 Epidemiología
 Transición tras hospitalización
 IC preservada
 Comorbilidades
 Metanálisis y vida real
 Redefinición de daño miocárdico
PATIENTS’ JOURNEY OF CARE FOLLOWING INCIDENT HF:
diagnostic test, treatments and care pathways in 93,000 patients
Conrad N, et al. Lancet. 2018; 391: 572-580
Conrad N, et al. Lancet. 2018; 391: 572-580
PATIENTS’ JOURNEY OF CARE FOLLOWING INCIDENT HF:
diagnostic test, treatments and care pathways in 93,000 patients
Conrad N, et al. Lancet. 2018; 391: 572-580
PATIENTS’ JOURNEY OF CARE FOLLOWING INCIDENT HF:
diagnostic test, treatments and care pathways in 93,000 patients
CLCZ696B2401 study
A multicenter, randomized, open label, parallel group study comparing
Two modalities of tReatment with LCZ696 in heArt failure patieNtS with
reduced ejectIon-fracTion hospItalized for an acute decOmpensation
eveNt (ADHF) - the TRANSITION study
Data on-file
Session Title Date & Time
Poster Session 1:
Chronic heart failure –
Pathophysiology and
mechanisms
Poster # P886
Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in hospitalized patients with
heart failure with reduced ejection fraction after
hemodynamic stabilization:
primary results of the TRANSITION study
Sat 25 Aug
11:00-16:00
Poster Session 7:
Chronic heart failure –
Treatment
Poster # P6531
Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in hospitalized patients with
HFrEF after hemodynamic stabilization: baseline
characteristics of the TRANSITION study compared with
TITRATION and PARADIGM-HF
Tue 28 Aug
14:00-18:00
TRANSITION Investigators in Munich:
10 weeks results presentation and discussion
Sat 25 Aug
06:45-08:15am
Life-time risk after a first hospitalization ADHF
Median time from hospital discharge
Readmissionrate
Initial
discharge Death
Transition phase
Plateau
phase
Palliation and priorities
Picture from: Desai AS and Stevenson LW. Circulation. 2012; 126(4): 501-506
Key eligibility criteria for TRANSITION,
PARADIGM-HF and TITRATION studies
Variable TRANSITION PARADIGM-HF TITRATION
Age ≥18 years
NYHA class II-IV
LVEF ≤40% ≤40%a ≤35%
Plasma BNP or
NT-proBNP
levels
No pre-defined
entry levels
(BNP ≥150 pg/mL or NT-proBNP
≥600 pg/mL) or
(BNP ≥100 pg/mL or NT-proBNP
≥400 pg/mL and hospitalization for
HF within last 12 months)
No pre-defined
entry levels
SBP ≥110 mmHg ≥100 mmHg ≥100 mmHg
eGFR ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m2
Clinical status Inpatients Outpatients
Inpatients and
outpatients
Previous
ACEI/ARB dose
Variable doses of
ACEI/ARB or
treatment naïveb
Stable dose of an ACEI/ARB
equivalent to enalapril 10 mg/day for
at least 4 weeks before the
screening
Variable doses of
ACEI/ARB or
treatment naïveb,c
ACEI, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; ARB,
angiotensin receptor blocker; BNP, B-type natriuretic
peptide; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; HF,
heart failure; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; NYHA,
New York Heart Association; NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro-
B-type natriuretic peptide; SBP, systolic blood pressure
a LVEF eligibility criteria was changed to ≤35% in a protocol
amendment; b ACEI/ARB naïve defined as patients without
any previous ACEI/ARB for ≥4 weeks before hospital
admission; c For outpatients, ACEI/ARB dose must have
been stable for at least 2 weeks
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P6531
TRANSITION:
Flexibility similar to the clinical practice
HF treatment optimization in hospitalized patients with HFrEF
stabilized after an ADHF event*
Optimization of
guidelines
recommended HF
therapies* at the
discretion of the
investigator
Recruiting hospitalized
HFrEF patients:
• On any dose of
ACEI/ARB
• Naive to ACEI/ARB
• De novo = newly
diagnosed
Up-titration and down-
titration of
sacubitril/valsartan
according to patient
tolerability
*Beta-blockers, MRAs, and replacement of ACEi/ARB by sacubitril/valsartan ACEi, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor; ADHF, acute decompensated
heart failure; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; b.i.d, twice daily; HF, heart
failure; OMT, optimal medical treatment for HF; sac/val, sacubitril/valsartan
Pascual-Figal, et al. ESC Heart Failure (Epub ahead of print)
TRANSITION study design
ACEi, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor; ADHF, acute decompensated heart
failure; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; b.i.d, twice daily; HF, heart failure; OMT,
optimal medical treatment for HF; sac/val, sacubitril/valsartan
Treatment epoch
10 weeks’ duration starting at randomization
1-3 days’
screening epoch
16 weeks’
follow-up epoch
Open-label
Sac/val 50 mg  100 mg b.i.d.  200 mg b.i.d.
or
Sac/val  100 mg  200 mg b.i.d.
as per label and at investigator discretion
Open-label
Sac/val 50 mg  100 mg b.i.d.  200 mg b.i.d.
or
Sac/val  100 mg  200 mg b.i.d.
as per label and at investigator discretion
OMT continued throughout the study (excluding ACEi/ARB)
Any OMT as
per treating
physician OMT continued throughout the study (excluding ACEi/ARB)
Patient stabilized
3 strata
OMT but
ACEi/ARB
naïve pts
PRE-discharge initiation
POST-discharge initiation
36 h ACEi
washout
Hospital
admission
for ADHF
ACEi + OMT
ARB + OMT
RandomizationtoPRE-orPOST-discharge
36 h ACEi
washout
Open-labelsac/val
attolerateddose
Discharge
Down-titration or temporary discontinuation of sac/val is allowed in all groups at any time
max. 2 weeks
Any OMT as per
treating
physician
Pascual-Figal, et al. ESC Heart Failure (Epub ahead of print)
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier:
NCT02661217. ESC Congress,
Munich, 2018. P6531
Characteristics
Pre-discharge
N= 497
Post-
discharge
N= 496
Total
N= 993
Prior heart failure history – n (%)
No 148 (29.8) 138 (27.8) 286 (28.8)
Yes 349 (70.2) 358 (72.2) 707 (71.2)
First onset (de novo) HF n (%) 148 (29.8) 138 (27.8) 286 (28.8)
Prior hospitalisation for HF n (%) 237 (47.7) 248 (50.0) 485 (48.8)
Date of HF diagnosis – n (%)
>0 to 3 months 23 (6.6) 21 (5.9) 44 (6.2)
>3 to 6 months 16 (4.6) 19 (5.3) 35 (5.0)
>6 to 12 months 35 (10.0) 32 (8.9) 67 (9.5)
>1 to 2 years 37 (10.6) 40 (11.2) 77 (10.9)
>2 to 5 years 94 (26.9) 92 (25.7) 186 (26.3)
>5 years 144 (41.3) 152 (42.5) 296 (41.9)
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
Data on-file
TRANSITION patients’ strata
Stratification based on use of RAAS medications
prior to hospitalization
ACEI/ARB -naïve patients
defined as either:
• without any previous treatment
with ACEI or ARBs, or
• without ACEI/ARB therapy for
at least 4 weeks before hospital
admission due to ADHF
as reported in IVRS
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
Primary and secondary endpoints
45
62,5
86,4
4,5
50,4
68
[VALOR]
3,5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Proportionofpatients(%)
Primary endpoint
On target dose 200 mg bid
of sac/val at Week 10
Achieved and maintained
100 mg and/or 200 mg bid
of sac/val or at least 2
weeks leading to Week 10
Achieved and maintained
any dose of sac/val for at
least 2 weeks leading to
Week 10
Permanently
discontinued sac/val
due to AE
RRR 0.89 (0.78, 1.02)
P= 0.092
RRR 0.92 (0.84, 1.01)
P= 0.071
RRR 0.97 (0.93, 1.02)
P= 0.262
RRR 1.29 (0.69, 2.39)
P= 0.424
Pre-discharge
initiation (N= 493)
Post-discharge
initiation (N= 490)
AE, adverse events; bid, twice daily; sac/val, sacubitril/valsartan;
RRR, relative risk ratio
* Safetyl analysis set
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
AEs and treatment interruptions
AE, adverse event; SAE, serious adverse event * Fischer’s Exact Test, Full analysis set
Pre-discharge
N= 497
n (%)
Post-discharge
N= 496
n (%)
P value*
Patients with 1 AE, n (%) 338 (68.0) 323 (65.1) 0.335
Patients with 1 SAE, n (%) 94 (18.9) 88 (17.7) 0.682
Deaths, n (%) 13 (2.6) 10 (2.0) 0.674
Temporary treatment interruption, n (%)
Due to AEs 70 (14.1) 55 (11.1) 0.180
Due to SAEs 21 (4.2) 8 (3.6) 0.744
Due to non-SAEs 54 (10.9) 42 (8.5) 0.237
Permanent treatment discontinuation, n (%)
Due to AEs 22 (4.4) 20 (4.0) 0.875
Due to SAEs 15 (3.0) 13 (2.6) 0.848
Due to non-SAEs 8 (1.6) 7 (1.4) 1.000
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
Most common AEs† during 10-week treatment
epoch regardless of study drug relationship
AE, adverse event * Fischer’s Exact Test, Full analysis set
Pre-discharge
N= 497
n (%)
Post-discharge
N= 496
n (%)
P value*
Hyperkalemia 55 (11.1) 56 (11.3) 0.920
Hypotension 61 (12.3) 45 (9.1) 0.123
Cardiac failure 34 (6.8) 42 (8.5) 0.343
Dizziness 28 (5.6) 21 (4.2) 0.380
Peripheral edema 17 (3.4) 24 (4.8) 0.270
Renal impairment 25 (5.0) 15 (3.0) 0.146
Diarrhea 12 (2.4) 23 (4.6) 0.060
Urinary tract infection 20 (4.0) 15 (3.0) 0.492
† ≥4% of patients in any group
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
Most common Serious Adverse Events*
COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease;
SAE, serious adverse event
** Fischer’s Exact Test, Full analysis set
Pre-discharge
N= 497
n (%)
Post-discharge
N= 496
n (%)
P value**
No. of patients with at least one SAE 94 (18.9) 88 (17.7) 0.682
Hyperkalemia 3 (0.6) 2 (0.4) 1.000
Hypotension 4 (0.8) 2 (0.4) 0.687
Atrial fibrillation 3 (0.6) 4 (0.8) 0.726
Cardiac failure (acute/chronic) 35 (7.0) 38 (7.7) 0.717
Ventricular tachycardia 3 (0.6) 0 (0.0) 0.249
Non-cardiac chest pain 0 (0.0) 3 (0.6) 0.124
Pneumonia 4 (0.8) 3 (0.6) 1.000
Respiratory tract infection 0 (0.0) 3 (0.6) 0.124
Acute kidney injury 6 (1.2) 7 (1.4) 0.789
Renal failure 3 (0.6) 1 (0.2) 0.624
Pulmonary edema 3 (0.6) 2 (0.4) 1.000
COPD 0 (0.0) 4 (0.8) 0.062
* ≥0.5% of patients in any group
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
Predictors for successful sacubitril/valsartan
dose up-titration to 200 mg bid
AE, adverse event; CI, confidence interval; eGFR,
estimated glomerular filtration rate; HF, heart
failure; sac/val, sacubitril/valsartan; SBP, systolic
blood pressure
For the results shown above, only significant
(p <0.05) predictors and treatment group
(significant or not) are kept in the model
Age (<65 years vs. ≥65 years)
eGFR at baseline (≥60 mL/min·1.73 m2
vs. <60 mL/min·1.73 m2)
SBP at baseline ≥120 mmHg vs.
≥100-120 mmHg
Prior HF history (No vs. Yes)
Medical history of hypertension
(Yes vs. No)
Atrial fibrillation at baseline (No
vs. Yes)
Starting dose of sac/val (100 mg
vs. 50 mg)
Treatment (post-discharge vs.
pre-discharge)
1.42
1.52
1.48
1.59
1.85
1.77
2.41
1.20
(1.05, 1.93)
(1.13, 2.03)
(1.11, 1.97)
(1.15, 2.19)
(1.31, 2.63)
(1.33, 2.35)
(1.57, 3.68)
(0.91, 1.58)
0.023
0.005
0.008
0.005
0.001
<0.001
<0.001
0.196
Predictor Odds ratio 95% CI P value
1 2 3 4
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
TRANSITION
Sac-Val (both initiation
and titration) is feasible
and safe in the
Transition period of a
patient hospitalized due
to HF
Pascual-Figal DA. Eur J Heart Fail. 2017; 19(8): 1.011-1.013
Greene SJ, Mentz RJ, Felker GM. JAMA Cardiol. 2018; 3: 252
Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Características basales de la población
Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
% day lost due to unplanned CV hospitalisations
and all-cause death
Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
% days lost due to unplanned HF hospitalisations
Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02992288. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02992288. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02992288. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
No efecto comparado
con placebo
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02992288. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Microvascular dysfunction in heart failure with preserved
ejection fraction (HFpEF) evidence from PROMIS-HFpEF
Carolyn SP, et al. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Carolyn SP, et al. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
InterAtrial Shunt Device (IASD®)
Feldman T, Shah SJ, et al. Circ Heart Fail. 2016 Jul; 9(7) NCT02600234
Feldman T. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Feldman T. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Shunt Patency
Feldman T. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Change in NYHA Functional Class:
InterAtrial Shunt Device vs. Sham Control
Feldman T, MD. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Feldman T. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
Decreased AF burden with dynamic optimization of CRT
pacing using the AdaptivCRT algorithm in Heart Failure
patients: Analysis of real-world patient data
Figure: Highlight ESC Munich. Aug 29, 2018
Singh J, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 482. P2491
Singh J, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 482. P2491
Singh J, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 482. P2491
Impact of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists on sudden cardiac
death in patients with heart failure and left ventricular systolic
dysfunction: a meta-analysis of three randomized controlled trials.
X. Rosselló (Palma de Mallorca, ES)
• Se presenta un metanálisis de 3 estudios sobre el uso de antagonistas de los
receptores de mineralocorticoide (MAR) en pacientes con ICFEr en la
incidencia de muerte súbita (MS) con 11.032 pacientes vs. placebo
• Estudios RALES, EPHESUS y EMPHASIS-HF
• Conclusiones:
– Los MAR reducen un 23% el riesgo de MS en pacientes con ICFEr
(objetivo 1)
– El uso de MAR debería tenerse en cuenta como terapia de primera línea,
así como las otras con clara evidencia (BB IECAS)
Rosselló X. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 17
• Conclusiones:
– La terapia guiada de concentración sérica de digoxina se asoció con un
aumento de la mortalidad en pacientes con ICFEr con óptimo tratamiento
médico
– Solo en niveles séricos <0,9 ng/mL no se objetivó un aumento de
mortalidad
– Se refuerza la opinión de expertos que digoxina debería ser usada
cuidadosamente en pacientes seleccionados con niveles controlados
The impact of serum concentration guided digoxin therapy on
mortality: a long-term follow-up, propensity-matched cohort
study. B. Muk (Budapest, HU)
Muk B, et al. European Heart Journal, Volume 39,
Issue suppl_1, 1 August 2018, ehy564.205,
https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy564.205"
Characteristics of heart failure patients treated
with Sacubitril-Valsartan in Europe. Results from ARIADNE
Zeymer U, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 174
Zeymer U, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 174
Beware of making dose comparisons for efficacy
in post-hoc analyses of achieved dose in up-titrating studies:
lessons from the EMPHASIS trial
Ferreira JP, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 174(39): 910
Tolerability and safety of sacubitril/valsartan
in high-risk subgroups
Neiva JN, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 174-175(39): 911
Treatment with insulin is associated with worse outcome
in patients with chronic heart failure and diabetes
Cosmi D, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 680
Cosmi D, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 680
Cosmi D, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 680
– Independiente de la adherencia del médico a las guías clínicas, la adherencia del paciente jugó
un rol clave en pacientes con IC, en cuanto a la mortalidad y las rehospitalizaciones por IC
Physician and patient adherence to guidelines is associated with better prognosis
in patients with heart failure: insights from the Optimize Heart Failure Care
Program. Y. M. Lopatin (Volgograd, RU)
Lopatin YM, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 19
The role of statins in patients with heart failure with
preserved, mid-range, and reduced ejection fraction.
A meta-analysis and systematic review
Science and Fiction in heart failure
Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction (2018). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 25 [Epub ahead of print]
 IC asociada a envejecimiento y comorbilidad, precisa esfuerzo
organizativo
 Sacubitrilo-valsartán presenta buena tolerancia y es factible en el
periodo vulnerable tras una hospitalización por IC
 Datos favorables de telemedicina posthospitalización, 24 h/7días y sin
depresión.
 TRC adaptada puede prevenir FA
 ICFE preservada: disfunción microvascular y shunt interatrial
 Fármacos con evidencia deben ser usados y optimizados en la vida
real de forma adecuada
Mensajes finales

Novedades en el manejo de la Insuficiencia Cardiaca Crónica

  • 2.
     Epidemiología  Transicióntras hospitalización  IC preservada  Comorbilidades  Metanálisis y vida real  Redefinición de daño miocárdico
  • 3.
    PATIENTS’ JOURNEY OFCARE FOLLOWING INCIDENT HF: diagnostic test, treatments and care pathways in 93,000 patients Conrad N, et al. Lancet. 2018; 391: 572-580
  • 4.
    Conrad N, etal. Lancet. 2018; 391: 572-580 PATIENTS’ JOURNEY OF CARE FOLLOWING INCIDENT HF: diagnostic test, treatments and care pathways in 93,000 patients
  • 5.
    Conrad N, etal. Lancet. 2018; 391: 572-580 PATIENTS’ JOURNEY OF CARE FOLLOWING INCIDENT HF: diagnostic test, treatments and care pathways in 93,000 patients
  • 6.
    CLCZ696B2401 study A multicenter,randomized, open label, parallel group study comparing Two modalities of tReatment with LCZ696 in heArt failure patieNtS with reduced ejectIon-fracTion hospItalized for an acute decOmpensation eveNt (ADHF) - the TRANSITION study
  • 7.
  • 8.
    Session Title Date& Time Poster Session 1: Chronic heart failure – Pathophysiology and mechanisms Poster # P886 Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in hospitalized patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction after hemodynamic stabilization: primary results of the TRANSITION study Sat 25 Aug 11:00-16:00 Poster Session 7: Chronic heart failure – Treatment Poster # P6531 Initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in hospitalized patients with HFrEF after hemodynamic stabilization: baseline characteristics of the TRANSITION study compared with TITRATION and PARADIGM-HF Tue 28 Aug 14:00-18:00 TRANSITION Investigators in Munich: 10 weeks results presentation and discussion Sat 25 Aug 06:45-08:15am
  • 9.
    Life-time risk aftera first hospitalization ADHF Median time from hospital discharge Readmissionrate Initial discharge Death Transition phase Plateau phase Palliation and priorities Picture from: Desai AS and Stevenson LW. Circulation. 2012; 126(4): 501-506
  • 10.
    Key eligibility criteriafor TRANSITION, PARADIGM-HF and TITRATION studies Variable TRANSITION PARADIGM-HF TITRATION Age ≥18 years NYHA class II-IV LVEF ≤40% ≤40%a ≤35% Plasma BNP or NT-proBNP levels No pre-defined entry levels (BNP ≥150 pg/mL or NT-proBNP ≥600 pg/mL) or (BNP ≥100 pg/mL or NT-proBNP ≥400 pg/mL and hospitalization for HF within last 12 months) No pre-defined entry levels SBP ≥110 mmHg ≥100 mmHg ≥100 mmHg eGFR ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m2 Clinical status Inpatients Outpatients Inpatients and outpatients Previous ACEI/ARB dose Variable doses of ACEI/ARB or treatment naïveb Stable dose of an ACEI/ARB equivalent to enalapril 10 mg/day for at least 4 weeks before the screening Variable doses of ACEI/ARB or treatment naïveb,c ACEI, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; BNP, B-type natriuretic peptide; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; HF, heart failure; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; NYHA, New York Heart Association; NT-proBNP, N-terminal pro- B-type natriuretic peptide; SBP, systolic blood pressure a LVEF eligibility criteria was changed to ≤35% in a protocol amendment; b ACEI/ARB naïve defined as patients without any previous ACEI/ARB for ≥4 weeks before hospital admission; c For outpatients, ACEI/ARB dose must have been stable for at least 2 weeks Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P6531
  • 11.
    TRANSITION: Flexibility similar tothe clinical practice HF treatment optimization in hospitalized patients with HFrEF stabilized after an ADHF event* Optimization of guidelines recommended HF therapies* at the discretion of the investigator Recruiting hospitalized HFrEF patients: • On any dose of ACEI/ARB • Naive to ACEI/ARB • De novo = newly diagnosed Up-titration and down- titration of sacubitril/valsartan according to patient tolerability *Beta-blockers, MRAs, and replacement of ACEi/ARB by sacubitril/valsartan ACEi, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor; ADHF, acute decompensated heart failure; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; b.i.d, twice daily; HF, heart failure; OMT, optimal medical treatment for HF; sac/val, sacubitril/valsartan Pascual-Figal, et al. ESC Heart Failure (Epub ahead of print)
  • 12.
    TRANSITION study design ACEi,angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor; ADHF, acute decompensated heart failure; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; b.i.d, twice daily; HF, heart failure; OMT, optimal medical treatment for HF; sac/val, sacubitril/valsartan Treatment epoch 10 weeks’ duration starting at randomization 1-3 days’ screening epoch 16 weeks’ follow-up epoch Open-label Sac/val 50 mg  100 mg b.i.d.  200 mg b.i.d. or Sac/val  100 mg  200 mg b.i.d. as per label and at investigator discretion Open-label Sac/val 50 mg  100 mg b.i.d.  200 mg b.i.d. or Sac/val  100 mg  200 mg b.i.d. as per label and at investigator discretion OMT continued throughout the study (excluding ACEi/ARB) Any OMT as per treating physician OMT continued throughout the study (excluding ACEi/ARB) Patient stabilized 3 strata OMT but ACEi/ARB naïve pts PRE-discharge initiation POST-discharge initiation 36 h ACEi washout Hospital admission for ADHF ACEi + OMT ARB + OMT RandomizationtoPRE-orPOST-discharge 36 h ACEi washout Open-labelsac/val attolerateddose Discharge Down-titration or temporary discontinuation of sac/val is allowed in all groups at any time max. 2 weeks Any OMT as per treating physician Pascual-Figal, et al. ESC Heart Failure (Epub ahead of print)
  • 13.
  • 14.
    Characteristics Pre-discharge N= 497 Post- discharge N= 496 Total N=993 Prior heart failure history – n (%) No 148 (29.8) 138 (27.8) 286 (28.8) Yes 349 (70.2) 358 (72.2) 707 (71.2) First onset (de novo) HF n (%) 148 (29.8) 138 (27.8) 286 (28.8) Prior hospitalisation for HF n (%) 237 (47.7) 248 (50.0) 485 (48.8) Date of HF diagnosis – n (%) >0 to 3 months 23 (6.6) 21 (5.9) 44 (6.2) >3 to 6 months 16 (4.6) 19 (5.3) 35 (5.0) >6 to 12 months 35 (10.0) 32 (8.9) 67 (9.5) >1 to 2 years 37 (10.6) 40 (11.2) 77 (10.9) >2 to 5 years 94 (26.9) 92 (25.7) 186 (26.3) >5 years 144 (41.3) 152 (42.5) 296 (41.9) Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886 Data on-file
  • 15.
    TRANSITION patients’ strata Stratificationbased on use of RAAS medications prior to hospitalization ACEI/ARB -naïve patients defined as either: • without any previous treatment with ACEI or ARBs, or • without ACEI/ARB therapy for at least 4 weeks before hospital admission due to ADHF as reported in IVRS Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
  • 16.
    Primary and secondaryendpoints 45 62,5 86,4 4,5 50,4 68 [VALOR] 3,5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Proportionofpatients(%) Primary endpoint On target dose 200 mg bid of sac/val at Week 10 Achieved and maintained 100 mg and/or 200 mg bid of sac/val or at least 2 weeks leading to Week 10 Achieved and maintained any dose of sac/val for at least 2 weeks leading to Week 10 Permanently discontinued sac/val due to AE RRR 0.89 (0.78, 1.02) P= 0.092 RRR 0.92 (0.84, 1.01) P= 0.071 RRR 0.97 (0.93, 1.02) P= 0.262 RRR 1.29 (0.69, 2.39) P= 0.424 Pre-discharge initiation (N= 493) Post-discharge initiation (N= 490) AE, adverse events; bid, twice daily; sac/val, sacubitril/valsartan; RRR, relative risk ratio * Safetyl analysis set Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
  • 17.
    AEs and treatmentinterruptions AE, adverse event; SAE, serious adverse event * Fischer’s Exact Test, Full analysis set Pre-discharge N= 497 n (%) Post-discharge N= 496 n (%) P value* Patients with 1 AE, n (%) 338 (68.0) 323 (65.1) 0.335 Patients with 1 SAE, n (%) 94 (18.9) 88 (17.7) 0.682 Deaths, n (%) 13 (2.6) 10 (2.0) 0.674 Temporary treatment interruption, n (%) Due to AEs 70 (14.1) 55 (11.1) 0.180 Due to SAEs 21 (4.2) 8 (3.6) 0.744 Due to non-SAEs 54 (10.9) 42 (8.5) 0.237 Permanent treatment discontinuation, n (%) Due to AEs 22 (4.4) 20 (4.0) 0.875 Due to SAEs 15 (3.0) 13 (2.6) 0.848 Due to non-SAEs 8 (1.6) 7 (1.4) 1.000 Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
  • 18.
    Most common AEs†during 10-week treatment epoch regardless of study drug relationship AE, adverse event * Fischer’s Exact Test, Full analysis set Pre-discharge N= 497 n (%) Post-discharge N= 496 n (%) P value* Hyperkalemia 55 (11.1) 56 (11.3) 0.920 Hypotension 61 (12.3) 45 (9.1) 0.123 Cardiac failure 34 (6.8) 42 (8.5) 0.343 Dizziness 28 (5.6) 21 (4.2) 0.380 Peripheral edema 17 (3.4) 24 (4.8) 0.270 Renal impairment 25 (5.0) 15 (3.0) 0.146 Diarrhea 12 (2.4) 23 (4.6) 0.060 Urinary tract infection 20 (4.0) 15 (3.0) 0.492 † ≥4% of patients in any group Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
  • 19.
    Most common SeriousAdverse Events* COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; SAE, serious adverse event ** Fischer’s Exact Test, Full analysis set Pre-discharge N= 497 n (%) Post-discharge N= 496 n (%) P value** No. of patients with at least one SAE 94 (18.9) 88 (17.7) 0.682 Hyperkalemia 3 (0.6) 2 (0.4) 1.000 Hypotension 4 (0.8) 2 (0.4) 0.687 Atrial fibrillation 3 (0.6) 4 (0.8) 0.726 Cardiac failure (acute/chronic) 35 (7.0) 38 (7.7) 0.717 Ventricular tachycardia 3 (0.6) 0 (0.0) 0.249 Non-cardiac chest pain 0 (0.0) 3 (0.6) 0.124 Pneumonia 4 (0.8) 3 (0.6) 1.000 Respiratory tract infection 0 (0.0) 3 (0.6) 0.124 Acute kidney injury 6 (1.2) 7 (1.4) 0.789 Renal failure 3 (0.6) 1 (0.2) 0.624 Pulmonary edema 3 (0.6) 2 (0.4) 1.000 COPD 0 (0.0) 4 (0.8) 0.062 * ≥0.5% of patients in any group Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
  • 20.
    Predictors for successfulsacubitril/valsartan dose up-titration to 200 mg bid AE, adverse event; CI, confidence interval; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; HF, heart failure; sac/val, sacubitril/valsartan; SBP, systolic blood pressure For the results shown above, only significant (p <0.05) predictors and treatment group (significant or not) are kept in the model Age (<65 years vs. ≥65 years) eGFR at baseline (≥60 mL/min·1.73 m2 vs. <60 mL/min·1.73 m2) SBP at baseline ≥120 mmHg vs. ≥100-120 mmHg Prior HF history (No vs. Yes) Medical history of hypertension (Yes vs. No) Atrial fibrillation at baseline (No vs. Yes) Starting dose of sac/val (100 mg vs. 50 mg) Treatment (post-discharge vs. pre-discharge) 1.42 1.52 1.48 1.59 1.85 1.77 2.41 1.20 (1.05, 1.93) (1.13, 2.03) (1.11, 1.97) (1.15, 2.19) (1.31, 2.63) (1.33, 2.35) (1.57, 3.68) (0.91, 1.58) 0.023 0.005 0.008 0.005 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.196 Predictor Odds ratio 95% CI P value 1 2 3 4 Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02661217. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018. P886
  • 21.
    TRANSITION Sac-Val (both initiation andtitration) is feasible and safe in the Transition period of a patient hospitalized due to HF Pascual-Figal DA. Eur J Heart Fail. 2017; 19(8): 1.011-1.013 Greene SJ, Mentz RJ, Felker GM. JAMA Cardiol. 2018; 3: 252
  • 22.
    Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.govidentifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
  • 23.
    Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.govidentifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
  • 24.
    Características basales dela población Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
  • 25.
    % day lostdue to unplanned CV hospitalisations and all-cause death Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
  • 26.
    Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.govidentifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
  • 27.
    % days lostdue to unplanned HF hospitalisations Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
  • 28.
    Koehler F. Clinicaltrials.govidentifier: NCT01878630. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
  • 29.
  • 30.
  • 31.
  • 32.
    No efecto comparado conplacebo Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02992288. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
  • 33.
    Microvascular dysfunction inheart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) evidence from PROMIS-HFpEF Carolyn SP, et al. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
  • 34.
    Carolyn SP, etal. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
  • 35.
    InterAtrial Shunt Device(IASD®) Feldman T, Shah SJ, et al. Circ Heart Fail. 2016 Jul; 9(7) NCT02600234
  • 36.
    Feldman T. ESCCongress, Munich, 2018
  • 37.
    Feldman T. ESCCongress, Munich, 2018
  • 38.
    Shunt Patency Feldman T.ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
  • 39.
    Change in NYHAFunctional Class: InterAtrial Shunt Device vs. Sham Control Feldman T, MD. ESC Congress, Munich, 2018
  • 40.
    Feldman T. ESCCongress, Munich, 2018
  • 41.
    Decreased AF burdenwith dynamic optimization of CRT pacing using the AdaptivCRT algorithm in Heart Failure patients: Analysis of real-world patient data Figure: Highlight ESC Munich. Aug 29, 2018 Singh J, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 482. P2491
  • 42.
    Singh J, etal. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 482. P2491
  • 43.
    Singh J, etal. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 482. P2491
  • 44.
    Impact of mineralocorticoidreceptor antagonists on sudden cardiac death in patients with heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction: a meta-analysis of three randomized controlled trials. X. Rosselló (Palma de Mallorca, ES) • Se presenta un metanálisis de 3 estudios sobre el uso de antagonistas de los receptores de mineralocorticoide (MAR) en pacientes con ICFEr en la incidencia de muerte súbita (MS) con 11.032 pacientes vs. placebo • Estudios RALES, EPHESUS y EMPHASIS-HF • Conclusiones: – Los MAR reducen un 23% el riesgo de MS en pacientes con ICFEr (objetivo 1) – El uso de MAR debería tenerse en cuenta como terapia de primera línea, así como las otras con clara evidencia (BB IECAS) Rosselló X. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 17
  • 45.
    • Conclusiones: – Laterapia guiada de concentración sérica de digoxina se asoció con un aumento de la mortalidad en pacientes con ICFEr con óptimo tratamiento médico – Solo en niveles séricos <0,9 ng/mL no se objetivó un aumento de mortalidad – Se refuerza la opinión de expertos que digoxina debería ser usada cuidadosamente en pacientes seleccionados con niveles controlados The impact of serum concentration guided digoxin therapy on mortality: a long-term follow-up, propensity-matched cohort study. B. Muk (Budapest, HU) Muk B, et al. European Heart Journal, Volume 39, Issue suppl_1, 1 August 2018, ehy564.205, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy564.205"
  • 46.
    Characteristics of heartfailure patients treated with Sacubitril-Valsartan in Europe. Results from ARIADNE Zeymer U, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 174
  • 47.
    Zeymer U, etal. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 174
  • 48.
    Beware of makingdose comparisons for efficacy in post-hoc analyses of achieved dose in up-titrating studies: lessons from the EMPHASIS trial Ferreira JP, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 174(39): 910
  • 49.
    Tolerability and safetyof sacubitril/valsartan in high-risk subgroups Neiva JN, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 174-175(39): 911
  • 50.
    Treatment with insulinis associated with worse outcome in patients with chronic heart failure and diabetes Cosmi D, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 680
  • 51.
    Cosmi D, etal. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 680
  • 52.
    Cosmi D, etal. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 680
  • 53.
    – Independiente dela adherencia del médico a las guías clínicas, la adherencia del paciente jugó un rol clave en pacientes con IC, en cuanto a la mortalidad y las rehospitalizaciones por IC Physician and patient adherence to guidelines is associated with better prognosis in patients with heart failure: insights from the Optimize Heart Failure Care Program. Y. M. Lopatin (Volgograd, RU) Lopatin YM, et al. Eur Heart J. 2018; 39: 19
  • 54.
    The role ofstatins in patients with heart failure with preserved, mid-range, and reduced ejection fraction. A meta-analysis and systematic review Science and Fiction in heart failure
  • 55.
    Fourth Universal Definitionof Myocardial Infarction (2018). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 25 [Epub ahead of print]
  • 56.
     IC asociadaa envejecimiento y comorbilidad, precisa esfuerzo organizativo  Sacubitrilo-valsartán presenta buena tolerancia y es factible en el periodo vulnerable tras una hospitalización por IC  Datos favorables de telemedicina posthospitalización, 24 h/7días y sin depresión.  TRC adaptada puede prevenir FA  ICFE preservada: disfunción microvascular y shunt interatrial  Fármacos con evidencia deben ser usados y optimizados en la vida real de forma adecuada Mensajes finales