Clinical characteristics and treatment patterns in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease with hypercholesterolemia: a retrospective analysis of a large US real-world database cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Guidelines developed by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) recommend lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. This study described LLT utilization patterns and LDL-C goal achievement (to <70 mg/dL) among patients with ASCVD in the United States. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database (CDM). Patients with their first ASCVD diagnosis (index date) in the CDM database between July 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018, were followed for ≥12 months to assess LLT utilization patterns and change in LDL-C. LLTs included were statins and non-statin LLTs (ezetimibe, fibrates, and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors). Adherence was measured as the proportion of days covered (PDC), defined as the number of days with drug on-hand (or number of days exposed to drug) divided by the 12-month follow-up period. Patients with PDC ≥0.8 were considered adherent. RESULTS: Among the patients with ASCVD (N = 1,424,893) included in this study, only 621,978 (43.7%) had at least one LDL-C measurement at baseline (6 months prior to and 3 months after the index date). The mean age was 71.5 years, and almost half of the patients were female. Patients were followed for a mean (standard deviation [SD]) duration of 30.6 (11.4) months (median of 29.9 months). During the follow-up, about one-quarter of the patients did not receive any LLT. Among treated patients, 89.5% received statins and 10.5% received non-statin LLT. Less than half (47.6%) of the patients were adherent to the index treatment during the 12-month follow-up. Even in patients receiving combination therapy (statin + non-statin LLT), a sizable proportion (35.8%) showed an increase in LDL-C over the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study highlighted limited LDL-C monitoring in patients with ASCVD, and unmet need in terms of suboptimal utilization of non-stain LLTs, limited adherence to LLTs, and inadequate lipid control after treatment (among those with LDL-C measurements during the follow-up period) need to be addressed to improve outcomes in this patient cohort.

International societies of cardiologists recommend use of medications to lower the "bad" cholesterol, and its risk of cardiovascular diseases like stroke. We aimed to describe how those medications are being used and to what extent patients with cardiovascular diseases in the United States have their "bad" cholesterol under control. Results of this study indicate that cholesterol check-up among the patients was limited. Among recommended medications, statins were mostly used, whereas use of other recently approved medications was minimal. One-quarter of patients were not prescribed medications to control their cholesterol. Moreover, patients were not taking the medications as frequently as prescribed.

Burden of elevated lipoprotein(a) among patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: Evidence from a systematic literature review and feasibility assessment of meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] level is an independent genetic risk factor that increases the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) by 2-4 fold. We aimed to report the burden of clinically relevant elevated Lp(a) in secondary prevention ASCVD population as the evaluation of such evidence is lacking. METHODS: A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted using Embase®, MEDLINE®, and MEDLINE® In-Process databases to identify studies reporting burden of elevated Lp(a) levels from January 1, 2010, to March 28, 2022. Full-text, English-language studies including ≥500 participants with ≥1 Lp(a) assessment were included. RESULTS: Sixty-one studies reported clinical burden of elevated Lp(a). Of these, 25 observational studies and one clinical trial reported clinical burden of clinically relevant elevated Lp(a) levels. Major clinical outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; n = 20), myocardial infarction (MI; n = 11), revascularization (n = 10), stroke (n = 10), cardiovascular (CV) mortality (n = 9), and all-cause mortality (n = 10). Elevated Lp(a) levels significantly increased the risk of MACE (n = 15) and revascularization (n = 8), while they demonstrated a trend for positive association with remaining CV outcomes. Meta-analysis was not feasible for included studies due to heterogeneity in Lp(a) thresholds, outcome definitions, and patient characteristics. Three studies reported humanistic burden. Patients with elevated Lp(a) levels had higher odds of manifesting cognitive impairment (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval; CI]: 1.62 [1.11-2.37]) and disability related to stroke (OR [95% CI]:1.46 [1.23-1.72)]) (n = 2). Elevated Lp(a) levels negatively correlated with health-related quality of life (R = -0.166, p = 0.014) (n = 1). A single study reported no association between elevated Lp(a) levels and economic burden. CONCLUSIONS: This SLR demonstrated a significant association of elevated Lp(a) levels with major CV outcomes and increased humanistic burden in secondary prevention ASCVD population. These results reinforce the need to quantify and manage Lp(a) for CV risk reduction and to perform further studies to characterize the economic burden.

Burden of lipoprotein(a) for patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A retrospective analysis from the United States.

BACKGROUND: Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an inherited, independent, and causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). OBJECTIVE: To assess the burden of elevated Lp(a) for patients with ASCVD in a real-world setting in the United States. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study assessed US patients with available Lp(a) measurement and established ASCVD using Optum's Clinformatics Data Mart database (2007-2020). Index date was defined as the first diagnosis of an ASCVD event. Patient demographics, medications, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and occurrence of cardiovascular events were assessed for patients with elevated (≥150 nmol/L) vs normal (≥65 nmol/L) Lp(a) levels, within the first year of index date. HCRU was characterized by inpatient hospitalization, inpatient length of stay (LOS), outpatient visits, and emergency department (ED) visits. All comparative analyses of patients with elevated (≥150 nmol/L) vs normal (≥65 nmol/L) Lp(a) levels within the first year of index date were adjusted for age, sex, baseline statin use, and diabetes. RESULTS: 8,372 patients with ASCVD and Lp(a) measurement in nmol/L were included in this study. Patient demographics and baseline clinical characteristics were similar among those with normal and elevated Lp(a). However, the proportion of patients receiving statins and ß-blockers at baseline were significantly higher in the elevated vs normal Lp(a) group (54.76% vs 42.91%, P < 0.0001, and 30.92% vs 27.32%, P = 0.0183, respectively). At 1 year of follow-up, the rates per 100 person-years for ASCVD-related inpatient hospitalizations, outpatient hospitalizations, and ED visits were higher among patients with elevated Lp(a) compared with normal Lp(a) (13.33 vs 9.46, 89.08 vs 85.10, and 2.89 vs 2.29, respectively). The mean LOS per ASCVD-related hospitalization was 7.21 days in the elevated and 6.26 days in the normal Lp(a) group (P = 0.3462). During the 1-year post-index follow-up period, 15% of patients in the elevated Lp(a) group required revascularization compared with 10% of patients in the normal Lp(a) group (P = 0.0002). The odds of composite myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and revascularization occurrence of events within the first year of index was significantly higher in the elevated Lp(a) group compared with the normal Lp(a) group (1.46; 95% CI = 1.20-1.77; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: HCRU within the first year of ASCVD diagnosis is substantial among patients with ASCVD and elevated Lp(a). Relatively higher rates of inpatient hospitalizations, increased LOS per hospitalization, and requirement of revascularization procedures within the first year of ASCVD index diagnosis were observed in patients with elevated Lp(a) compared with normal Lp(a) levels. Lp(a) testing in routine clinical practice could help in identification of high-risk patients with ASCVD and play an important role in the overall cardiovascular risk management, aiming to reduce the HCRU associated with ASCVD. DISCLOSURES: Ms Fonseca, Dr Laguna, Dr Itani, Dr Rachel Studer, and Dr Ferber are employees of Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland. Ms Byrne is an employee of Novartis AG, Dublin, Ireland. Dr Costa-Scharplatz is an employee of Novartis Sweden AB, Stockholm, Sweden. Dr Heo and Ms Dillon are employees of Genesis Research. Genesis Research was commissioned to conduct the study (data extraction and analysis) on behalf of Novartis Pharma AG.

Recurrent heart failure hospitalizations increase the risk of mortality in heart failure patients with atrial fibrillation and type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United Kingdom: a retrospective analysis of Clinical Practice Research Datalink database.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) is a global illness and is a leading cause of hospitalizations. Recurrent HF hospitalization (HFH) is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) and all-cause mortality, thereby burdening the health system. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are two important comorbidities in patients living with HF. This study aims to assess the association between recurrent HFHs with CV and all-cause mortality in patients living with HF and having AF and/or T2DM. METHODS: This study was conducted using primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink database with linkage to hospital data and mortality data. Adults living with HF and with at least 1 HFH were identified from January 2010 to December 2014. Patients were grouped based on the number of recurrent HFHs. During follow-up, all-cause mortality or CV mortality for the HF population with AF and T2DM was recorded. RESULTS: Overall, 32.9% of 2344 T2DM patients and 28.2% of 4585 AF patients had at least 1 recurrent HFH. The patients were relatively elderly and were predominantly male. The mean number of all-cause hospitalizations in HF patients having T2DM and AF, with ≥ 1 recurrent HFH were significantly higher than patients without recurrent HFH. The annualized mortality rates in CV mortality as the primary cause and for all-cause mortality and increased with recurrent HFHs, in T2DM and AF patients. The risk of CV mortality as primary cause and all cause morality were 5.39 and 3.19 times higher in T2DM patients with 3 recurrent HFHs versus no recurrent HFH. Similarly, the risk of CV mortality as primary cause and all cause morality was 5.98 and 4.3 times higher in AF patients with 3 recurrent HFHs versus those with no recurrent HFH. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrent HFHs are strongly associated with CV mortality and all-cause mortality in HF patients with TD2M or AF. The hospitalization rate highlights the need for treatment and disease management, which will improve the course of the disease and help patients stay out of hospital.

Hospitalization Rates in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction Initiating Sacubitril/Valsartan or Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/Angiotensin Receptor Blockers: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: The angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) sacubitril/valsartan (SAC/VAL) has shown benefit in patients with symptomatic heart failure (HF), including those naïve to renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi) therapy, and is considered the preferred RAASi for chronic HF. Real-world data on ARNI, specifically in RAASi-naïve patients, are limited. This study compared real-world outcomes of ARNI (SAC/VAL) vs. angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) therapy in RAASi-naïve patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included de-identified data on RAASi-naïve patients with HFrEF (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40%) who had newly initiated SAC/VAL or ACEi/ARB between July 1, 2015, and March 31, 2019, from the Optum® Electronic Health Records database in the US. New SAC/VAL users were propensity score matched 1:2 with new ACEi/ARB users by pre-selected characteristics. One-year post-index rates of all-cause, HF, and cardiovascular hospitalizations and the composite of HF hospitalization or emergency room (ER) visits were measured using negative binomial regression. Time to first all-cause hospitalization, HF hospitalization, and composite of HF hospitalization or ER visits was measured using a subdistribution hazards model. RESULTS: The matched sample included 3059 new SAC/VAL and 6118 new ACEi/ARB users. Rates of all-cause hospitalization and composite of HF hospitalization or ER visits were significantly lower with SAC/VAL compared with ACEi/ARB (incidence rate ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.87 [0.81-0.93] and 0.87 [0.81-0.94], respectively), whereas rates of HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular hospitalizations were similar (1.00 [0.91-1.11] and 0.94 [0.87-1.02], respectively). Time-to-event analyses also showed a similar trend. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world clinical practice, RAASi-naïve patients with HFrEF initiating SAC/VAL were less likely to be hospitalized than those initiating ACEi/ARB, suggesting a potential for a reduced clinical and economic burden in these patients.

Identification and Mapping Real-World Data Sources for Heart Failure, Acute Coronary Syndrome, and Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Transparent and robust real-world evidence sources are increasingly important for global health, including cardiovascular (CV) diseases. We aimed to identify global real-world data (RWD) sources for heart failure (HF), acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of publications with RWD pertaining to HF, ACS, and AF (2010-2018), generating a list of unique data sources. Metadata were extracted based on the source type (e.g., electronic health records, genomics, and clinical data), study design, population size, clinical characteristics, follow-up duration, outcomes, and assessment of data availability for future studies and linkage. RESULTS: Overall, 11,889 publications were retrieved for HF, 10,729 for ACS, and 6,262 for AF. From these, 322 (HF), 287 (ACS), and 220 (AF) data sources were selected for detailed review. The majority of data sources had near complete data on demographic variables (HF: 94%, ACS: 99%, and AF: 100%) and considerable data on comorbidities (HF: 77%, ACS: 93%, and AF: 97%). The least reported data categories were drug codes (HF, ACS, and AF: 10%) and caregiver involvement (HF: 6%, ACS: 1%, and AF: 1%). Only a minority of data sources provided information on access to data for other researchers (11%) or whether data could be linked to other data sources to maximize clinical impact (20%). The list and metadata for the RWD sources are publicly available at www.escardio.org/bigdata. CONCLUSIONS: This review has created a comprehensive resource of CV data sources, providing new avenues to improve future real-world research and to achieve better patient outcomes.

Burden and Quality of Life Among Female and Male Patients with Heart Failure in Europe: A Real-World Cross-Sectional Study.

PURPOSE: To characterize symptoms, clinical burden, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among women and men with heart failure (HF) with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of ≤60% in Europe. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A real-world cross-sectional study was conducted in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and United Kingdom from June to November 2019. Patient record forms were completed by 257 cardiologists and 158 general practitioners for consecutive patients with HF. The same patients were invited to complete a questionnaire comprising patient-reported outcomes: the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ), five-level five-dimension EuroQol questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire. RESULTS: The mean age of 804 patients (men, n=517; women, n=287) was 68.6 years (men, 67.8 years; women, 70.2 years; p=0.0022). The mean LVEF was 44.7% (men, 43.6%; women, 46.8%; p<0.0001). Patients reported dyspnoea when active (overall, 55.7%; men, 56.0%; women, 55.3%), fatigue/weakness/faintness (34.5%; men, 32.9%; women, 37.2%), and oedema (20.3%; men, 18.7%; women, 23.1%) as the most troublesome HF symptoms. Overall, 54.1% of patients reported low mood/depression (men, 50.8%; women, 60.1%). The overall MLHFQ mean score was higher (ie, poorer HRQoL) among women vs men (37.9 vs 34.6; p=0.0481). MLHFQ was consistently higher (ie, poorer HRQoL) for women vs men across the physical (18.6 vs 16.6; p=0.0041) and emotional (9.4 vs 7.9; p=0.0021) scoring domains. Mean EQ-5D utility (0.69 vs 0.75; p=0.0046) and VAS scores (55.4 vs 61.3; p<0.0001) were lower among women compared with men. Overall, 23.4% of patients were hospitalized owing to HF in the previous year (men, 22.7%; women, 24.6%). Patients reported 43.2% activity impairment due to HF (men, 41.6%; women, 46.4%; p=0.01). CONCLUSION: HF causes a substantial burden on patients, with a greater burden among women vs men. This gender-related difference is consistent with other HF studies, warranting further research to understand the underlying reasons.

External validation of a claims-based model to predict left ventricular ejection fraction class in patients with heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Ejection fraction (EF) is an important prognostic factor in heart failure (HF), but administrative claims databases lack information on EF. We previously developed a model to predict EF class from Medicare claims. Here, we evaluated the performance of this model in an external validation sample of commercial insurance enrollees. METHODS: Truven MarketScan claims linked to electronic medical records (EMR) data (IBM Explorys) containing EF measurements were used to identify a cohort of US patients with HF between 01-01-2012 and 10-31-2019. By applying the previously developed model, patients were classified into HF with reduced EF (HFrEF) or preserved EF (HFpEF). EF values recorded in EMR data were used to define gold-standard HFpEF (LVEF ≥45%) and HFrEF (LVEF<45%). Model performance was reported in terms of overall accuracy, positive predicted values (PPV), and sensitivity for HFrEF and HFpEF. RESULTS: A total of 7,001 HF patients with an average age of 71 years were identified, 1,700 (24.3%) of whom had HFrEF. An overall accuracy of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.80-0.82) was seen in this external validation sample. For HFpEF, the model had sensitivity of 0.96 (95%CI, 0.95-0.97) and PPV of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.81-0.82); while for HFrEF, the sensitivity was 0.32 (95%CI, 0.30-0.34) and PPV was 0.73 (95%CI, 0.69-0.76). These results were consistent with what was previously published in US Medicare claims data. CONCLUSIONS: The successful validation of the Medicare claims-based model provides evidence that this model may be used to identify patient subgroups with specific EF class in commercial claims databases as well.

Caregivers of Patients with Heart Failure: Burden and the Determinants of Health-Related Quality of Life.

PURPOSE: To assess the burden among caregivers of patients with heart failure (HF) with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤60%. The burden by New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class was also characterized. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and UK from June to November 2019. Patient record forms were completed by 257 cardiologists and 158 general practitioners for consecutive HF patients. Caregivers who accompanied the patient to their consultation completed a caregiver self-completion survey voluntarily, which included the Family Caregiver Quality of Life Questionnaire (FAMQOL) and 5-level 5-dimension EuroQol questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L). RESULTS: We analyzed 361 caregivers of patients with HF (NYHA class I, n=41; II, n=212; III IV, n=108). Mean age of caregivers was 58.8 years (NYHA I/II/III-IV: 59.1/60.8/54.6 years; p=0.0029), with majority being females (73.1%). Caregivers spent on average 19.8 hours/week caring for a HF patient, which increased with increase in NYHA class (I/II/III-IV: 11.8/18.1/25.9 hours/week; p=0.0094). Caregivers (24.1%) reported providing emotional support/encouragement to patients as the most troublesome/inconvenient caregiving activity (no significant difference across NYHA class). Nearly one-third of caregivers experienced stress (NYHA I/II/III-IV: 17.1%/28.8%/40.7%; p=0.0111) and anxiety (26.8%/24.1%/39.8%; p=0.0127) due to caregiving burden. The overall FAMQOL mean score decreased significantly (poorer QoL) with increase in NYHA class (I/II/III-IV: 58.1/56.3/52.2; p=0.0069). A trend of decreasing scores with increasing NYHA class was observed across physical, emotional, and social domains (each p≤0.012). CONCLUSION: Caregivers of HF patients with LVEF ≤60% experienced a significant burden, which was higher among caregivers of patients with more severe and symptomatic disease.

Recurrent heart failure hospitalizations increase the risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure in Sweden: a real-world study.

AIMS: Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of hospitalization and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. We examined the impact of recurrent HF hospitalizations (HFHs) on cardiovascular (CV) mortality among patients with HF in Sweden. METHODS AND RESULTS: Adults with incident HF were identified from linked national health registers and electronic medical records from 01 January 2005 to 31 December 2013 for Uppsala and until 31 December 2014 for Västerbotten. CV mortality and all-cause mortality were evaluated. A time-dependent Cox regression model was used to estimate relative CV mortality rates for recurrent HFHs. Assessment was also done for ejection fraction-based HF phenotypes and for comorbid atrial fibrillation, diabetes, or chronic renal impairment. Overall, 3878 patients with HF having an index hospitalization were included, providing 9691.9 patient-years of follow-up. Patients were relatively old (median age: 80 years) and were more frequently male (55.5%). Compared with patients without recurrent HFHs, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR [95% confidence interval; CI]) for CV mortality and all-cause mortality were statistically significant for patients with one, two, three, and four or more recurrent HFHs. The risk of CV mortality and all-cause mortality increased approximately six-fold in patients with four or more recurrent HFHs vs. those without any HFHs (HR [95% CI]: 6.26 [5.24-7.48] and 5.59 [4.70-6.64], respectively). Similar patterns were observed across the HF phenotypes and patients with comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: There is a strong association between recurrent HFHs and CV and all-cause mortality, with the risk increasing progressively with each recurrent HFH.

Real-world effectiveness and safety of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: PARADIGM-HF demonstrated superiority of sacubitril/valsartan (sac/val) over enalapril in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, patients in clinical practice may differ in their characteristics and overall risk compared with patients in clinical trials, and additional outcomes can be observed in real world (RW). Hence, a systematic review was conducted to identify and describe RW data on sac/val. METHODS: RW studies evaluating the effects of sac/val in adult patients with HFrEF with a sample size ≥100 were identified via MEDLINE® and Embase® from 2015 to January 2020. Citations were screened, critically appraised and relevant data were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 68 unique studies were identified. Nearly half of the studies were conducted in Europe (n = 34), followed by the US (n = 15) and Asia (n = 11). Median follow-up period varied from 1 to 19 months. Mean age ranged between 48.7 and 79.0 years; patients were mostly male and in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II/III, and mean left ventricular ejection fraction varied between 23%and 38%. Of studies performing comparisons, most reported superior efficacy of sac/val in reducing the risk of HF hospitalisations, all-cause hospitalisations, and all-cause mortality as compared to standard-of-care. Many studies reported significant improvements in NYHA functional class and reduction in biomarker levels post sac/val. Hypotension and hyperkalaemia were the most frequently reported adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive overview of currently available RW evidence on sac/val complements the evidence from randomised controlled trials, substantiating its effectiveness in heterogeneous real-world HF populations.

Characterizing the role of, and physical and emotional burden on caregivers of patients with heart failure: Results from a cross-sectional survey in Japan.

The aim of this cross-sectional survey was to characterize the role of and burden on caregivers of heart failure (HF) patients in Japan, since such data are limited at present. Data from 126 caregivers whose average age was 63.5 years were analyzed. Helping to prepare meals/cooking was the most frequently reported activity (47% of caregivers); 24% found this the most burdensome. The most frequently reported physical consequence of caregiving was feeling physically tired (44%); emotionally worrying about the patient (62%) was the most frequent psychological consequence. Approximately half of the caregivers reported that caring for patients impacted their lifestyle. Although 40% of caregivers asked questions to physicians regarding diet or lifestyle modifications, 19% did not ask any. Caregivers play a crucial role in the management of HF patients in Japan but experience physical and emotional burden. Solutions are required to reduce the caregiver burden associated with HF.

Epidemiologic Characterization of Heart Failure with Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction Populations Identified Using Medicare Claims.

BACKGROUND: Administrative claims do not contain ejection fraction information for heart failure patients. We recently developed and validated a claims-based model to predict ejection fraction subtype. METHODS: Heart failure patients aged 65 years or above from US Medicare fee-for-service claims were identified using diagnoses recorded after a 6-month baseline period of continuous enrollment, which was used to identify predictors and to apply the claims-based model to distinguish heart failure with reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFrEF or HFpEF). Patients were followed for the composite outcome of time to first worsening heart failure event (heart failure hospitalization or outpatient intravenous diuretic treatment) or all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 3,134,414 heart failure patients with an average age of 79 years were identified, of which 200,950 (6.4%) were classified as HFrEF. Among those classified as HFrEF, men comprised a larger proportion (68% vs 41%) and the average age was lower (76 vs 79 years) compared with HFpEF. History of myocardial infarction was more common in HFrEF (32% vs 13%), while hypertension was more common in HFpEF (71% vs 77%). One-year cumulative incidence of the composite endpoint was 42.6% for HFrEF and 36.9% for HFpEF. One-year all-cause mortality incidence was similar between the groups (27.4% for HFrEF and 26.4% for HFpEF), however, cardiovascular mortality was higher for HFrEF (15.6% vs 11.3%), whereas noncardiovascular mortality was higher for HFpEF (11.8% vs 15.1%). CONCLUSION: We replicated well-documented differences in key patient characteristics and cause-specific outcomes between HFrEF and HFpEF in populations identified based on the application of a claims-based model.

Recurrent hospitalizations are associated with increased mortality across the ejection fraction range in heart failure.

AIMS: The proportion of patients hospitalized for heart failure (HF) with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is rising, but no approved treatment exists, in part owing to incomplete characterization of this particular HF phenotype. In order to better define the characteristics of HF phenotypes in Finland, a large cohort with 12 years' follow-up time was analysed. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients diagnosed between 2005 and 2017 at the Hospital District of Southwest Finland were stratified according to LVEF measure and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels. For this retrospective registry study, previously diagnosed HF patients were defined as follows: patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF; LVEF ≤ 40%; n = 4042), mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF; LVEF > 40-50% and NT-proBNP ≥ 125 pg/mL; n = 1468), and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF; LVEF > 50% and NT-proBNP ≥ 125 pg/mL; n = 3122) and followed up for 15 022, 4962, and 10 097 patient-years, respectively. Cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization and mortality, influence of pre-selected covariates on hospitalization and mortality, and the proportion of HFpEF and HFmrEF patients with a drop in LVEF to HFrEF phenotype were analysed. All data were extracted from the electronic patient register. HFrEF patients were rehospitalized slightly earlier than HFpEF/HFmrEF patients, but the second, third, and fourth rehospitalization rates did not differ between the subgroups. Female gender and better kidney function were associated with reduced rehospitalizations in HFmrEF and HFrEF, with a non-significant trend in HFpEF. Each additional hospitalization was associated with a two-fold increased risk of death and 2.2- to 2.3-fold increased risk of CV death. All-cause mortality was higher in patients with HFpEF. Although CV mortality was less frequent in HFpEF patients, it was associated with increased NT-proBNP concentrations at index in all patient groups. During the 10 years following the index date, 26% of HFmrEF patients and 10% of HFpEF patients progressed to an HFrEF phenotype. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that disease progression, in terms of increased frequency of hospitalizations, and the relationship between increased number of hospitalizations and mortality are similar by LVEF phenotypes. These data highlight the importance of effective treatments that can reduce hospitalizations and suggest a role for monitoring NT-proBNP levels in the management of HFpEF patients in particular.

Recurrent heart failure hospitalizations are associated with increased cardiovascular mortality in patients with heart failure in Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

AIMS: Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of hospitalization and is associated with high morbidity and mortality post-diagnosis. Here, we examined the impact of recurrent HF hospitalization (HFH) on cardiovascular (CV) and all-cause mortality among HF patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Adult HF patients identified in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink with a first (index) hospitalization due to HF recorded in the Hospital Episode Statistics data set from January 2010 to December 2014 were included. Patients were followed up until death or end of study (December 2017). CV mortality as primary and as any reported cause and all-cause mortality were evaluated. An extended Cox regression model was used for reporting adjusted relative CV mortality rates for time-dependent recurrent HFHs. Overall, 8603 HF patients with an index hospitalization were included, providing 15 964 patient-years of follow-up. Patients were relatively old (median age: 80 years) and were mostly male (54.6%), with main co-morbidities being hypertension and atrial fibrillation. Recurrent HFHs occurred one, two, three, and more than four times in 1561 (18.2%), 518 (6.02%), 206 (2.4%), and 153 (1.8%) patients, respectively. The median time to mortality was 215 (38-664) days for 50.8% of patients who died for any cause during the study period and 139 (27-531) days for 31.3% who died with CV reasons as primary cause. Compared with those of patients without recurrent HFHs, the adjusted hazard ratios (95% CI) for CV mortality as primary cause were 2.65 (2.35-2.99), 3.69 (3.06-4.43), 5.82 (4.48-7.58), and 5.95 (4.40-8.05) for those with one, two, three, and more than four recurrent HFHs. CONCLUSIONS: There is a strong association between recurrent HFH and CV mortality, with the risk increasing progressively with each recurrent HFH.

Burden of Heart Failure on Patient Daily Life and Patient-Physician Discordance in Disease Management　- Results From a Cross-Sectional Survey in Japan.

Background: We investigated the impact of heart failure (HF) on daily life and satisfaction with current HF medication from the patient perspective in a real-world study in Japan. Methods and Results: A cross-sectional survey of 154 HF patients treated by 58 cardiologists was conducted in Japan using patient self-completed questionnaires about their daily life and satisfaction with HF medication, as well as patient record forms completed by their physicians capturing corresponding data. The mean age of patients was 72.7 years. The proportion of patients within New York Heart Association Class I, II, III, and IV was 39%, 44%, 16%, and 1%, respectively. Symptoms reported by patients included dyspnea when active (46%), nocturia (43%), anxiety (18%), and depression (6%). There was a discordance between physician- and patient-reported symptoms, especially for nocturia and inability to sleep. The most frequent lifestyle recommendation from physicians was 'reduce salt/sodium intake', but only 51% of patients receiving this recommendation followed the advice. In all, 44% of patients reported dissatisfaction with their current medication; according to the patients, 27% reported no discussion with their physicians about their prescribed medication, while physicians reported the opposite. Conclusions: HF negatively impacts patient daily life. There is discordance between patients and physicians in symptom reporting, lifestyle modification advice and adherence, and reported medication decision making. Gaps in patient-physician communication exist.