Aims
To assess the proportion of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who are eligible for sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) based on the European Medicines Agency/Food and Drug Administration (EMA/FDA) label, the PARADIGM‐HF trial and the 2016 ESC guidelines, and the association between eligibility and outcomes.
Methods and results
Outpatients with HFrEF in the ESC‐EORP‐HFA Long‐Term Heart Failure (HF‐LT) Registry between March 2011 and November 2013 were considered. Criteria for LCZ696 based on EMA/FDA label, PARADIGM‐HF and ESC guidelines were applied. Of 5443 patients, 2197 and 2373 had complete information for trial and guideline eligibility assessment, and 84%, 12% and 12% met EMA/FDA label, PARADIGM‐HF and guideline criteria, respectively. Absent PARADIGM‐HF criteria were low natriuretic peptides (21%), hyperkalemia (4%), hypotension (7%) and sub‐optimal pharmacotherapy (74%); absent Guidelines criteria were LVEF>35% (23%), insufficient NP levels (30%)
and sub‐optimal pharmacotherapy (82%); absent label criteria were absence of symptoms (New York Heart Association class I). When a daily requirement of ACEi/ARB ≥ 10 mg enalapril (instead of ≥ 20 mg) was used, eligibility rose from 12% to 28% based on both PARADIGM‐HF and guidelines. One‐year heart failure hospitalization was higher (12% and 17% vs. 12%) and all‐cause mortality lower (5.3% and 6.5% vs. 7.7%) in registry eligible patients compared to the enalapril arm of PARADIGM‐HF.
Conclusions
Among outpatients with HFrEF in the ESC‐EORP‐HFA HF‐LT Registry, 84% met label criteria, while only 12% and 28% met PARADIGM‐HF and guideline criteria for LCZ696 if requiring ≥ 20 mg and ≥ 10 mg enalapril, respectively. Registry patients eligible for LCZ696 had greater heart failure hospitalization but lower mortality rates than the PARADIGM‐HF enalapril group.
BackgroundThe aim of this study was to find the main risk factors for development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), especially factors identified before the surgical procedure and factors related to the recipient profile and the medical history of the donor.Material/MethodsThere were 147 patients who had heart transplantation (HT) included in this study: mean age was 45.8±15.3 years. All study patients had coronary angiography after HT. Analyzed risk factors were: non-immunologic recipient risk factors (age of transplantation, smoking, hypertension, lipids, diabetes, obesity and weight gain after HT), immunologic recipient risk factors (acute cellular rejection (ACR), acute humoral rejection (AMR), cytomegalovirus (CMV) episodes), and donor-related risk factors (age, sex, catecholamine usage, ischemic time, compatibility of sex and blood groups, cause of death, cardiac arrest).ResultsCAV was recognized in 48 patients (CAV group); mean age 53.6±13.6 years. There were 99 patients without CAV (nonCAV group); mean age 48.3±15.5 years. A univariate Cox analysis of the development of coronary disease showed statistical significance (p<0.05) for baseline high-density lipid (HDL), ACR, AMR, CMV, and donor age. Multivariate Cox regression model confirmed that only baseline HDL, episodes of ACR, donor age, and CMV infection are significant for the frequency of CAV after HT.ConclusionsOlder donor age is highly associated with CAV development. Older donor age and low level of HDL in heart recipients with the strongest influence of immunologic risk factors (ACR, CMV infection) were linked with development of CAV.
The risk of malignancy development is many times higher for HT patients than in the general population. The high incidence rate for pulmonary carcinoma in the analyzed group of patients was most likely related to smoking before transplantation and continuation of smoking after the procedure in the case of patients who received immunosuppressive therapy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.