Background and objectives The calcimimetic cinacalcet reduced the risk of death or cardiovascular (CV) events in older, but not younger, patients with moderate to severe secondary hyperparathyroidism (HPT) who were receiving hemodialysis. To determine whether the lower risk in younger patients might be due to lower baseline CV risk and more frequent use of cointerventions that reduce parathyroid hormone (kidney transplantation, parathyroidectomy, and commercial cinacalcet use), this study examined the effects of cinacalcet in older ($65 years, n=1005) and younger (,65 years, n=2878) patients.Design, setting, participants, & measurements Evaluation of Cinacalcet HCl Therapy to Lower Cardiovascular Events (EVOLVE) was a global, multicenter, randomized placebo-controlled trial in 3883 prevalent patients on hemodialysis, whose outcomes included death, major CV events, and development of severe unremitting HPT. The age subgroup analysis was prespecified.Results Older patients had higher baseline prevalence of diabetes mellitus and CV comorbidity. Annualized rates of kidney transplantation and parathyroidectomy were .3-fold higher in younger relative to older patients and were more frequent in patients randomized to placebo. In older patients, the adjusted relative hazard (95% confidence interval) for the primary composite (CV) end point (cinacalcet versus placebo) was 0.70 (0.60 to 0.81); in younger patients, the relative hazard was 0.97 (0.86 to 1.09). Corresponding adjusted relative hazards for mortality were 0.68 (0.51 to 0.81) and 0.99 (0.86 to 1.13). Reduction in the risk of severe unremitting HPT was similar in both groups. ConclusionsIn the EVOLVE trial, cinacalcet decreased the risk of death and of major CV events in older, but not younger, patients with moderate to severe HPT who were receiving hemodialysis. Effect modification by age may be partly explained by differences in underlying CV risk and differential application of cointerventions that reduce parathyroid hormone.

AimsThe beneficial effects of CRT in patients with advanced heart failure, wide QRS, and low LVEF have been clearly established. Nevertheless, mortality remains high in some patients. The aims of our study were to identify the predictors of mortality in patients treated with CRT and to design a risk score for mortality.Methods and resultsA cohort of 608 consecutive patients treated with CRT from 2000 to 2011 in our centre was prospectively analysed. Baseline clinical and echocardiography variables were analysed and mortality data were collected. During a mean follow-up of 36.2 ± 29.2 months, 174 patients died: 123/174 (71%) due to cardiovascular causes, 25/174 (14%) non-cardiac causes, and 26/174 (15%) unknown aetiology. In a multivariate analysis the predictors of mortality were NYHA class IV [hazard ratio (HR) 2.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.7–3.7, P < 0.001], glomerular filtration rate (GFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.14–2.30, P = 0.008), AF (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.19–2.3, P = 0.01), age ≥70 years (HR 1.44, (95% CI 1.04–2.00, P = 0.02), and LVEF <22% (HR 1.83, 95% CI 1.33–2.52, P ≤ 0.001). The EAARN score (EF, Age, AF, Renal dysfunction, NYHA class IV) summarizes the predictors. Each additional predictor increased the mortality: one predictor, HR 3.28 (95% CI 1.37–7.8, P = 0.008); two, HR 5.23 (95% CI 2.24–12.10, P < 0.001); three, HR 9.63 (95% CI 4.1–22.60, P < 0.001); and four or more, HR 14.38 (95% CI 5.8–35.65, P < 0.001).ConclusionThe predictors of mortality have a significant add-on predictive effect on mortality. The EAARN score could be useful to stratify the prognosis of CRT patients.

The presence of a correctable abnormality evaluated by conventional echocardiography is associated with LV reverse remodeling and better survival at midterm follow-up. Clinical characteristics and myocardial viability also have an influence.

AimsA maximum percentage of ventricular pacing is mandatory to obtain a good response to CRT. Atrioventricular junction (AVJ) ablation has been recommended to attain this objective in patients with AF. The aims of our study were: (i) to determine whether the presence of complete AVJ block (induced or spontaneous) improves survival in patients with permanent AF treated with CRT and (ii) to analyse the predictors of mortality in AF patients treated with CRT. Methods and resultsFrom a series of 608 patients treated with CRT in our centre from 2000 to 2011, a cohort of 155 patients with permanent AF was analysed. Patients in AF were divided into two groups, AF + AVJ block [76 (49%)] and AF non-AVJ block [79 (51%)]. Mean follow-up was 30 months (interquartile range 13 -51 months). During the follow-up, 62 patients died. Overall and cardiovascular mortality were similar between both groups: hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 -1.39, P ¼ 0.51 and HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.52-1.68, P ¼ 0.82. Multivariate analysis identified three independent predictors of mortality: basal NYHA functional class IV (HR 2.25, 95% CI 1.12-4.22, P ¼ 0.03), glomerular filtration rate (HR 0.98, P ¼ 0.03), and LVEF (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-0.99, P ¼ 0.02). ConclusionsAVJ block did not improve survival for patients in AF treated with CRT. Basal NYHA functional class IV, poor renal function, and LVEF were the independent predictors of mortality.--