BACKGROUND: In the Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial (BEST), systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≤120 mm Hg was an independent predictor of poor prognosis in ambulatory patients with chronic systolic heart failure (HF). Because SBP is an important predictor of response to β-blocker therapy, the BEST protocol prespecified a post hoc analysis to determine whether the effect of bucindolol varied by baseline SBP. METHODS: In the BEST, 2706 patients with chronic systolic (left ventricular ejection fraction < 35%) HF and New York Heart Association class III (92%) or IV (8%) symptoms and receiving standard background therapy were randomized to receive either bucindolol (n = 1354) or placebo (n = 1354). Of these, 1751 had SBP ≤ 120 mm Hg, and 955 had SBP > 120 mm Hg at baseline. RESULTS: Among patients with SBP > 120 mm Hg, all-cause mortality occurred in 28% and 22% of patients receiving placebo and bucindolol, respectively (hazard ratio when bucindolol was compared with placebo, 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.99; P = 0.039). In contrast, among those with SBP ≤ 120 mm Hg, 36% and 35% of patients in the placebo and bucindolol groups died, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.81-1.12; P = 0.541). Hazard ratios (95% CIs; P values) for HF hospitalization associated with bucindolol use were 0.70 (0.56-0.89; P = 0.003) and 0.82 (0.71-0.95; P = 0.008) for patients with SBP > 120 and ≤ 120 mm Hg, respectively. CONCLUSION:Bucindolol, a nonselective β-blocker with weak α(2)-blocking properties, significantly reduced HF hospitalization in systolic HF patients regardless of baseline SBP. However, bucindolol reduced mortality only in those with SBP > 120 mm Hg.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: In the Beta-Blocker Evaluation of Survival Trial (BEST), systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≤ 120 mm Hg was an independent predictor of poor prognosis in ambulatory patients with chronic systolic heart failure (HF). Because SBP is an important predictor of response to β-blocker therapy, the BEST protocol prespecified a post hoc analysis to determine whether the effect of bucindolol varied by baseline SBP. METHODS: In the BEST, 2706 patients with chronic systolic (left ventricular ejection fraction < 35%) HF and New York Heart Association class III (92%) or IV (8%) symptoms and receiving standard background therapy were randomized to receive either bucindolol (n = 1354) or placebo (n = 1354). Of these, 1751 had SBP ≤ 120 mm Hg, and 955 had SBP > 120 mm Hg at baseline. RESULTS: Among patients with SBP > 120 mm Hg, all-cause mortality occurred in 28% and 22% of patients receiving placebo and bucindolol, respectively (hazard ratio when bucindolol was compared with placebo, 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.99; P = 0.039). In contrast, among those with SBP ≤ 120 mm Hg, 36% and 35% of patients in the placebo and bucindolol groups died, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.81-1.12; P = 0.541). Hazard ratios (95% CIs; P values) for HF hospitalization associated with bucindolol use were 0.70 (0.56-0.89; P = 0.003) and 0.82 (0.71-0.95; P = 0.008) for patients with SBP > 120 and ≤ 120 mm Hg, respectively. CONCLUSION:Bucindolol, a nonselective β-blocker with weak α(2)-blocking properties, significantly reduced HF hospitalization in systolic HFpatients regardless of baseline SBP. However, bucindolol reduced mortality only in those with SBP > 120 mm Hg.
Authors: Eric J Eichhorn; Michael J Domanski; Heidi Krause-Steinrauf; Michael R Bristow; Philip W Lavori Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-05-31 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jeptha P Curtis; Seth I Sokol; Yongfei Wang; Saif S Rathore; Dennis T Ko; Farid Jadbabaie; Edward L Portnay; Stephen J Marshalko; Martha J Radford; Harlan M Krumholz Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2003-08-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jean L Rouleau; Ellen B Roecker; Michal Tendera; Paul Mohacsi; Henry Krum; Hugo A Katus; Michael B Fowler; Andrew J S Coats; Alain Castaigne; Armin Scherhag; Terry L Holcslaw; Milton Packer Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-04-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: A Hjalmarson; S Goldstein; B Fagerberg; H Wedel; F Waagstein; J Kjekshus; J Wikstrand; D El Allaf; J Vítovec; J Aldershvile; M Halinen; R Dietz; K L Neuhaus; A Jánosi; G Thorgeirsson; P H Dunselman; L Gullestad; J Kuch; J Herlitz; P Rickenbacher; S Ball; S Gottlieb; P Deedwania Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-03-08 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Linda G Jones; Mo-Kyung Sin; Fadi G Hage; Raya E Kheirbek; Charity J Morgan; Michael R Zile; Wen-Chih Wu; Prakash Deedwania; Gregg C Fonarow; Wilbert S Aronow; Sumanth D Prabhu; Ross D Fletcher; Ali Ahmed; Richard M Allman Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2014-12-05 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Meaghan Lunney; Marinella Ruospo; Patrizia Natale; Robert R Quinn; Paul E Ronksley; Ioannis Konstantinidis; Suetonia C Palmer; Marcello Tonelli; Giovanni Fm Strippoli; Pietro Ravani Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2020-02-27