Sacubitril/valsartan and frailty in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction

• Butt J.H.
• Dewan P.
• Jhund P.S.
• Anand I.S.
• Atar D.
• Ge J.
• Desai A.S.
• Echeverria L.E.
• Kober L.
• Lam C.S.P.
• Maggioni A.P.
• Martinez F.A.
• Packer M.
• Rouleau J.L.
• Sim D.
• Van Veldhuisen D.J.
• Vrtovec B.
• Zannad F.
• Zile M.R.
• Gong J.
• Lefkowitz M.P.
• Rizkala A.R.
• Solomon S.D.
• John J.V. McMurray

Abstract

Background. Frailty is an increasingly common problem, and frail patients are less likely to receive new pharmacologic therapies because the risk–benefit profile is perceived to be less favorable than in nonfrail patients.

Objectives. This study investigated the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan according to frailty status in 4796 patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction randomized in the PARAGON-HF (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ARB Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction) trial.

Methods. Frailty was measured by using the Rockwood cumulative deficit approach. The primary endpoint was total heart failure hospitalizations or cardiovascular death.

Results. A frailty index (FI) was calculable in 4,795 patients. In total, 45.2% had class 1 frailty (FI #0.210, not frail), 43.5% had class 2 frailty (FI 0.211–0.310, more frail), and 11.4% had class 3 frailty (FI $ 0.311, most frail). There was a graded relationship between FI class and the primary endpoint, with a significantly higher risk associated with greater frailty (class 1: reference; class 2 rate ratio: 2.19 [95% CI: 1.85–2.60]; class 3 rate ratio: 3.29 [95% CI: 2.65–4.09]).

The effect of sacubitril/valsartan vs valsartan on the primary endpoint from lowest to highest FI class (as a rate ratio) was: 0.98 [95% CI: 0.76–1.27], 0.92 [95% CI: 0.76–1.12], and 0.69 [95% CI: 0.51–0.95]), respectively (P_interaction = 0.23).

When FI was examined as a continuous variable, the interaction with treatment was significant for the primary outcome (P_interaction = 0.002) and total heart failure hospitalizations (P_interaction <0.001), with those most frail deriving greater benefit.

Conclusion. Frailty was common in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and associated with worse outcomes. Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan seemed to show a greater reduction in the primary endpoint with increasing frailty, although this was not significant when FI was examined as a categorical variable. (Prospective Comparison of ARNI With ARB Global Outcomes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction [PARAGON-HF]; NCT01920711.)

Keywords:clinical trial; frailty; heart failure; outcomes

References

1. Fried L.P., Tangen C.M., Walston J., et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001; 56: M146–56.

2. Fried L.P., Ferrucci L., Darer J., Williamson J.D., Anderson G. Untangling the concepts of disability, frailty, and comorbidity: implications for improved targeting and care. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2004; 59: 255–63.

3. Hoogendijk E.O., Afilalo J., Ensrud K.E., Kowal P., Onder G., Fried L.P. Frailty: implications for clinical practice and public health. Lancet. 2019; 394: 1365–75.

4. Clegg A., Young J., Iliffe S., Rikkert M.O., Rockwood K. Frailty in elderly people. Lancet. 2013; 381: 752–62.

5. Khan H., Kalogeropoulos A.P., Georgiopoulou V.V., et al. Frailty and risk for heart failure in older adults: the Health, Aging, and Body Composition Study. Am Heart J. 2013; 166: 887–94.

6. Denfeld Q.E., Winters-Stone K., Mudd J.O., Gelow J.M., Kurdi S., Lee C.S. The prevalence of frailty in heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2017; 236: 283–9.

7. Bielecka-Dabrowa A., Ebner N., dos Santos M.R., Ishida J., Hasenfuss G, von Haehling S. Cachexia, muscle wasting, and frailty in cardiovascular disease. Eur J Heart Fail. 2020; 22: 2314–26.

8. Vitale C., Jankowska E., Hill L., et al. Heart Failure Association/European Society of Cardiology position paper on frailty in patients with heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. 2019; 21: 1299–305.

9. Upadhya B., Pisani B., Kitzman D.W. Evolution of a geriatric syndrome: pathophysiology and treatment of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2017; 65: 2431–40.

10. Dewan P., Jackson A., Jhund P.S., et al. The prevalence and importance of frailty in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction-an analysis of PARADIGM-HF and ATMOSPHERE. Eur J Heart Fail. 2020; 22: 2123–33.

11. Sanders N.A., Supiano M.A., Lewis E.F., et al. The frailty syndrome and outcomes in the TOPCAT trial. Eur J Heart Fail. 2018; 20: 1570–7.

12. Zhang Y., Yuan M., Gong M., Tse G., Li G., Liu T. Frailty and clinical outcomes in heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19:1003–8.e1.

13. Bottle A., Kim D., Hayhoe B., et al. Frailty and comorbidity predict first hospitalisation after heart failure diagnosis in primary care: population-based observational study in England. Age Ageing. 2019; 48: 347–54.

14. Vidán M.T., Blaya-Novakova V., Sanchez E., Ortiz J., Serra-Rexach J.A., Bueno H. Prevalence and prognostic impact of frailty and its components in non-dependent elderly patients with heart failure. Eur J Heart Fail. 2016; 18: 869–75.

15. Greene S.J., Butler J., Albert N.M., et al. Medical therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: the CHAMP-HF Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 72: 351–66.

16. Brunner-La Rocca H.-P., Linssen G.C., Smeele F.J., et al. Contemporary drug treatment of chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: the CHECK-HF Registry. JACC Heart Fail. 2019; 7: 13–21.

17. Veenis J.F., Brunner-La Rocca H.P., Linssen G.C.M., et al. Age differences in contemporary treatment of patients with chronic heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2019; 26: 1399–407.

18. Curtin D., Dukelow T., James K., O’Donnell D., O’Mahony D., Gallagher P. Deprescribing in multimorbid older people with polypharmacy: agreement between STOPPFrail explicit criteria and gold standard deprescribing using 100 standardized clinical cases. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2019; 75: 427–32.

19. Kubala M., Guédon-Moreau L., Anselme F., et al. Utility of frailty assessment for elderly patients undergoing cardiac resynchronization therapy. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2017; 3: 1523–33.

20. Pulignano G., Del Sindaco D., Di Lenarda A., et al. Usefulness of frailty profile for targeting older heart failure patients in disease management programs: a cost-effectiveness, pilot study. J Cardiovasc Med. 2010; 11: 739–47.

21. Solomon S.D., McMurray J.J.V., Anand I.S., et al. Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med. 2019; 381: 1609–20.

22. Mitnitski A.B., Mogilner A.J., Rockwood K. Accumulation of deficits as a proxy measure of aging. Sci World J. 2001; 1: 323–36.

23. Rockwood K., Mitnitski A. Frailty in relation to the accumulation of deficits. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007; 62: 722–7.

24. Searle S.D., Mitnitski A., Gahbauer E.A., Gill T.M., Rockwood K. A standard procedure for creating a frailty index. BMC Geriatr. 2008; 8: 24.

All articles in our journal are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0 license)