Efficacy and safety of ivabradine in patients with chronic systolic heart failure and diabetes: an analysis from the SHIFT trial

Ivabradine in patients with heart failure: a systematic literature review

Background: Heart failure is a chronic disease linked with significant morbidity and mortality, and uncontrolled resting heart rate is a risk factor for adverse outcomes. This systematic literature review aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of ivabradine in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Methods: We searched electronic databases from their inception to July 2021 to include studies that reported on efficacy, safety, or PROs of ivabradine in patients with HFrEF. Results: Of 1947 records screened, 51 RCTs and 6 observational studies were identified. Ivabradine on top of background therapy demonstrated a significant reduction in composite outcomes including hospitalization for HF or cardiovascular death. In addition, observational studies suggested that ivabradine was associated with a significant reduction in mortality. Across all studies, ivabradine use on top of background therapy was associated with greater reductions in heart rate, improved EF, and improved health-related quality of life (QoL) and comparable risk of total adverse events compared to those treated with background therapy alone. Conclusions: Ivabradine on top of background therapy is beneficial for heart rate, hospitalization risk for HF, mortality, EF, and patients' QoL. Moreover, these benefits were achieved with no significant increase in the overall risk of total adverse events.

Therapeutic Use and Molecular Aspects of Ivabradine in Cardiac Remodeling: A Review

Cardiac remodeling can cause ventricular dysfunction and progress to heart failure, a cardiovascular disease that claims many lives globally. Ivabradine, a funny channel (I_f) inhibitor, is used in patients with chronic heart failure as an adjunct to other heart failure medications. This review aims to gather updated information regarding the therapeutic use and mechanism of action of ivabradine in heart failure. The drug reduces elevated resting heart rate, which is linked to increased morbidity and mortality in patients with heart failure. Its use is associated with improved cardiac function, structure, and quality of life in the patients. Ivabradine exerts several pleiotropic effects, including an antiremodeling property, which are independent of its principal heart-rate-reducing effects. Its suppressive effects on cardiac remodeling have been demonstrated in animal models of cardiac remodeling and heart failure. It reduces myocardial fibrosis, apoptosis, inflammation, and oxidative stress as well as increases autophagy in the animals. It also modulates myocardial calcium homeostasis, neurohumoral systems, and energy metabolism. However, its role in improving heart failure remains unclear. Therefore, elucidating its molecular mechanisms is imperative and would aid in the design of future studies.

Heart Failure: An Underappreciated Complication of Diabetes. A Consensus Report of the American Diabetes Association

Heart failure (HF) has been recognized as a common complication of diabetes, with a prevalence of up to 22% in individuals with diabetes and increasing incidence rates. Data also suggest that HF may develop in individuals with diabetes even in the absence of hypertension, coronary heart disease, or valvular heart disease and, as such, represents a major cardiovascular complication in this vulnerable population; HF may also be the first presentation of cardiovascular disease in many individuals with diabetes. Given that during the past decade, the prevalence of diabetes (particularly type 2 diabetes) has risen by 30% globally (with prevalence expected to increase further), the burden of HF on the health care system will continue to rise. The scope of this American Diabetes Association consensus report with designated representation from the American College of Cardiology is to provide clear guidance to practitioners on the best approaches for screening and diagnosing HF in individuals with diabetes or prediabetes, with the goal to ensure access to optimal, evidence-based management for all and to mitigate the risks of serious complications, leveraging prior policy statements by the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association.

Clinical comparative study assessing the effect of ivabradine on neopterin and NT-Pro BNP against standard treatment in chronic heart failure patients

Purpose

Heart rate reduction (HR) is a cornerstone in heart failure therapy as it improves patient outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate short-term effect of ivabradine on NT-Pro BNP and neopterin in heart failure patients and assess the association between HR and these biomarkers.

Methods

Sixty patients on standard heart failure therapy were randomly allocated into ivabradine group (n = 30) and non-ivabradine group (n = 30). Ivabradine 5 mg twice daily was given for 3 months. Lipid profile and kidney functions were performed and blood samples for NT-Pro BNP and neopterin were analysed at baseline and after 3 months of intervention in both groups.

Results

There was a significant improvement in NYHA class in ivabradine group (p < 0.001). Ejection fraction was improved in ivabradine and non-ivabradine groups after intervention (p < 0.001), with a greater improvement in ivabradine group (p = 0.026). Heart rate was reduced in ivabradine group (p < 0.001) and non-ivabradine group (p < 0.001) yet greater reduction was seen in ivabradine group (p < 0.001). Serum creatinine and blood urea nitrogen were reduced in ivabradine group (Scr: p = 0.001, BUN: p = 0.001). NT-Pro BNP and neopterin levels significantly decreased in ivabradine group (NT-Pro BNP: p < 0.001, neopterin p < 0.001). Significant positive correlation was found between HR and biomarker levels after intervention (NT-Pro BNP: r = 0.475, p < 0.001, neopterin: r = 0.384, p = 0.002).

Conclusion

Ivabradine therapy reduced levels of both biomarkers which correlated well with HR. Biomarker levels might provide a tool for assessing ivabradine effectiveness in HF.

Trial registration

Date: June 26, 2020. Identifier: NCT04448899. Link: Ivabradine in Patients with Congestive Heart Failure—Full Text View—ClinicalTrials.gov.

Diabetic cardiomyopathy: Clinical phenotype and practice

Diabetic cardiomyopathy (DCM) is a pathophysiological condition of cardiac structure and function changes in diabetic patients without coronary artery disease, hypertension, and other types of heart diseases. DCM is not uncommon in people with diabetes, which increases the risk of heart failure. However, the treatment is scarce, and the prognosis is poor. Since 1972, one clinical study after another on DCM has been conducted. However, the complex phenotype of DCM still has not been fully revealed. This dilemma hinders the pace of understanding the essence of DCM and makes it difficult to carry out penetrating clinical or basic research. This review summarizes the literature on DCM over the last 40 years and discusses the overall perspective of DCM, phase of progression, potential clinical indicators, diagnostic and screening criteria, and related randomized controlled trials to understand DCM better.

Comparison of Efficacy of Ivabradine With Traditional Therapy in Patients With Left Ventricular Dysfunction

Background: Heart failure patients usually present with disease exacerbation that overburdens the hospitals and also increases the risk of mortality with increased heart rate being the main issue. Consideration is being given to drugs for sole heart rate control in addition to conventional therapy.

Objective: To compare the outcomes of ivabradine to traditional treatment in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

Methodology: This randomized controlled trial was conducted in the Department of Cardiology, Khyber Teaching Hospital, Peshawar from November 1, 2020, to May 31, 2021. Patients aged 30-65 years of age and of either gender with heart failure were enrolled in the study. Patients were screened for New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and were enrolled into one of the two groups. In group 1, patients were started on traditional treatment, while group 2 patients were given ivabradine as an add-on therapy. Follow-up was made at the end of the second month for evaluation of the outcomes.

Results: Each group had 119 patients, with a mean age of 58.05±4.98 years. Group 1, consisted of 61.3% of the patients in NYHA 3, while 38.65% were in NYHA 4. In group 2, NYHA 3 and NYHA 4 patients were 59.6% and 40.3%, respectively. Upon follow-up, there were greater improvements in group 2 as compared to group 1 based on NYHA classifications, with NYHA 2 [47.05% (group 2) vs. 13.44% (group 1)], NYHA 3 [42.85% (group 2) vs. 61.34% (group 1)] and NYHA 4 [10.08% (group 2) vs. 25.21% (group 1)], p < 0.05.

Conclusions: Obtaining a more optimal heart rate with ivabradine in patients with congestive heart failure is reflected in an improvement in NYHA classification.

Intersection Between Diabetes and Heart Failure: Is SGLT2i the "One Stone for Two Birds" Approach?

Purpose of Review

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a major comorbidity of heart failure (HF). Comparing the similarities and differences in disease characteristics and treatment between the HF patients with and without DM, this review was to investigate whether and how the novel class of sodium-glucose transport protein 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) would benefit both populations.

Recent Findings

Despite the obviously different clinical profiles, patients of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) should be treated the same with guideline directed medical therapy, irrespective of DM status. Upon the mounting evidence that supported its use in diabetic patients at high risk of HF, recent large clinical trials demonstrated that SGLT2i could further reduce HF hospitalization or cardiovascular mortality and improve quality of life in diabetic and non-diabetic HFrEF patients who were optimally managed.

Summary

SGLT2i expands the foundation of HFrEF therapy. Whether it is equally effective in HF with preserved ejection fraction awaits more evidence.

Ischemic and bleeding risk by type 2 diabetes clusters in patients with acute coronary syndrome

The risk of ischemic events carried by different clusters of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) in the setting of secondary prevention is not definite and the association between DM and bleeding complications is controversial. We explored these issues in the START-ANTIPLATELET, a multicenter Italian registry including acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. Study outcome was 1-year incidence of the net composite endpoint including major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) or any bleeding and its individual components across different DM strata (no DM, DM with or without insulin). Out of 951 patients, 20.0% had diabetes not on insulin and 2.5% had diabetes on insulin. The rate of the net composite endpoint was highest in patients receiving insulin (39.4 per 100 person-years vs 11.7 in diabetic patients not on insulin vs 14.0 in those without DM; p = 0.007). In DM, the higher risk of MACE was regardless of insulin use (p = 0.36). Conversely, the increase in bleeding complications was limited to patients on insulin (Hazard Ratio 2.31, 95% CI 0.93-5.71 vs no DM; p = 0.0105 across DM strata). On top of aspirin, the rates of the net composite endpoint were similar with ticagrelor/prasugrel or clopidogrel irrespective of DM status (p for interaction 0.63). In conclusion, in ACS patients, type 2 DM enhances the risk of MACE regardless of the DM cluster, whereas the propensity to bleeding related to DM seems confined to insulin-treated patients.

Self-management on heart failure: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Heart failure (HF) is a severe public health problem all over the World. Self-management is an effective method to progress self-care ability. However, the role of self-management in heart failure has not been thoroughly elucidated.

METHODS

The research articles related to heart failure were searched by the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane databases, and China National Knowledge Database on articles published through March 2020. The average 95% of confidence intervals (CIs) were used to calculate using random-effects or fixed-effects. Review Manager (version 5.2) was adopted for meta-analysis, sensitivity analysis, and bias analysis.

RESULTS

Eight (8) eligible studies with 1707 patients with HF were included in this analysis. In the Meta-analysis showed significant differences for Self-management (SM) groups in Dutch Heart Failure Knowledge Scale (DHFK) (MD = 1.36, 95%CI [-0.03, 2.75], P = 0.04; I² = 83%), in Self-Care of Heart Failure Index (SCHFI) (MD = 5.51, 95%CI [0.62, 10.40], P = 0.03; I² = 70%), and in Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease Scale (SEMCDI) (I² = 47%, Z = 5.43, P of over effect < 0.0001) than control groups. One bias is detected as attrition bias, and another one is reporting bias. Sensitivity analysis satisfied the stability of the results.

CONCLUSION

Self-management was associated with significant outcomes in patients with HF through knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP).

Cellular mechanisms and recommended drug-based therapeutic options in diabetic cardiomyopathy

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with a specific cardiac phenotype characterized by structural and functional alterations. This so-called diabetic cardiomyopathy (DM CM) is clinically relevant as patients with DM show high incidence of heart failure. Mechanistically, several parameters interact on the cardiomyocyte level leading to increased inflammation, apoptosis, reactive oxygen species and altered calcium signaling. This in turn provokes functional myocardial changes that might inter alia play into the worsened clinical outcome in DM patients. Therefore, efficient therapeutic options are urgently needed. This review focuses on mechanistic effects of currently recommended antidiabetic treatment and heart failure therapy for DM CM.

Isolated downregulation of HCN2 in ventricles of rats with streptozotocin-induced diabetic cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

In spite of disrupted repolarization of diabetic heart, some studies report less tendency of diabetic heart to develop ventricular arrhythmias suggesting effective compensatory mechanism. We hypothesized that myocardial alterations in HCN2 and HCN4 channels occur under hyperglycaemia.

METHODS

Diabetes was induced in rats using a single injection of streptozotocin (STZ; 55 mg/kg body weight, i.p.). Basal ECG was measured. Expression of mRNA for HCN channels, potassium channels and microRNA 1 and 133a were measured in ventricular tissues. Protein expression of HCN2 channel isoform was assessed in five different regions of the heart by western blotting. Differentiated H9c2 cell line was used to examine HCN channels expression under hyperglycaemia in vitro.

RESULTS

Six weeks after STZ administration, heart rate was reduced, QRS complex duration, QT interval and T-wave were prolonged in diabetic rats compared to controls. mRNA and protein expressions of HCN2 decreased exclusively in the ventricles of diabetic rats. HCN2 expression levels in atria of STZ rats and H9c2 cells treated with excess of glucose were not changed. MicroRNA levels were stable in STZ rat hearts. We found significantly decreased mRNA levels of several potassium channels participating in repolarization, namely Kcnd2 (Ito1), Kcnh2 (IKr), Kcnq1 (IKs) and Kcnj11 (IKATP).

CONCLUSIONS

This result together with downregulated HCN2 channels suggest that HCN channels might be an integral part of ventricular electric remodelling and might play a role in cardiac repolarization projected in altered arrhythmogenic profile of diabetic heart.

Effects of liraglutide on diastolic function parameters in patients with type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease: a randomized crossover study

Background

Diastolic dysfunction is highly prevalent in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and is associated with overweight, glucose dysregulation and coronary artery disease (CAD). The GLP-1 receptor agonist, liraglutide, has shown to induce weight loss and improve metabolic factors, thus modulating factors associated with diastolic dysfunction. We have previously reported the effects of liraglutide on systolic function, and in this current study we explore the effects of liraglutide on diastolic function parameters in patients with stable CAD, preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and newly diagnosed T2DM.

Methods

Thirty subjects were randomized to liraglutide or placebo intervention for 12 + 12-weeks in this double-blind cross-over study. 2D-echocardiography using tissue velocity imaging was used for assessment of diastolic function parameters. Early diastolic filling velocity (E), late atrial filling velocity (A), E-wave deceleration time (EDT) and E/A ratio was assessed from the pulse wave (PW)-Doppler velocity recording of the mitral inflow. Peak early diastolic annular velocities (e′) was measured from color tissue doppler images.

Results

Liraglutide, when compared to placebo, induced a significant reduction in average e′ and lateral e′ velocities (– 0.57 cm/s [– 1.05 to − 0.08] and –0.74 cm/s [–1.32 to –0.15], respectively). Adjusted for the concomitant increase in HR (+ 6.16 bpm [0.79 to 11.54], the changes were not significant. No significant changes in other diastolic function parameters were observed.

Conclusions

Liraglutide therapy did not improve any diastolic function parameters in subjects with T2DM, CAD, and preserved LVEF. Instead, a deterioration in e’ was observed, which was associated to an increase in heart rate induced by liraglutide therapy.

Trial registration Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (unique identifier: NCT01595789) (first submitted May 8, 2012)

Heart Failure in Diabetes Mellitus: An Updated Review

Diabetes mellitus (DM) and heart failure (HF) are comorbid conditions associated with significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Despite the availability of novel and effective therapeutic options and intensive glycaemic control strategies, mortality and hospitalisation rates continue to remain high and the incidence of HF persists. In this review, we described the impact of currently available glucose-lowering therapies in DM with a focus on HF clinical outcomes. Non-conventional modes of management and alternative pathophysiological mechanisms with the potential for therapeutic targeting are also discussed.

Consensus document: management of heart failure in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a known predisposing factor for heart failure (HF). The growing burden of these two conditions and their impact on health of the individual and on society in general needs urgent attention from the health care professionals. Availability of multiple treatment choices for managing T2DM and HF may make therapeutic decisions more complex for clinicians. Recent cardiovascular outcome trials of antidiabetic drugs have added very robust evidence to effectively manage subjects with this dual condition. This consensus statement provides the prevalence trends and the impact of this dual burden on patients. In addition, it concisely narrates the types of HF, the different treatment algorithms, and recommendations for physicians to comprehensively manage such patients.

Therapeutic approaches to diabetic cardiomyopathy: Targeting the antioxidant pathway

The global epidemic of cardiovascular disease continues unabated and remains the leading cause of death both in the US and worldwide. We hereby summarize the available therapies for diabetes and cardiovascular disease in diabetics. Clearly, the current approaches to diabetic heart disease often target the manifestations and certain mediators but not the specific pathways leading to myocardial injury, remodeling and dysfunction. Better understanding of the molecular events determining the evolution of diabetic cardiomyopathy will provide insight into the development of specific and targeted therapies. Recent studies largely increased our understanding of the role of enhanced inflammatory response, ROS production, as well as the contribution of Cyp-P450-epoxygenase-derived epoxyeicosatrienoic acid (EET), Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor Gamma Coactivator-1α (PGC-1α), Heme Oxygenase (HO)-1 and 20-HETE in pathophysiology and therapy of cardiovascular disease. PGC-1α increases production of the HO-1 which has a major role in protecting the heart against oxidative stress, microcirculation and mitochondrial dysfunction. This review describes the potential drugs and their downstream targets, PGC-1α and HO-1, as major loci for developing therapeutic approaches beside diet and lifestyle modification for the treatment and prevention of heart disease associated with obesity and diabetes.

Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Approximately half of people with heart failure have chronic kidney disease (CKD). Pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD have the potential to reduce death (any cause) or hospitalisations for decompensated heart failure. However, these interventions are of uncertain benefit and may increase the risk of harm, such as hypotension and electrolyte abnormalities, in those with CKD.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to look at the benefits and harms of pharmacological interventions for HF (i.e., antihypertensive agents, inotropes, and agents that may improve the heart performance indirectly) in people with HF and CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies through 12 September 2019 in consultation with an Information Specialist and using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of any pharmacological intervention for acute or chronic heart failure, among people of any age with chronic kidney disease of at least three months duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened the records to identify eligible studies and extracted data on the following dichotomous outcomes: death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure, worsening kidney function, hyperkalaemia, and hypotension. We used random effects meta-analysis to estimate treatment effects, which we expressed as a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane tool. We applied the GRADE methodology to rate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred and twelve studies met our selection criteria: 15 were studies of adults with CKD; 16 studies were conducted in the general population but provided subgroup data for people with CKD; and 81 studies included individuals with CKD, however, data for this subgroup were not provided. The risk of bias in all 112 studies was frequently high or unclear. Of the 31 studies (23,762 participants) with data on CKD patients, follow-up ranged from three months to five years, and study size ranged from 16 to 2916 participants. In total, 26 studies (19,612 participants) reported disaggregated and extractable data on at least one outcome of interest for our review and were included in our meta-analyses. In acute heart failure, the effects of adenosine A1-receptor antagonists, dopamine, nesiritide, or serelaxin on death, hospitalisations, worsening heart failure or kidney function, hyperkalaemia, hypotension or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. In chronic heart failure, the effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (4 studies, 5003 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.02; I² = 78%; low certainty evidence), aldosterone antagonists (2 studies, 34 participants: RR 0.61 95% CI 0.06 to 6.59; very low certainty evidence), and vasopressin receptor antagonists (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1840 participants; low certainty evidence) on death (any cause) were uncertain. Treatment with beta-blockers may reduce the risk of death (any cause) (4 studies, 3136 participants: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.79; I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Treatment with ACEi or ARB (2 studies, 1368 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.90; I² = 97%; very low certainty evidence) had uncertain effects on hospitalisation for heart failure, as treatment estimates were consistent with either benefit or harm. Treatment with beta-blockers may decrease hospitalisation for heart failure (3 studies, 2287 participants: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.05; I² = 87%; low certainty evidence). Aldosterone antagonists may increase the risk of hyperkalaemia compared to placebo or no treatment (3 studies, 826 participants: RR 2.91, 95% CI 2.03 to 4.17; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence). Renin inhibitors had uncertain risks of hyperkalaemia (2 studies, 142 participants: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.49; I² = 0%; very low certainty). We were unable to estimate whether treatment with sinus node inhibitors affects the risk of hyperkalaemia, as there were few studies and meta-analysis was not possible. Hyperkalaemia was not reported for the CKD subgroup in studies investigating other therapies. The effects of ACEi or ARB, or aldosterone antagonists on worsening heart failure or kidney function, hypotension, or quality of life were uncertain due to sparse data or were not reported. Effects of anti-arrhythmic agents, digoxin, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, renin inhibitors, sinus node inhibitors, vasodilators, and vasopressin receptor antagonists were very uncertain due to the paucity of studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of pharmacological interventions for heart failure in people with CKD are uncertain and there is insufficient evidence to inform clinical practice. Study data for treatment outcomes in patients with heart failure and CKD are sparse despite the potential impact of kidney impairment on the benefits and harms of treatment. Future research aimed at analysing existing data in general population HF studies to explore the effect in subgroups of patients with CKD, considering stage of disease, may yield valuable insights for the management of people with HF and CKD.

Optimization of Heart Failure Treatment by Heart Rate Reduction

Heart failure (HF) treatment should be optimized in addition to guideline-directed and recommended drugs to achieve an appropriate heart rate (i.e. 50−60 bpm) by ivabradine in patients with a heart rate >70 bpm in sinus rhythm and with an ejection fraction ≤35%. Heart rate reduction was to reduce cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization dependent on baseline resting heart rate. In particular in patients at a heart rate >75 bpm, a reduction in cardiovascular death, all-cause death, HF death, HF hospitalization and all-cause hospitalization has been observed. The optimal heart rate achieved appears to be between 50−60 bpm, if well tolerated as in these patients the lowest event rate is observed on treatment. Heart rate reduction is, therefore, a treatable risk factor in chronic HF. Observational studies support the concept that it is a risk indicator in other cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular conditions. Whether heart rate reduction is also modifying risk in other conditions than chronic HF should be explored in prospective clinical trials.

European Society of Cardiology/Heart Failure Association position paper on the role and safety of new glucose-lowering drugs in patients with heart failure

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is common in patients with heart failure (HF) and associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Significant advances have recently occurred in the treatment of T2DM, with evidence of several new glucose-lowering medications showing either neutral or beneficial cardiovascular effects. However, some of these agents have safety characteristics with strong practical implications in HF [i.e. dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA), and sodium-glucose co-transporter type 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors]. Regarding safety of DPP-4 inhibitors, saxagliptin is not recommended in HF because of a greater risk of HF hospitalisation. There is no compelling evidence of excess HF risk with the other DPP-4 inhibitors. GLP-1 RAs have an overall neutral effect on HF outcomes. However, a signal of harm suggested in two small trials of liraglutide in patients with reduced ejection fraction indicates that their role remains to be defined in established HF. SGLT-2 inhibitors (empagliflozin, canagliflozin and dapagliflozin) have shown a consistent reduction in the risk of HF hospitalisation regardless of baseline cardiovascular risk or history of HF. Accordingly, SGLT-2 inhibitors could be recommended to prevent HF hospitalisation in patients with T2DM and established cardiovascular disease or with multiple risk factors. The recently completed trial with dapagliflozin has shown a significant reduction in cardiovascular mortality and HF events in patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction, with or without T2DM. Several ongoing trials will assess whether the results observed with dapagliflozin could be extended to other SGLT-2 inhibitors in the treatment of HF, with either preserved or reduced ejection fraction, regardless of the presence of T2DM. This position paper aims to summarise relevant clinical trial evidence concerning the role and safety of new glucose-lowering therapies in patients with HF.

Mechanisms of Protective Effects of SGLT2 Inhibitors in Cardiovascular Disease and Renal Dysfunction

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is one of the most common forms of the disease worldwide. Hyperglycemia and insulin resistance play key roles in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Renal glucose reabsorption is an essential feature in glycaemic control. Kidneys filter 160 g of glucose daily in healthy subjects under euglycaemic conditions. The expanding epidemic of diabetes leads to a prevalence of diabetes-related cardiovascular disorders, in particular, heart failure and renal dysfunction. Cellular glucose uptake is a fundamental process for homeostasis, growth, and metabolism. In humans, three families of glucose transporters have been identified, including the glucose facilitators GLUTs, the sodium-glucose cotransporter SGLTs, and the recently identified SWEETs. Structures of the major isoforms of all three families were studied. Sodium-glucose cotransporter (SGLT2) provides most of the capacity for renal glucose reabsorption in the early proximal tubule. A number of cardiovascular outcome trials in patients with type 2 diabetes have been studied with SGLT2 inhibitors reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The current review article summarises these aspects and discusses possible mechanisms with SGLT2 inhibitors in protecting heart failure and renal dysfunction in diabetic patients. Through glucosuria, SGLT2 inhibitors reduce body weight and body fat, and shift substrate utilisation from carbohydrates to lipids and, possibly, ketone bodies. These pleiotropic effects of SGLT2 inhibitors are likely to have contributed to the results of the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial in which the SGLT2 inhibitor, empagliflozin, slowed down the progression of chronic kidney disease and reduced major adverse cardiovascular events in high-risk individuals with type 2 diabetes. This review discusses the role of SGLT2 in the physiology and pathophysiology of renal glucose reabsorption and outlines the unexpected logic of inhibiting SGLT2 in the diabetic kidney.

Diabetic cardiomyopathy: Pathophysiology, theories and evidence to date

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) has increased worldwide and doubled over the last two decades. It features among the top 10 causes of mortality and morbidity in the world. Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of complications in diabetes and within this, heart failure has been shown to be the leading cause of emergency admissions in the United Kingdom. There are many hypotheses and well-evidenced mechanisms by which diabetic cardiomyopathy as an entity develops. This review aims to give an overview of these mechanisms, with particular emphasis on metabolic inflexibility. T2D is associated with inefficient substrate utilisation, an inability to increase glucose metabolism and dependence on fatty acid oxidation within the diabetic heart resulting in mitochondrial uncoupling, glucotoxicity, lipotoxicity and initially subclinical cardiac dysfunction and finally in overt heart failure. The review also gives a concise update on developments within clinical imaging, specifically cardiac magnetic resonance studies to characterise and phenotype early cardiac dysfunction in T2D. A better understanding of the pathophysiology involved provides a platform for targeted therapy in diabetes to prevent the development of early heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

The Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF) trial: baseline characteristics

BACKGROUND

The aims of this study were to: (i) report the baseline characteristics of patients enrolled in the Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF) trial, (ii) compare DAPA-HF patients to participants in contemporary heart failure (HF) registries and in other recent HF trials, and (iii) compare individuals with diabetes, pre-diabetes and a normal glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in DAPA-HF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Adults with HF in New York Heart Association functional class ≥ II, a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40%, an elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide concentration and receiving standard treatment were eligible for DAPA-HF, which is comparing dapagliflozin 10 mg once daily to matching placebo. In patients without a history of diabetes, previously undiagnosed diabetes was defined as a confirmed HbA1c ≥ 6.5%. Among patients without known or undiagnosed diabetes, pre-diabetes was defined as a HbA1c ≥ 5.7% The remainder of patients, with a HbA1c < 5.7%, were defined as normoglycaemic. Of the 4744 patients (mean age 66 years; 23% women) randomized, 42% had known diabetes and 3% undiagnosed diabetes. Of the remainder, 67% had pre-diabetes and 33% normal HbA1c. Overall, DAPA-HF patients were generally similar to those in recent registries and in relevant trials and had high levels of background therapy: 94% angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker/angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor, 96% beta-blocker, and 71% mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist; 26% had a defibrillator. Patients with diabetes had worse HF status, more co-morbidity, and greater renal impairment but received similar HF therapy. Patients with diabetes received non-insulin hypoglycaemic therapy alone in 49%, insulin alone in 11%, both in 14%, and none in 26%.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients randomized in DAPA-HF were similar to those in other contemporary HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) registries and trials. These patients were receiving recommended HFrEF therapy and those with diabetes were also treated with conventional glucose-lowering therapy. Consequently, DAPA-HF will test the incremental efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in HFrEF patients with and without diabetes.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03036124.

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Heart Failure: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association and the Heart Failure Society of America: This statement does not represent an update of the 2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA heart failure guideline update

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a risk factor for incident heart failure and increases the risk of morbidity and mortality in patients with established disease. Secular trends in the prevalence of diabetes mellitus and heart failure forecast a growing burden of disease and underscore the need for effective therapeutic strategies. Recent clinical trials have demonstrated the shared pathophysiology between diabetes mellitus and heart failure, the synergistic effect of managing both conditions, and the potential for diabetes mellitus therapies to modulate the risk of heart failure outcomes. This scientific statement on diabetes mellitus and heart failure summarizes the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and impact of diabetes mellitus and its control on outcomes in heart failure; reviews the approach to pharmacological therapy and lifestyle modification in patients with diabetes mellitus and heart failure; highlights the value of multidisciplinary interventions to improve clinical outcomes in this population; and outlines priorities for future research.

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Heart Failure, A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association and Heart Failure Society of America

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a risk factor for incident heart failure and increases the risk of morbidity and mortality in patients with established disease. Secular trends in the prevalence of diabetes mellitus and heart failure forecast a growing burden of disease and underscore the need for effective therapeutic strategies. Recent clinical trials have demonstrated the shared pathophysiology between diabetes mellitus and heart failure, the synergistic effect of managing both conditions, and the potential for diabetes mellitus therapies to modulate the risk of heart failure outcomes. This scientific statement on diabetes mellitus and heart failure summarizes the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and impact of diabetes mellitus and its control on outcomes in heart failure; reviews the approach to pharmacological therapy and lifestyle modification in patients with diabetes mellitus and heart failure; highlights the value of multidisciplinary interventions to improve clinical outcomes in this population; and outlines priorities for future research.

The Role of Metabolic Remodeling in Macrophage Polarization and Its Effect on Skeletal Muscle Regeneration

Significance: Macrophages are crucial for tissue homeostasis. Based on their activation, they might display classical/M1 or alternative/M2 phenotypes. M1 macrophages produce pro-inflammatory cytokines, reactive oxygen species (ROS), and nitric oxide (NO). M2 macrophages upregulate arginase-1 and reduce NO and ROS levels; they also release anti-inflammatory cytokines, growth factors, and polyamines, thus promoting angiogenesis and tissue healing. Moreover, M1 and M2 display key metabolic differences; M1 polarization is characterized by an enhancement in glycolysis and in the pentose phosphate pathway (PPP) along with a decreased oxidative phosphorylation (OxPhos), whereas M2 are characterized by an efficient OxPhos and reduced PPP. Recent Advances: The glutamine-related metabolism has been discovered as crucial for M2 polarization. Vice versa, flux discontinuities in the Krebs cycle are considered additional M1 features; they lead to increased levels of immunoresponsive gene 1 and itaconic acid, to isocitrate dehydrogenase 1-downregulation and to succinate, citrate, and isocitrate over-expression. Critical Issues: A macrophage classification problem, particularly in vivo, originating from a gap in the knowledge of the several intermediate polarization statuses between the M1 and M2 extremes, characterizes this field. Moreover, the detailed features of metabolic reprogramming crucial for macrophage polarization are largely unknown; in particular, the role of β-oxidation is highly controversial. Future Directions: Manipulating the metabolism to redirect macrophage polarization might be useful in various pathologies, including an efficient skeletal muscle regeneration. Unraveling the complexity pertaining to metabolic signatures that are specific for the different macrophage subsets is crucial for identifying new compounds that are able to trigger macrophage polarization and that might be used for therapeutical purposes.

Efficacy of ivabradine for heart failure: A protocol for a systematic review of randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Previous clinical trials have reported that ivabradine can effectively treat heart failure (HF). However, no systematic review has explored its efficacy and safety for HF. This systematic review will aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ivabradine for the treatment of patients with HF.

METHODS

We will search the literature from the following electronic databases from inception to the January 31, 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, MEDILINE, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP Information, and Wanfang Data. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ivabradine for HF will be fully considered for inclusion without any restrictions. Additionally, grey literature including clinical trial registries, dissertations, and reference lists of included studies, conference abstracts will also be searched. Two researchers will review these literatures, extract data, and assess risk of bias of included RCTs separately. Data will be pooled by either fixed-effects model or random-effects model, and meta-analysis will be conducted if it is appropriate.

RESULTS

The primary outcome is all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes comprise of change in body weight, urine output, change in serum sodium, and all adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study will summary provide up-to-dated evidence for assessing the efficacy and safety of ivabradine for HF.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

It is not necessary to acquire ethical approval for this systematic review, because no individual patient data will be used in this study. The results of this systematic review will be published through peer-reviewed journals.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019120814.

Ivabradine for the Treatment of Cardiovascular Diseases

Higher heart rate (HR) is independently related to worse outcomes in various cardiac diseases, including hypertension, coronary artery disease, and heart failure (HF). HR is determined by the pacemaker activity of cells within the sinoatrial node. The hyperpolarization-activated cyclic nucleotide-gated (HCN) 4 channel, one of 4 HCN isoforms, generates the I_f current and plays an important role in the regulation of pacemaker activity in the sinoatrial node. Ivabradine is a novel and only available HCN inhibitor, which can reduce HR and has been approved for stable angina and chronic HF in many countries other than Japan. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge of the HCN4 channel and ivabradine, including the function of HCN4 in cardiac pacemaking, the mechanism of action of I_f inhibition by ivabradine, and the pharmacological and clinical effects of ivabradine in cardiac diseases as HF, coronary artery disease, and atrial fibrillation.

Editor’s Choice- Impact of insulin-treated diabetes on cardiovascular outcomes following high-risk myocardial infarction

Background:

Diabetes is associated with poor cardiovascular outcomes, and insulin-treated patients usually have a worse prognosis than non-insulin-treated subjects. The relationship between insulin treatment and outcomes in high-risk myocardial infarction patients has not been described in a large dataset.

Methods:

To investigate the association between insulin-treated diabetes and long-term cardiovascular outcomes in patients with high-risk myocardial infarction, we used adjusted Cox models to compare cardiovascular mortality and hospitalisation among 28,771 patients grouped by diabetes status and insulin treatment from four randomised clinical trials (VALIANT, EPHESUS, OPTIMAAL, CAPRICORN) of acute myocardial infarction complicated by heart failure and/or left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

Results:

After an approximately 2-year follow-up, patients with no diabetes (21,386 subjects, 74.3%), non-insulin-treated diabetes (4977 patients, 17.3%) and insulin-treated diabetes (2409 subjects, 8.4%) had an incremental yearly mortality risk (15.8%, 21.3% and 28.1%, respectively). Insulin-treated diabetes patients presented with a higher cardiovascular burden and comorbidities. After adjustment for 18 baseline covariates, patients with non-insulin-treated and insulin-treated diabetes were at higher risk of cardiovascular death (hazard ratio (HR) 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13–1.38 and HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.31–1.69, respectively; P for comparison of non-insulin-treated vs. insulin-treated diabetes =0.016) and cardiovascular hospitalisation (HR 1.33, 95% CI 1.25–1.41 and HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.11–1.22, respectively) compared to patients without diabetes. These results remained consistent after further adjustment for medications and left ventricular ejection fraction.

Conclusions:

Insulin-treated diabetes patients had higher event rates than diabetes patients taking oral treatments and patients without diabetes. However, insulin-treated diabetes patients had more comorbidities and atherosclerotic disease, precluding any causality suggestion between insulin treatment and outcomes. This high-risk population may require specific and/or more intense cardiovascular protective therapies.

The heart failure burden of type 2 diabetes mellitus-a review of pathophysiology and interventions

Diabetes and heart failure (HF) are both global epidemics with tremendous costs on society with increased rates of HF hospitalizations and worsened prognosis when co-existing, making it a significant "deadly duo." The evidence for pharmacological treatment of HF in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) stems typically from either subgroup analyses of patients that were recruited to randomized controlled trials of HF interventions, usually in patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF), or from subgroup analyses of HF patients recruited to cardiovascular (CV) outcome trials (CVOT) of glucose lowering agents involving patients with T2DM. Studies in patients with HF with preserved EF are sparse. This review summarizes the literature on pathophysiology and interventions aiming to reduce the HF burden in T2DM and includes HF trials of ACEi, digoxin, β-blocker, ARB, If-blocker, MRA, and ARNI involving 38,600 patients, with or without prevalent diabetes, and CV outcome trials in T2DM involving 74,351 patients, with or without prevalent HF. In all HF trials, HF outcomes by prevalent diabetes were reported with an incremental risk of HF and death confessed by prevalent diabetes and a treatment effect similar to those without diabetes. All T2DM CVOTs reported on HF outcomes with heterogeneity between trials with two reporting benefits (empagliflozin and canagliflozin) and two reporting increased risk (saxagliptin, pioglitazone). In vulnerable T2DM patients with concomitant HF, guideline-recommended HF drugs are effective. When choosing glucose-lowering therapy, outcomes from available CVOTs should be considered.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and heart failure: a position statement from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology

The coexistence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and heart failure (HF), either with reduced (HFrEF) or preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), is frequent (30-40% of patients) and associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization, all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality. The most important causes of HF in T2DM are coronary artery disease, arterial hypertension and a direct detrimental effect of T2DM on the myocardium. T2DM is often unrecognized in HF patients, and vice versa, which emphasizes the importance of an active search for both disorders in the clinical practice. There are no specific limitations to HF treatment in T2DM. Subanalyses of trials addressing HF treatment in the general population have shown that all HF therapies are similarly effective regardless of T2DM. Concerning T2DM treatment in HF patients, most guidelines currently recommend metformin as the first-line choice. Sulphonylureas and insulin have been the traditional second- and third-line therapies although their safety in HF is equivocal. Neither glucagon-like preptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, nor dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors reduce the risk for HF hospitalization. Indeed, a DPP4 inhibitor, saxagliptin, has been associated with a higher risk of HF hospitalization. Thiazolidinediones (pioglitazone and rosiglitazone) are contraindicated in patients with (or at risk of) HF. In recent trials, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, empagliflozin and canagliflozin, have both shown a significant reduction in HF hospitalization in patients with established CV disease or at risk of CV disease. Several ongoing trials should provide an insight into the effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with HFrEF and HFpEF in the absence of T2DM.

The mitochondrial metabolic reprogramming agent trimetazidine as an 'exercise mimetic' in cachectic C26-bearing mice

BACKGROUND

Cancer cachexia is characterized by muscle depletion and exercise intolerance caused by an imbalance between protein synthesis and degradation and by impaired myogenesis. Myofibre metabolic efficiency is crucial so as to assure optimal muscle function. Some drugs are able to reprogram cell metabolism and, in some cases, to enhance metabolic efficiency. Based on these premises, we chose to investigate the ability of the metabolic modulator trimetazidine (TMZ) to counteract skeletal muscle dysfunctions and wasting occurring in cancer cachexia.

METHODS

For this purpose, we used mice bearing the C26 colon carcinoma as a model of cancer cachexia. Mice received 5 mg/kg TMZ (i.p.) once a day for 12 consecutive days. A forelimb grip strength test was performed and tibialis anterior, and gastrocnemius muscles were excised for analysis. Ex vivo measurement of skeletal muscle contractile properties was also performed.

RESULTS

Our data showed that TMZ induces some effects typically achieved through exercise, among which is grip strength increase, an enhanced fast-to slow myofibre phenotype shift, reduced glycaemia, PGC1α up-regulation, oxidative metabolism, and mitochondrial biogenesis. TMZ also partially restores the myofibre cross-sectional area in C26-bearing mice, while modulation of autophagy and apoptosis were excluded as mediators of TMZ effects.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, our data show that TMZ acts like an 'exercise mimetic' and is able to enhance some mechanisms of adaptation to stress in cancer cachexia. This makes the modulation of the metabolism, and in particular TMZ, a suitable candidate for a therapeutic rehabilitative protocol design, particularly considering that TMZ has already been approved for clinical use.

Prognostic Impact of Diabetes on Long-term Survival Outcomes in Patients With Heart Failure: A Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Several studies have explored the impact of diabetes on mortality in patients with heart failure (HF). However, the extent to which diabetes may confer risk of mortality and hospitalization in this patient population remains imperfectly known. Here we examine the independent prognostic impact of diabetes on the long-term risk of mortality and hospitalization in patients with HF.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from January 1990 to October 2016 were the data sources used. We included large (n ≥1,000) observational registries and randomized controlled trials with a follow-up duration of at least 1 year. Eligible studies were selected according to predefined keywords and clinical outcomes. Data from selected studies were extracted, and meta-analysis was performed using random-effects modeling.

RESULTS

A total of 31 registries and 12 clinical trials with 381,725 patients with acute and chronic HF and 102,036 all-cause deaths over a median follow-up of 3 years were included in the final analysis. Diabetes was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death (random-effects hazard ratio [HR] 1.28 [95% CI 1.21, 1.35]), cardiovascular death (1.34 [1.20, 1.49]), hospitalization (1.35 [1.20, 1.50]), and the combined end point of all-cause death or hospitalization (1.41 [1.29, 1.53]). The impact of diabetes on mortality and hospitalization was greater in patients with chronic HF than in those with acute HF. Limitations included high heterogeneity and varying degrees of confounder adjustment across individual studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This updated meta-analysis shows that the presence of diabetes per se adversely affects long-term survival and risk of hospitalization in patients with acute and chronic HF.

The Clinical Use of Ivabradine

The clinical use of ivabradine has and continues to evolve along channels that are predicated on its mechanism of action. It selectively inhibits the funny current (I_f) in sinoatrial nodal tissue, resulting in a decrease in the rate of diastolic depolarization and, consequently, the heart rate, a mechanism that is distinct from those of other negative chronotropic agents. Thus, it has been evaluated and is used in select patients with systolic heart failure and chronic stable angina without clinically significant adverse effects. Although not approved for other indications, ivabradine has also shown promise in the management of inappropriate sinus tachycardia. Here, the authors review the mechanism of action of ivabradine and salient studies that have led to its current clinical indications and use.

The potential role and rationale for treatment of heart failure with sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors

Heart failure (HF) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are both growing public health concerns contributing to major medical and economic burdens to society. T2DM increases the risk of HF, frequently occurs concomitantly with HF, and worsens the prognosis of HF. Several anti-hyperglycaemic medications have been associated with a concern for worse HF outcomes. More recently, the results of the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial showed that the sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor empagliflozin was associated with a pronounced and precocious 38% reduction in cardiovascular mortality in subjects with T2DM and established cardiovascular disease [Correction added on 8 September 2017, after first online publication: "32%" in the previous sentence was corrected to "38%"]. These benefits were more related to a reduction in incident HF events rather than to ischaemic vascular endpoints. Several mechanisms have been put forward to explain these benefits, which also raise the possibility of using these drugs as therapies not only in the prevention of HF, but also for the treatment of patients with established HF regardless of the presence or absence of diabetes. Several large trials are currently exploring this postulate.

Benefits of Heart Rate Slowing With Ivabradine in Patients With Systolic Heart Failure and Coronary Artery Disease

Heart rate (HR) is a risk factor in patients with chronic systolic heart failure (HF) that, when reduced, provides outcome benefits. It is also a target for angina pectoris prevention and a risk marker in chronic coronary artery disease without HF. HR can be reduced by drugs; however, among those used clinically, only ivabradine reduces HR directly in the sinoatrial nodal cells without other known effects on the cardiovascular system. This review provides current information regarding the safety and efficacy of HR reduction with ivabradine in clinical studies involving >36,000 patients with chronic stable coronary artery disease and >6,500 patients with systolic HF. The largest trials, Morbidity-Mortality Evaluation of the I_f Inhibitor Ivabradine in Patients With Coronary Disease and Left Ventricular Dysfunction and Study Assessing the Morbidity-Mortality Benefits of the I_f Inhibitor Ivabradine in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease, showed no effect on outcomes. The Systolic Heart Failure Treatment With the I_f Inhibitor Ivabradine Trial, a randomized controlled trial in >6,500 patients with HF, revealed marked and significant HR-mediated reduction in cardiovascular mortality or HF hospitalizations while improving quality of life and left ventricular mechanical function after treatment with ivabradine. The adverse effects of ivabradine predominantly included bradycardia and atrial fibrillation (both uncommon) and ocular flashing scotomata (phosphenes) but otherwise were similar to placebo. In conclusion, ivabradine improves outcomes in patients with systolic HF; rates of overall adverse events are similar to placebo.

Heart failure 2016: still more questions than answers

Heart failure has reached epidemic proportions given the ageing of populations and is associated with high mortality and re-hospitalization rates. This article reviews and summarizes recent advances in the diagnosis, assessment and treatment of the patients with heart failure. Data are discussed based also on the most recent guidelines indications. Open issues and unmet needs are highlighted.

Ivabradine

Ivabradine is a blocker of the funny current channels in the sinoatrial node cells. This results in pure heart rate reduction when elevated without direct effect on contractility or on the vessels. It was tested in a large outcome clinical trial in stable chronic heart failure (CHF) with low ejection fraction, in sinus rhythm, on a contemporary background therapy including betablockers (SHIFT: Systolic Heart Failure Treatment with the If inhibitor Trial).The primary composite endpoint (cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization) was reduced by 18% whereas the first occurrence of heart failure hospitalizations was reduced by 26%. The effect was of greater magnitude in patients with baseline heart rate ≥75 beats per minute. Ivabradine improved also the quality of life and induced a reverse remodelling.The safety was overall good with an increase in (a)symptomatic bradycardia and visual side effects.The efficacy and tolerability were similar to those observed in the overall trial in subgroups with diabetes mellitus, low systolic blood pressure (SBP), renal dysfunction or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).Ivabradine is indicated in CHF with systolic dysfunction, in patients in sinus rhythm with a heart rate ≥75 bpm in combination with standard therapy including betablocker therapy or when betablocker therapy is contraindicated or not tolerated (European Medicine Agency).

Addressing Major Unmet Needs in Patients with Systolic Heart Failure: The Role of Ivabradine

We reviewed clinical evidence for the use of ivabradine in systolic heart failure (HF), in which it appears to improve symptoms, improve quality of life, prevent hospitalization, and prolong survival, thereby addressing unmet needs in the management of HF. Ivabradine provides symptomatic benefits in HF on top of standard therapies, in terms of functional parameters and exercise capacity, and there is some evidence that this leads to improvements in quality of life in symptomatic HF patients, who may have dyspnea, altered exercise capacity, and fatigue. The SHIFT trial demonstrated that ivabradine has significant beneficial effects on major outcomes in HF. Ivabradine had a significant effect on pump failure death, which was reduced by 26 % (p = 0.014), with no effect on sudden cardiac death. This is an important result since pump failure death is currently the main cause of death in HF, and also because the reductions in mortality obtained with beta-blockers and spironolactone in the last 20 years appear to be mainly due to reduction in sudden death rather than reduction in pump failure death. Ivabradine also has a beneficial effect on hospital admissions (-26 %, p < 0.0001), which is clinically relevant since a quarter of HF patients can expect to be readmitted to hospital for HF within 1 month of discharge. Ivabradine-treated patients are also at significantly lower risk of experiencing a second or third hospitalization for worsening HF. Ivabradine clearly has a key role to play in the management of HF by covering the main therapeutic objectives of symptoms, quality of life, and outcomes.

Update on ivabradine for heart failure

Despite dramatic advances in therapy for heart failure (HF) during the past 3 decades, hospitalization and mortality rates remain relatively high. In recent decades, it has become apparent that HF is divisible into two equally lethal but pathophysiologically different sub-classes, the first comprising patients with LV systolic dysfunction [heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF)] and the other, approximately equal in size, involving patients with "preserved" systolic function [heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)]. Evidence-based event reducing therapy currently is available only for HFrEF. With the completion of seminal trials of beta blockers, now part of standard therapy for HFrEF, it was apparent that heart rate slowing is an underlying basis of clinical effectiveness of HFrEF therapy. With the discovery of the "f current" that modulates the slope of spontaneous diastolic depolarization of the sino-atrial node, a non-beta blockade approach to heart rate slowing became available. Ivabradine, the first FDA-approved f-current blocker for HFrEF, markedly reduces hospitalizations for worsening heart failure, while also progressively reducing mortality as pre-therapy heart rate increases, and also promotes beneficial left ventricular remodeling, improves health-related quality of life and is effective despite a wide range of comorbidities. The drug is well tolerated and adverse effects are relatively few. Ivabradine represents an important addition to the armamentarium for mitigation of HFrEF.

The cardiac enigma: current conundrums in heart failure research

The prevalence of heart failure is expected to increase almost 50% in the next 15 years because of aging of the general population, an increased frequency of comorbidities, and an improved survival following cardiac events. Conventional treatments for heart failure have remained largely static over the past 20 years, illustrating the pressing need for the discovery of novel therapeutic agents for this patient population. Given the heterogeneous nature of heart failure, it is important to specifically define the cellular mechanisms in the heart that drive the patient's symptoms, particularly when considering new treatment strategies. This report highlights the latest research efforts, as well as the possible pitfalls, in cardiac disease translational research and discusses future questions and considerations needed to advance the development of new heart failure therapies. In particular, we discuss cardiac remodeling and the translation of animal work to humans and how advancements in our understanding of these concepts relative to disease are central to new discoveries that can improve cardiovascular health.

The Role of Ivabradine and Trimetazidine in the New ESC HF Guidelines

The prevalence of heart failure (HF) is increasing, representing a major cause of death and disability, and a growing financial burden on healthcare systems. Despite the use of effective treatments with both drugs and devices, mortality remains high. There is therefore a need for new and effective therapeutic agents. Ivabradine is a specific sinus node inhibiting agent that was approved in 2005 by the European Medicines Agency, alone or in combination with a beta-blocker. Trimetazidine is a cytoprotective, anti-ischaemic agent established in the treatment of angina pectoris. In the 2012 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of HF, ivabradine was recommended in symptomatic HF patients who are in sinus rhythm with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35 % and heart rate higher than 70 beats per minute, despite optimal medical therapy, including maximally tolerated dose of beta-blocker. The role of trimetazidine in this setting was not mentioned. In the 2016 ESC guidelines, recommendations for ivabradine are unchanged but trimetazidine is included for the treatment of angina pectoris with HF. This article discusses the need for new therapeutic options in HF and reviews clinical evidence in support of these two therapeutic options.