Circulating biomarkers of distinct pathophysiological pathways in heart failure with preserved vs. reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether biomarkers reflecting pathophysiological pathways are different between heart failure with preserved (HFpEF) and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and whether the prognostic value of biomarkers is different in HFpEF vs. HFrEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 458 HFrEF (LVEF ≤40%) and 112 HFpEF (LVEF ≥50%) patients aged ≥60 years with NYHA class ≥II from TIME-CHF were included. Endpoints are 18-month overall and HF hospitalization-free survival. After correction for baseline characteristics that differed between the HF types, i.e. age, gender, body mass index, systolic blood pressure, cause of HF, and AF, HFpEF patients exhibited higher soluble interleukin 1 receptor-like 1 [ST2; 37.6 (28.5-54.7) vs. 35.7 (25.6-52.2), P = 0.02], high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP; 8.54 (3.39-25.86) vs. 6.66 (2.42-15.39), P = 0.01), and cystatin-C [1.94 (1.57-2.37) vs. 1.75 (1.39-2.12), P = 0.01]. In contrast, HFrEF patients exhibited higher NT-proBNP [2142 (1473-4294) vs. 4202 (2239-7411), P < 0.001], high sensitivity troponin T [hsTnT; 27.7 (16.8-48.0) vs. 32.4 (19.2-59.0), P = 0.03], and haemoglobin [124 (110-135) vs. 134 (122-145), P < 0.001]. In addition to these clinical characteristics, NT-proBNP, haemoglobin, cystatin-C, hsTnT, and ST2 improved the area under the curve from 0.86 (0.82-0.89) to 0.91 (0.87-0.94; P < 0.001) for discriminating HFpEF from HFrEF. There were no significant interactions between HFpEF and HFrEF when considering the prognostic value of the investigated biomarkers (P > 0.10 for both endpoints), except for cystatin-C which had less prognostic impact in HFpEF (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Biomarker levels suggest a different amount of activation of several pathophysiological pathways between HFpEF and HFrEF. No important differences in the prognostic value of biomarkers in HFpEF vs. HFrEF were found except for cystatin-C, and for NT-proBNP in the NT-proBNP-guided study arm only, both of which had less prognostic value in HFpEF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN43596477.

Differential prognostic impact of resting heart rate in older compared with younger patients with chronic heart failure--insights from TIME-CHF.

BACKGROUND: There is little information regarding the prognostic role of resting heart rate (HR) in older compared with younger patients with chronic heart failure (HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: In patients enrolled in the Trial of Intensified Medical Therapy in Elderly Patients With Congestive Heart Failure (TIME-CHF) with sinus rhythm, effects of baseline HR (≥70 vs <70 beats/min [bpm]) on 18-month outcomes were compared between older (≥75 years; n = 186) and younger (<75 years; n = 141) patients. Older patients with lower (61 ± 6 bpm) and higher (83 ± 9 bpm) HR had similar left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and survival and HF hospitalization-free survival. In contrast, younger patients with higher HR (81 ± 7 bpm) had higher NT-proBNP and NYHA functional class, lower LVEF, and a higher risk of death (hazard ratio 4.01 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17 -13.69]; P = .02) and death or HF hospitalization (hazard ratio 2.35 [95% CI 1.01-5.50]; P = .04) than those with lower HR (62 ± 5 bpm), with the association between higher HR and survival remaining significant after adjustment for NYHA functional class, LVEF, and NT-proBNP. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to HF patients aged <75 years, we found no association between HR and worse outcomes in HF patients aged ≥75 years.

Predictors of early readmission or death in elderly patients with heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary heart failure (HF) patients are elderly and have a high rate of early rehospitalization or death, resulting in a high burden for both the patients and the health care system. Prior studies were focused on younger and less well-characterized patients. We aimed to identify predictors of early hospital readmission and death in elderly patients with HF. METHODS: Patients with chronic HF taking part in the TIME-CHF study (n = 614, age 77 +/- 8 years, 41% female, left ventricular ejection fraction 35% +/- 13%) were evaluated with respect to predictors of hospital readmission or death 30 and 90 days after inclusion. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, echocardiographic, and social variables were obtained at baseline and included in a multivariable logistic regression analysis to identify predictors of early events. RESULTS: The rate of hospital readmission or death was high at 30 (11%) and 90 days (26%). The reason for hospitalization was HF in 33%, other cardiovascular in 32%, and noncardiovascular in 45% of the cases, respectively. Predictors of readmission or death at 30 days were angina, lower systolic blood pressure, anemia, more extensive edema, higher creatinine levels, and dry cough; and at 90 days were coronary artery disease, prior pacemaker implantation, high jugular venous pressure, pulmonary rales, prior abdominal surgery, older age, and depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Early hospital readmission or death was frequent among elderly HF patients. A very large proportion of readmissions were due to noncardiovascular causes. In addition to clinical signs of HF, comorbidities are important predictors of early events in elderly HF patients.

Pre-clinical diabetic cardiomyopathy: prevalence, screening, and outcome.

AIMS: Diabetic cardiomyopathy, characterized by left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and LV hypertrophy independent of myocardial ischaemia and hypertension, could contribute to the increased life-time risk of congestive heart failure seen in patients with diabetes. We assessed prospectively the prevalence, effectiveness of screening methods [brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and C-reactive protein in combination with clinical parameters], and outcome of pre-clinical diabetic cardiomyopathy. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 100 adults (mean age 57.4 +/- 10.2 years, 44% females) with diabetes and no previous evidence of structural heart disease. By echocardiography, diabetic cardiomyopathy was present in 48% of patients. Screening with combinations of clinical parameters (gender, systolic blood pressure, and body mass index), but not BNP, resulted in high negative predictive values for diabetic cardiomyopathy. During a mean follow-up of 48.5 +/- 9.0 months, in the groups with and without diabetic cardiomyopathy, 12.5 vs. 3.9% (P < 0.2) patients died or experienced cardiovascular events and 37.5 vs. 9.6% (P < 0.002) had a deterioration in NYHA functional class. Overall event-free survival was 54 vs. 87% (P = 0.001) in the groups with and without diabetic cardiomyopathy, respectively. Brain natriuretic peptide was an independent predictor of events [odds ratio 3.5 (1.1-10.9), P = 0.02]. CONCLUSION: Pre-clinical diabetic cardiomyopathy is common. Screening with combinations of simple clinical parameters, but not BNP, can be useful to identify those patients needing further evaluation. Patients with pre-clinical diabetic cardiomyopathy are at increased risk for functional deterioration and possibly cardiovascular events during follow-up. Brain natriuretic peptide was shown to be an independent predictor of future events.