, body-weight fluctuation was associated with increased risks of cardiovascular events independent of traditional cardiovascular risk factors, and regardless of HF severity, baseline weight or weight change direction. Clinical Trial Registration: Aldosterone antagonist therapy for adults with heart failure and preserved systolic function (TOPCAT), https://clinicaltrials.gov, identifier [NCT00094302].
| S-EPMC8236532 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Heart failure is defined as a clinical syndrome and is known to present with a number of different pathophysiological patterns. There is a remarkable degree of variation in measures of left ventricular systolic emptying and this has been used to categorise heart failure into two separate types: low ejection fraction (EF) heart failure or HF-REF and high EF heart failure or HF-PEF. Here we review the pathophysiology, epidemiology and management of HF-PEF and argue that sharp separation of heart failure into two forms is misguided and illogical, and the present scarcity of clinical trial evidence for effective treatment for HF-PEF is a problem of our own making; we should never have excluded patients from major trials on the basis of EF in the first place. Whilst as many heart failure patients have preserved EFs as reduced we have dramatically under-represented HF-PEF patients in trials. Only four trials have been performed in HF-PEF specifically, and another two trials that recruited both HF-PEF and HF-REF can be considered. When we consider the similarity in outcomes and neurohormonal activation between HF-REF and HF-REF, the vast corpus of trial data that we have to attest to the efficacy of various treatment (angiotensin-converting-enzyme [ACE] inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs], beta-blockers and aldosterone antagonists) in HF-REF, and the much more limited number of trials of similar agents showing near statistically significant benefits in HF-PEF the time has come rethink our management of HF-PEF, and in particular our selection of patients for trials.
| S-EPMC5490948 | biostudies-other