BACKGROUND: We analysed the effect of ivabradine on outcomes in heart failure (HF) patients on recommended background therapies with heart rates ≥75 bpm and <75 bpm in the SHIFT trial. A cut-off value of ≥75 bpm was chosen by the EMEA for approval for the use of ivabradine in chronic heart failure. METHODS: The SHIFT population was divided by baseline heart rate ≥75 or <75 bpm. The effect of ivabradine was analysed for primary composite endpoint (cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization) and other endpoints. RESULTS: In the ≥75 bpm group, ivabradine reduced primary endpoint (HR 0.76, 95 % CI 0.68-0.85, P < 0.0001), all-cause mortality (HR 0.83, 95 % CI, 0.72-0.96, P = 0.0109), cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.83, 95 % CI, (0.71-0.97, P = 0.0166), HF death (HR 0.61, 95 % CI, 0.46-0.81, P < 0.0006), and HF hospitalization (HR 0.70, 95 % CI, 0.61-0.80, P < 0.0001). Risk reduction depended on heart rate after 28 days, with the best protection for heart rates <60 bpm or reductions >10 bpm. None of the endpoints was significantly reduced in the <75 bpm group, though there were trends for risk reductions in HF death and hospitalization for heart rate <60 bpm and reductions >10 bpm. Ivabradine was tolerated similarly in both groups. CONCLUSION: The effect of ivabradine on outcomes is greater in patients with heart rate ≥75 bpm with heart rates achieved <60 bpm or heart rate reductions >10 bpm predicting best risk reduction. Our findings emphasize the importance of identification of high-risk HF patients by high heart rates and their treatment with heart rate-lowering drugs such as ivabradine.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: We analysed the effect of ivabradine on outcomes in heart failure (HF) patients on recommended background therapies with heart rates ≥75 bpm and <75 bpm in the SHIFT trial. A cut-off value of ≥75 bpm was chosen by the EMEA for approval for the use of ivabradine in chronic heart failure. METHODS: The SHIFT population was divided by baseline heart rate ≥75 or <75 bpm. The effect of ivabradine was analysed for primary composite endpoint (cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization) and other endpoints. RESULTS: In the ≥75 bpm group, ivabradine reduced primary endpoint (HR 0.76, 95 % CI 0.68-0.85, P < 0.0001), all-cause mortality (HR 0.83, 95 % CI, 0.72-0.96, P = 0.0109), cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.83, 95 % CI, (0.71-0.97, P = 0.0166), HF death (HR 0.61, 95 % CI, 0.46-0.81, P < 0.0006), and HF hospitalization (HR 0.70, 95 % CI, 0.61-0.80, P < 0.0001). Risk reduction depended on heart rate after 28 days, with the best protection for heart rates <60 bpm or reductions >10 bpm. None of the endpoints was significantly reduced in the <75 bpm group, though there were trends for risk reductions in HF death and hospitalization for heart rate <60 bpm and reductions >10 bpm. Ivabradine was tolerated similarly in both groups. CONCLUSION: The effect of ivabradine on outcomes is greater in patients with heart rate ≥75 bpm with heart rates achieved <60 bpm or heart rate reductions >10 bpm predicting best risk reduction. Our findings emphasize the importance of identification of high-risk HF patients by high heart rates and their treatment with heart rate-lowering drugs such as ivabradine.
Authors: Florian Custodis; Stephan H Schirmer; Magnus Baumhäkel; Gerd Heusch; Michael Böhm; Ulrich Laufs Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-12-07 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Karl Swedberg; Michel Komajda; Michael Böhm; Jeffrey S Borer; Ian Ford; Luigi Tavazzi Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2009-11-05 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: J G F Cleland; K Swedberg; F Follath; M Komajda; A Cohen-Solal; J C Aguilar; R Dietz; A Gavazzi; R Hobbs; J Korewicki; H C Madeira; V S Moiseyev; I Preda; W H van Gilst; J Widimsky; N Freemantle; Joanne Eastaugh; J Mason Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Paul Mulder; Stephane Barbier; Abdeslam Chagraoui; Vincent Richard; Jean Paul Henry; Françoise Lallemand; Sylvanie Renet; Guy Lerebours; Florence Mahlberg-Gaudin; Christian Thuillez Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-02-23 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jean-Claude Tardif; Eileen O'Meara; Michel Komajda; Michael Böhm; Jeffrey S Borer; Ian Ford; Luigi Tavazzi; Karl Swedberg Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2011-08-29 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Javed Butler; Milton Packer; Stephen J Greene; Mona Fiuzat; Stefan D Anker; Kevin J Anstrom; Peter E Carson; Lauren B Cooper; Gregg C Fonarow; Adrian F Hernandez; James L Januzzi; Mariell Jessup; Rita R Kalyani; Sanjay Kaul; Mikhail Kosiborod; JoAnn Lindenfeld; Darren K McGuire; Marc S Sabatine; Scott D Solomon; John R Teerlink; Muthiah Vaduganathan; Clyde W Yancy; Norman Stockbridge; Christopher M O'Connor Journal: Circulation Date: 2019-12-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Vincenzo De Santis; Domenico Vitale; Anna Santoro; Aurora Magliocca; Andrea Giuseppe Porto; Cecilia Nencini; Luigi Tritapepe Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2012-10-14 Impact factor: 5.460