Hans-Peter Brunner-La Rocca1, Luc Eurlings1, A Mark Richards2,3, James L Januzzi4, Matthias E Pfisterer5, Ulf Dahlström6, Yigal M Pinto7, Patric Karlström8, Hans Erntell9, Rudolf Berger10, Hans Persson9, Christopher M O'Connor11, Deddo Moertl12, Hanna K Gaggin4, Christopher M Frampton2, M Gary Nicholls2, Richard W Troughton2. 1. Department of Cardiology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, PO Box 5800, NL-6202AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands. 2. Department of Medicine, University of Otago Christchurch, Christchurch Hospital, Christchurch, New Zealand. 3. National University Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore. 4. Cardiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. 6. Department of Cardiology and Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linkoping University, Department of Cardiology, Linkoping, Sweden. 7. Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 8. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, County Hospital Ryhov, Jonkoping, Sweden. 9. Department of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 10. Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 11. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. 12. Department of Cardiology, LKH, St Poelten, Austria.
Abstract
AIMS: Previous analyses suggest that heart failure (HF) therapy guided by (N-terminal pro-)brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) might be dependent on left ventricular ejection fraction, age and co-morbidities, but the reasons remain unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: To determine interactions between (NT-pro)BNP-guided therapy and HF with reduced [ejection fraction (EF) ≤45%; HF with reduced EF (HFrEF), n = 1731] vs. preserved EF [EF > 45%; HF with preserved EF (HFpEF), n = 301] and co-morbidities (hypertension, renal failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, cerebrovascular insult, peripheral vascular disease) on outcome, individual patient data (n = 2137) from eight NT-proBNP guidance trials were analysed using Cox-regression with multiplicative interaction terms. Endpoints were mortality and admission because of HF. Whereas in HFrEF patients (NT-pro)BNP-guided compared with symptom-guided therapy resulted in lower mortality [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-0.97, P = 0.03] and fewer HF admissions (HR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.67-0.97, P = 0.02), no such effect was seen in HFpEF (mortality: HR = 1.22, 95% CI 0.76-1.96, P = 0.41; HF admissions HR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.67-1.53, P = 0.97; interactions P < 0.02). Age (74 ± 11 years) interacted with treatment strategy allocation independently of EF regarding mortality (P = 0.02), but not HF admission (P = 0.54). The interaction of age and mortality was explained by the interaction of treatment strategy allocation with co-morbidities. In HFpEF, renal failure provided strongest interaction (P < 0.01; increased risk of (NT-pro)BNP-guided therapy if renal failure present), whereas in HFrEF patients, the presence of at least two of the following co-morbidities provided strongest interaction (P < 0.01; (NT-pro)BNP-guided therapy beneficial only if none or one of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, cardiovascular insult, or peripheral vascular disease present). (NT-pro)BNP-guided therapy was harmful in HFpEF patients without hypertension (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The benefits of therapy guided by (NT-pro)BNP were present in HFrEF only. Co-morbidities seem to influence the response to (NT-pro)BNP-guided therapy and may explain the lower efficacy of this approach in elderly patients.
AIMS: Previous analyses suggest that heart failure (HF) therapy guided by (N-terminal pro-)brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) might be dependent on left ventricular ejection fraction, age and co-morbidities, but the reasons remain unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: To determine interactions between (NT-pro)BNP-guided therapy and HF with reduced [ejection fraction (EF) ≤45%; HF with reduced EF (HFrEF), n = 1731] vs. preserved EF [EF > 45%; HF with preserved EF (HFpEF), n = 301] and co-morbidities (hypertension, renal failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, cerebrovascular insult, peripheral vascular disease) on outcome, individual patient data (n = 2137) from eight NT-proBNP guidance trials were analysed using Cox-regression with multiplicative interaction terms. Endpoints were mortality and admission because of HF. Whereas in HFrEF patients (NT-pro)BNP-guided compared with symptom-guided therapy resulted in lower mortality [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-0.97, P = 0.03] and fewer HF admissions (HR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.67-0.97, P = 0.02), no such effect was seen in HFpEF (mortality: HR = 1.22, 95% CI 0.76-1.96, P = 0.41; HF admissions HR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.67-1.53, P = 0.97; interactions P < 0.02). Age (74 ± 11 years) interacted with treatment strategy allocation independently of EF regarding mortality (P = 0.02), but not HF admission (P = 0.54). The interaction of age and mortality was explained by the interaction of treatment strategy allocation with co-morbidities. In HFpEF, renal failure provided strongest interaction (P < 0.01; increased risk of (NT-pro)BNP-guided therapy if renal failure present), whereas in HFrEF patients, the presence of at least two of the following co-morbidities provided strongest interaction (P < 0.01; (NT-pro)BNP-guided therapy beneficial only if none or one of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, cardiovascular insult, or peripheral vascular disease present). (NT-pro)BNP-guided therapy was harmful in HFpEF patients without hypertension (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: The benefits of therapy guided by (NT-pro)BNP were present in HFrEF only. Co-morbidities seem to influence the response to (NT-pro)BNP-guided therapy and may explain the lower efficacy of this approach in elderly patients.
Authors: Julie McLellan; Carl J Heneghan; Rafael Perera; Alison M Clements; Paul P Glasziou; Karen E Kearley; Nicola Pidduck; Nia W Roberts; Sally Tyndel; F Lucy Wright; Clare Bankhead Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2016-12-22
Authors: Leah Rethy; Barry A Borlaug; Margaret M Redfield; Jae K Oh; Sanjiv J Shah; Ravi B Patel Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2021-01-21 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Peter Willeit; Stephen Kaptoge; Paul Welsh; Adam Butterworth; Rajiv Chowdhury; Sarah Spackman; Lisa Pennells; Pei Gao; Stephen Burgess; Daniel Freitag; Michael Sweeting; Angela Wood; Nancy Cook; Suzanne Judd; Stella Trompet; Vijay Nambi; Michael Olsen; Brendan Everett; Frank Kee; Johan Ärnlöv; Veikko Salomaa; Daniel Levy; Jussi Kauhanen; Jari Laukkanen; Maryam Kavousi; Toshiharu Ninomiya; Juan-Pablo Casas; Lori Daniels; Lars Lind; Caroline Kistorp; Jens Rosenberg; Thomas Mueller; Speranza Rubattu; Demosthenes Panagiotakos; Oscar Franco; James de Lemos; Andreas Luchner; Jorge Kizer; Stefan Kiechl; Jukka Salonen; S Goya Wannamethee; Rudolf de Boer; Børge Nordestgaard; Jonas Andersson; Torben Jørgensen; Olle Melander; Christie Ballantyne; Christopher DeFilippi; Paul Ridker; Mary Cushman; Wayne Rosamond; Simon Thompson; Vilmundur Gudnason; Naveed Sattar; John Danesh; Emanuele Di Angelantonio Journal: Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol Date: 2016-09-03 Impact factor: 44.867