Evaluation of the functional status questionnaire in heart failure: a sub-study of the second cardiac insufficiency bisoprolol survival study (CIBIS-II)

Assessment of patient-reported outcomes measures in heart failure: a systematic review

Heart failure (HF) is a prevalent global disease, particularly impacting developed countries. With the world's aging population, HF's impact on the quantity and quality of life is expected to grow. This review aims to ascertain the frequency, characteristics, and properties of all patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) studied in HF patients. We searched Ovid/Medline and Web of Science for original articles about PROMs performed in adults with HF. Using pre-established quality criteria for measurement properties, an overall rating was assigned to evaluate and compare different instruments. The quality of evidence was assessed with the COSMIN risk of bias checklist. Of 4283 records identified, we reviewed 296 full-text documents and included 64 papers, involving 30,185 participants. Thirty different PROMs were identified, with 14 specifically designed for HF being the most commonly used. Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLHF) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) were evaluated 16 and 13 times, respectively, demonstrating good psychometric properties. The MacNew Heart Disease Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire, a common heart disease-specific instrument, exhibited negative performances across various psychometric measures. Evidence for generic instruments was scant and unremarkable and they proved to be less responsive in HF populations. MLHF and KCCQ emerged as the most commonly used and well-supported PROMs, with robust overall evidence. They are comprehensive and accurate instruments, particularly suitable for application in clinical practice and research. Future research should explore how computer-adapted instruments can enhance precision, reduce respondent burden, and improve communication between clinicians and patients, thereby promoting more efficient and patient-centered services.

Dapagliflozin and Physical and Social Activity Limitations in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) is associated with impaired physical function and poor quality of life and affects health status more profoundly than many other chronic diseases.

OBJECTIVES

The authors examined the effects of dapagliflozin on specific physical and social limitations as reported by patients in the DAPA-HF (Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure) trial.

METHODS

The effect of dapagliflozin on the change from baseline to 8 months in each of the individual physical and social activity limitation questions answered by patients completing the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), and overall scores, were examined with mixed-effects models and responder analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 4,269 (90.0%) and 3,955 (83.4%) patients had complete data for both the physical and social activity limitation scores at baseline and 8 months, respectively. Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin significantly increased (improved) the mean KCCQ physical and social activity limitation scores at 8 months (placebo-corrected mean difference 1.94 [95% CI: 0.73-3.16] and 1.84 [95% CI: 0.43-3.25], respectively). Dapagliflozin also increased each of the individual components that comprise the physical and social activity limitations domains at 8 months, with the largest improvement seen in "hobbies or recreational activities" (placebo-corrected mean difference: 2.76 [95% CI: 1.06-4.46]) and "doing yardwork, housework, or carrying groceries" (placebo-corrected mean difference: 2.59 [95% CI: 0.76-4.42]). The proportion of patients with a 5-point improvement from baseline to 8 months in the KCCQ physical and social activity limitation scores was greater with dapagliflozin than with placebo (ORs: 1.23 [95% CI: 1.09-1.40] and 1.19 [95% CI: 1.05-1.35], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with HFrEF, dapagliflozin, compared with placebo, improved physical and social activity limitations as measured by KCCQ. (Study to Evaluate the Effect of Dapagliflozin on the Incidence of Worsening Heart Failure or Cardiovascular Death in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure [DAPA-HF]; NCT03036124).

Quality of life in men and women with heart failure: association with outcome, and comparison between the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire and the EuroQol 5 dimensions questionnaire

Aims

We sought to analyse quality of life (QoL) measures derived from two questionnaires widely used in clinical trials, the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) and the EuroQoL 5 dimensions (EQ‐5D), and to compare their prognostic value in men and women with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

Methods and results

From the BIOlogy Study to TAilored Treatment in Chronic Heart Failure (BIOSTAT‐CHF) we compared KCCQ and EQ‐5D at baseline and after 9 months in 1276 men and 373 women with new‐onset or worsening symptoms of HFrEF, who were sub‐optimally treated and in whom there was an anticipated up‐titration of guideline‐derived medical therapies. Women had significantly worse baseline QoL (median) as compared with men, both when assessed with KCCQ overall score (KCCQ‐OS, 44 vs. 53, P < 0.001) and EQ‐5D utility score (0.62 vs. 0.73, P < 0.001). QoL improved equally in women and men at follow‐up. All summary measures of QoL were independently associated with all‐cause mortality, with KCCQ‐OS showing the most remarkable association with mortality up to 1 year compared to the EQ‐5D scores (C‐statistic 0.650 for KCCQ‐OS vs. 0.633 and 0.599 for EQ‐5D utility score and EQ‐5D visual analogue scale, respectively). QoL was associated with all outcomes analysed, both in men and women (all P for interaction with sex >0.2).

Conclusion

Amongst patients with HFrEF, women reported significantly worse QoL than men. QoL was independently associated with subsequent outcome, similarly in men and women. The KCCQ in general, and the KCCQ‐OS in particular, showed the strongest independent association with outcome.

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.

Effects of Sacubitril/Valsartan on Physical and Social Activity Limitations in Patients With Heart Failure: A Secondary Analysis of the PARADIGM-HF Trial

Importance

Health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients with heart failure is markedly reduced compared with that in patients with other chronic diseases, demonstrating substantial limitations in physical and social activities. In the Prospective Comparison of ARNI With an ACE-Inhibitor to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) trial, sacubitril/valsartan improved overall HRQL compared with enalapril, as determined by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ).

Objective

To examine the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on physical and social activities.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The PARADIGM-HF trial was a randomized, double-blind, active treatment-controlled clinical trial performed from December 8, 2009, to March 31, 2014, in 8399 patients with New York Heart Association class II to IV disease and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less at 1043 centers in 38 countries. Data analysis was performed from August 1, 2017, to December 25, 2017.

Interventions

Sacubitril/valsartan, 200 mg twice daily, or enalapril, 10 mg twice daily.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Patients completed HRQL assessments using the KCCQ at randomization, 4-month, 8-month, and annual visits. The effect of sacubitril/valsartan on components of the physical and social limitation sections of the KCCQ at 8 months and longitudinally and related biomarkers and clinical outcomes were studied.

Results

At baseline, 7618 of 8399 patients (90.7%) (mean [SD] age, 64 [11] years; 5987 [78.6%] male and 1631 [21.4%] female) completed the initial KCCQ assessment. Patients reported the greatest limitations at baseline in jogging and sexual relationships. Patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan had significantly better adjusted change scores in most physical and social activities at 8 months and during 36 months compared with those receiving enalapril. The largest improvement over enalapril was in household chores (adjusted change score difference, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.19-3.50; P < .001) and sexual relationships (adjusted change score difference, 2.72; 95% CI, 0.97-4.46; P = .002); both persisted through 36 months (overall change score difference, 1.69 [95% CI, 0.78-2.60], P < .001; and 2.36 [95% CI, 1.01-3.71], P = .001, respectively).

Conclusions and Relevance

In patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, sacubitril/valsartan significantly improved nearly all KCCQ physical and social activities compared with enalapril, with the largest responses in household chores and sexual relationships. In addition to reduced likelihood of cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and heart failure hospitalization, sacubitril/valsartan may improve limitations in common activities in these patients.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01035255.

Assessing quality-of-life outcomes in cardiovascular clinical research

The field of quality-of-life (QOL) measurement grew out of attempts in the 1960s and 1970s to connect the ever-increasing levels of public expenditure on technology-based health care for chronic diseases with evidence of the benefits and harms to patients. Most of the concepts, methods, and standards for measuring QOL were derived from psychometrics, but the degree to which current tools adhere to these methods varies greatly. Despite the importance of QOL, patient-reported outcomes are not measured in most cardiovascular clinical trials. Lack of familiarity with QOL measures and their interpretation, and unrealistic expectations about the information these measures can provide, are obstacles to their use. Large clinical trials of revascularization therapy for coronary artery disease and medical treatments for heart failure show small-to-moderate QOL effects, primarily detected with disease-specific instruments. Larger treatment effects, seen in trials of device therapy for heart failure and ablation therapy for atrial fibrillation, have been detected with both generic and disease-specific instruments. A large gap remains between the parameters currently being measured in clinical research and the data needed to incorporate the 'patient's voice' into therapeutic decision-making.

Assessing the impact of heart failure therapeutics on quality of life and functional capacity

OPINION STATEMENT

Chronic heart failure (CHF) is an increasingly common disorder with major impact on morbidity and mortality. Goals of therapy include improving survival, attenuating progression of disease, improving functional capacity, and improving health-related quality of life (HRQL). Although there are multiple HRQL instruments that are psychometrically valid, concerns exist on the ability to reliably measure HRQL concepts. Nevertheless, there has been an emphasis on improving HRQL and thus novel therapies and clinical trials have included HRQL assessment routinely. Nonpharmacologic interventions have made a greater impact on HRQL, including the use of transcutaneous aortic valve replacement, left ventricular assist devices, and cardiac resynchronization devices. Pharmacologic therapies have resulted in modest improvements in HRQL and these improvements are often not clinically meaningful to the patient and not lasting beyond 6 months. As novel therapies are developed for CHF patients, researchers must: (a) identify mechanisms that may meaningfully improve HRQL, (b) develop better instruments to measure HRQL, and (c) target the right population with enough impairment in their sense of well-being to enable an intervention to work. The recent publication of the Food and Drug Administration Draft Guidance for Use of Patient-Reported Outcome measures in clinical trials has served as the foundation for more robust trial design using these HRQL measures.